Perhaps this might help you see Singapore’s GE in a different light.

http://i-came-i-saw-i-solved-it.blogspot.com/2006/10/proof-lee-kuan-yew-rigged-_116208578905665261.html

no one is stopped from voting against the pap in a grc.
……………………………………..

Yes, no one is stopped from voting against the pap in a grc.

When the opposition party almost captured the contested smaller GRCs during the past GEs, what happened? Before the next GE the electoral boundary is changed and the GRCs were enlarged so that the percentage of opposition votes is diluted. Is this not another way to prevent the opposition from capturing any GRC? Why was Serangoon Garden switched to Aljunied GRC? Without SG the WP might have won Aljunied GRC. This is the point.

Sorry, you have missed the point.

The old man is now scratching his head. Not that he does not know his present bunch of good-for-nothing stooges are useless. He cannot change them nor can he avoid his screwed up team from making more mistakes, either way, he is now in a fixed. It’s his own mistake from the start thinking that money can buy all the loyal men he can have to protect his own party, but forgetting that people who are attracted by money alone are mainly those who are selfish by nature themselves, they only want to take or infact prefer to look upon their master for decision rather than using their own brains to do things for the country. This is what he gets today for being too power craze. At his age now, he should be enjoying his golden years with his wife for most people. Tsk tsk tsk! ’sigh . . . .

aiyoh, you don’t know meh. it is not how, it is the legal obstacles !!! cycling need permit or not ? distributing pamphlets / selling newsletters need permit or not ? giving speech at your own chosen locations (not HLG lah), need permit or not ? you don’t know or pretend not to know. not enough positive visibility, how to know how good they are. as for not-so-positive visibility, do you know the meaning of msm.

Are you tryng to tell us you are really angry by your last sentence, “did anyone ever tell you that using CAPITAL LETTERS MAKES YOU SOUND REALLY ANGRY even if you aren’t?” Obviously not isn’t it. I think its more like you are trying to emphasize what you mean by your caps. So Joel’s caps are NOT NECESSARILY sounding angry. Hope you got it. If not, pls read/see your own statement again.

Next point I need to address is concerning your first sentence “there are capable people not in the pap, and the real issue is how to get them organised and contribute to the society.”

After they are organised, how do you suggest the capable people be MADE KNOWN to the public (AS THEY ARE, NOT TWISTED) so that the people can know how good they are and vote them into Govt? They need to be voted in before they can contribute to society don’t they?

What talking you ? If you do not do it, nothing will ever be tested. what ? my own cpf money, still must be accountable to you hah. you are nuts or what ?

why not you put all your cpf money with someone else and he tells you that $10/- per working day should be enough for survival (quoting some people in africa for example who can survive for much less) and he slowly distributes it back to you at a rate of sgd300/- per month when you reach age 70 (quoting you further example of certain ex-prime ministers, ex-presidents, actors, etc in some first world countries who can work till this age and thereafter). You may substitute that person with an organisation as you may even outlive that person.

You missed my point…. REMEMBERED THAT you make a statement earlier as below?:

“”"”"”have you ever consider the possibility that many people who voted for the pap aren’t pap fans? there are people who want better jobs, better tomorrow for their children. and when they look at the opposition candidates in their grc and hear what they say, the choice becomes clear immediately….. have you ever consider how to win the votes from this group of people?”"”"

If you read careful my posting…. I am saying that you are in error trying to JUDGE what you heard from the media and from your favorite PAP that these “group of people” (Opposition Candidates) are not good and capable candidates.

Go and search their portfolio out if you want, and you will find they are a group of capable and inspiring “group of people”. DO NOT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER AND WHAT OTHER TELLS YOU.

This is a common misconception about the opposition candidates, because the media, controlled and bias, PUT THEM DOWN !!!! I know some of them personally and they are really people who wants to serve. STOP CRITICISING them if you do not know them well and NOT willing to give them a chance before you pass judgment on them by listening to lies. IT IS NOT FAIR.

I refuse to even answer your last question. Grow up!!!

Today, people generally expect the right to pick the government but also want to hold the government responsible for not meeting expectations.

What hasn’t been put to test is whether the people are ready for more liberties, whether people can hold themselves responsible for their decisions (not just for elections but also for other policies, for example CPF withdrawal policies).

If democracy gives people the power to rule themselves, then more democracy can only come with greater responsibility.

there are capable people not in the pap, and the real issue is how to get them organised and contribute to the society.

the problem is that the people who make the loudest noise aren’t necessarily the ones who are capable. (promoting activism is a good start but the act itself is not final goal…) and there is a group of voters who will just vote for anyone who criticise the pap loudly….

btw, did anyone ever tell you that using CAPITAL LETTERS MAKES YOU SOUND REALLY ANGRY even if you aren’t?

You are trying to say that opposition do not put qualify and good people out there as candidates. You are wrong. I used to think that too but when I find out the truth I changed my mind.

If you checked on the last election, the candidates of the opposition that was standing for election were people who have been involved and activists since they were in schools. There are unknown because Singapore laws does not give them rooms to engage the public. Unless you are like Dr Chee, always getting caught, go to jail and being sued for defamation, then you will be know and the PAP will make sure you will be make to look like a fool.

Answer me, have you seen in the news about the works and activities these unknown opposition candidates have done…. NO, because the media is controlled. They will only show the PAP going around and not the oppositions. It is BIAS!!! Some of these candidates have give so much of their lives away to fight for what they believe is right.

These candidates are also professional who knows about the law, economy, finance, work…. etc. IF YOU STRAIGHT AWAY JUDGED THEM and do not hear them out THEN STOP BLAMING THEM for not having good people but blame yourself for falling into the trap set by the government.

If you depend on the media to give you a fair report, you are dreaming…. So go and find out for your own sake who those candidates are. IT IS A PLAYED DOWN AND WRONG IMAGE THAT THE PAP HAVE PORTRAYED THEM …..

When you do the same thing back to the PAP, they will be sued for till you bankrupted … if not just accuse you of some thing using the ISA.

OPEN YOUR EYES AND SEE, STOP FINDING EXCUSES FOR THEM…. like I have said earlier, if PAP is so noble, why don’t they contest individually in the GRCs. There are no difference between forming a GRCs before and after election …. if the reasons is to better serve the people. Make everyone contest for the constituencies and then after that form the GRCs…. that will be fair. Will the PAP do it….. NO THEY WON’T …. Cause they knew the weakness of the oppositions and they capitalized it for their own advantage.

have you ever consider the possibility that many people who voted for the pap aren’t pap fans? there are people who want better jobs, better tomorrow for their children. and when they look at the opposition candidates in their grc and hear what they say, the choice becomes clear immediately….. have you ever consider how to win the votes from this group of people?

Dear Edward,

It is true that the most common refrain we often hear is one of helplessness, in that, the PAP always get what they want – mainly because of the instruments they have available for them – placed there by themselves to serve the sole purpose of power retention. However, the electorate must not forget that the PAP has been able to strengthen their grip on power because of the feeling of ‘helplessness’ which the PAP wants us to feel. This is the subtle change in fear, where previously the threat of imprisonment and ISA detention were very real, the modern day form of fear is more subtle. It scares one into thinking that without the PAP, one would begin to lose his home, his job, his vacation and his family will suffer all kinds of calamities and what nots.

We have to overcome this new enemy that goes by the same name – FEAR. And there is no better way to do this than having you and I, reaching out to as many as we can, to change the perception of this new fear. This is a challenge that may last 10 to 15 years. Are we ready to undertake this huge task for a better tomorrow?

Dear Observer (SG-HK),

Like you, and I am sure most around here, we are of the same opinion that the end result of the next election will be no different from that of elections past. However, this does not mean that we should throw all hopes out the window.
What I will be looking for are:

a. a progression of better result than the last election in terms of percentage votes garnered by the opposition,
b. specifically, a higher percentage of votes for the opposition from the younger generation.
c. a break in the monopoly of the MSM, and with alternative platforms (online especially) playing an effective role to counter the bullshits from the MSM.
d. new blood from the opposition ranks with calibre to match.

There are reasons to be hopeful and I think opposition members like LTK and Sylvia have done reasonably well – not to have tarnished the image of opposition members in parliament – like Ding How Dong and Cheo Chai Chen did – and where the MSM was able to capitalised on their unflattering demeanours.

Apart from this, I am also hoping that Singaporeans exercise patience in their perceptions of the opposition. One thing is clear, we are not going to get a full slate of opposition members who have the credentials to run the country the way PAP does. Because of this, we have to be realistic in our expectations, both for the opposition and ourselves, and to set aside a period of time for the opposition to build itself up as a force to challenge the PAP with their alternative vision for Singapore, where the citizens matter more than money. I am looking toward a 10 to 15 years period of time, if we start to see changes in the voting pattern right now.

This is why I can see some potential in the recent changes, but only if the opposition is able to capitalise on them. One way is to embrace it (need not necessarily accept it) like the WP has done. The other way is for the opposition to join forces and ignore the changes, that is, make a firm stand not to take up the NCMP positions even when they are invited to do so after the election. This way, the electorate will then have to decide whether they want an opposition MP to represent the alternative voice they clamour for, or none at all. This might be the only way to kill off the NCMP scheme placed there by the PAP once and for all.

Other than this, the fight belongs to the citizens of Singapore more than it is the opposition. Singaporeans must come to realise that these opposition figures have been doing such a big favour for Singapore by availing themselves, election after election, waiting for the day when Singaporeans are awaken to the need to have an alternative representation for a truly democratic representation.

the real reason is that grc favours large teams, and no opposition party want/can field enough candidates to compete. don’t you think you have missed this point?

I can see those new MPs raelly like to score points, they attack opposition anyhow, in very rude way, but they never dare to voice objection to bad policies

These MPS came in at mercy of GRC, not contested, so they owe their well being to party not singaporean.

Gone are the days when PAP had brave and sensisble MPs, gone forever as long as GRC brings in talented YES MEN and YES WOMEN

Sad !

I have been emphasizing this possibility in TOC. In parliament PAP MP Ms Indranee Rajah told off LKT that in such a situation, the people can vote out the PAP government. With the whole government machinery, NTUC, PA, GLCs and grassroots organisations behind them together with a biased media and unfair election rules the PAP has prevented the opposition parties from capturing any GRC for more than 20 years. How to vote out the corrupt and ineffective government under such circumstances? Unless these leaders have depleted our foreign reserves and Singapore becomes bankrupt. By then we may have to beg our Abang for food and money.

Ms Indranee please read more about Zimbabwe and Argentina. Maybe,

while a nobel idea, i ask why would people want to sacrifice for singpaoreans?
business, transactions, tax, laws.

Self is more important than the rest of the humans.

I would have expected the same direct “NO” from Khairuanwar anyway.

I am in absolute agreement with what you have written about PAP taking a calculated risk as well as Joel’s analysis and challenge but at the end of the day, the game plan is “controlled” so to speaks. People are forgetful or “still fearful” come voting time, I am afraid the end results could well be a foregone conclusion in my mind even though I know where my vote will goes to if given the chance to participate. Am I being pessimistic about things? Not at all, it is a reality at moment even with this financial crisis still looming over our heads. At most optimistic view, there will be fewer than 5 alternative voices with voting RIGHTS (including the current 2 incumbent), if we get lucky. That is my assumption and provided the Alternative Voice really rally for the support of the people with a genuine agenda for layman like me to understand what I am voting for.

You have penned: “Singaporeans must begin to see that Singapore is not about the PAP but about its citizens.”

From this site alone, I assumed 75% or greater (but this is not large enough numbers if we break it down by GRC zoning). Does any of us speaks to voting siblings or relatives or friends and get their perspective come election time? How many will really do just that? Factor this in and we could see the numbers dwindling. The numbers will get worse when you count in the general publicl support (unless we are talking about money matters).

“Joel has suggested that we take up the opposition’s cause and enlist ourselves to help them out. I think this is a good call and for those who have the time and who wants to play a part in opposition politics in Singapore, by all means go take up the challenge.”

Joel’s challenge is a good call, and I certainly hope there will be many who will walk the talk when time is up. But my guess is that people (including me) would want to know more before jumping the gun to offer their volunteering service to the alternative voices. The more the educated, the inclination is need to know what are you championing for. I think Alternative Voices who are geared to participate in this coming election should make clear their objectives, clear enough for any layman to see and read (some might say a catch 22 situation as it is not so wise to openly make known your election agenda at this early stage, however, I think if those ideas were genuine, rational and practical, they should not fear any back lash and the ground work is never too early. If the message and actions were consistent, I think citizenry these days are smart enough to make the right choice when given the opportunity. Singapore Election (in the past) will take no more than a month to complete the election cycle (including publicity to lobby for support). Pretty short indeed (well, that’s the rule of the game). That is why it is important to start early as Alternative Voices had much to prove.

If you take a visit to the known Alternative Voices website, do you see a clear objective that you will be inspired to cast that sacred vote (if given the chance)? I’ll leave for viewers to ponder over this question.

What I mean is specifics on issues such:
1) What are the Alternative Voice going to do about Medical Scheme (i.e. how to better it to make it more affordable to the general public, particularly the weak, the old and the helpless)

2) What are the Alternative Voice going to do about Public Housing Scheme (i.e. how to better it to make it more affordable to the general public without bleeding)

3) What are the Alternative Voice going to do about Employment for Singaporeans and the Foreign Talent Import Scheme (i.e. how to ensure Singaporeans privilege are not being robbed)

And so on just to name a few examples…. A concrete enough plan for citizenry to see and feel they can be part of it. Not just having an alternative voice to pressure the government in parliament. I think ground sentiments are heard day in and day out with the advent of the new media. I do not think the government is so inept to ignore public voices (just that they choose to take on a low profile when dealing with it and prefers to discuss them “if they do, I am just speculating” within party compound). We are already the alternative voices now when we openly engaged in public discourses like this site and others on community issues, social issues, politically implied issues and so on. Until there is a real balance of power existed in Singapore, however vociferous the Alternative Voice may be during parliament debate, the out-come is there for us to see. Don’t get me wrong, there are changes alright, but I think it can go further and more progressive but again, we are all at the mercy of the ruling party. That is a reality and this reality will remain for awhile longer.

By the way, this is exactly how I feel right now and I can only speak for myself. I have no intent or do not intent to make any representation of anybody other than myself.

Sincerely,
Observer (SG-HK)

Ever since BS left parliament the PAP has been voted overwhelmingly. That clearly shows Singaporeans were not in favour of BS. That prompted years later for Lee Siew Choh to come out to admit that it was a mistake. Which was why he never allowed anymore opportunities to slip pass and took up the NCMP in 1988.

If I may hijack your question put to Khairuanwar, the straight answer to your question is an emphatic ‘No’. No, there aren’t enough opposing voting rights voice to veto the ‘change’ proposition or any proposition for that matter – and it is the same reason why the PAP can even get away with murder if it wanted to.

Some have already expressed the view that the PAP has done its homework, and this is being seen by some quarters as a masterstroke, in PM LHL’s drive to fix the opposition, and seemingly, it is a good fix by the looks of things.

However, this is only taking into consideration the PAP’s gamble that the people are on their side. The PAP is taking a calculated risk by these changes and the main factor it can be so gung-ho and confident the changes will work for them is down to one key area – the mainstream media.

By and large, the Singapore electorate is still a gullible one. Given that there might be a shift toward opposition support in recent times, the very optimistic among us would be hard-pressed to justify that the shift could be anything more than a few percentage points – not enough to impact a change in the outcome of an election.

Based on these few factors, the PAP, with the MSM on its side, then goes on to play mind-games with the citizens, telling them that an alternative voice is what they want, and it is what they will get – conveniently and sublimely sidestepping the fact that such an alternative has no voting or vetoing powers.

With such a fix, the PAP gets what it wants by giving the people what they want – limited to an alternative voice that is nothing more than a noise-making loudhailer, one that it can conveniently ignore, since it has no voting powers.

I’d like to tie in Joel’s challenge here. The situation calls for an educated electorate to see these changes for what they really are – the silencing of the collective voice of the people, so that the PAP can get on with THEIR business unhindered. Joel has suggested that we take up the opposition’s cause and enlist ourselves to help them out. I think this is a good call and for those who have the time and who wants to play a part in opposition politics in Singapore, by all means go take up the challenge.

However, contributing to the process of building a truly democratic political scene does not stop with one taking part in partisan politics. There are many other ways. We, the citizens, those of us who knows how gullible the Singapore electorate is, can, on our own, reach out to educate the rest of the electorate, to see the situation for what it is. The short term scenario will always seem a beautiful one but the danger is that we will not have anyone to turn to should the PAP government becomes corrupt or ineffective in meeting the challenges of the times. We have seen signs of them in recent times and who is say that the future might not be worse?

Singaporeans must begin to see that Singapore is not about the PAP but about its citizens. Singapore is bigger than the PAP, or any party for that matter. Singapore is bigger than its people. Singapore is what the people makes it to be. The contribution of every citizen, of every generation is what Singapore will be. Singaporeans must not be fooled that the PAP is Singapore and that Singapore will be doomed without the PAP. Every equation must ultimately lead back to us. Because of this, we cannot also wait for the opposition to take the first step. We the people must take the first step and that first step has to be how we cast our votes.

I suggest we reach out to Singaporeans to cast a protest vote against the PAP’s high-handedness by voting for any opposition. Never mind if the PAP gets voted out in the process, we can always vote them in again after five years. Five years is not too bad a trade off for a better future for our children – as far as I am concerned.