Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh /
Many of us will experience the joy of voting this year. More thrilling, perhaps, is that we will actually have tough choices to make—Singapore’s opposition has recruited some credible candidates. Good thing, for we need more of them in parliament if Singapore is to develop politically, socially and economically.
Though the People’s Action Party (PAP) has proved brilliant at transforming Singapore into a manufacturing- and service-sector economy, it has been far less successful in nurturing a knowledge-based economy. Qualities that served early Singapore so well—such as easy political consensus, an obedient populace, and a compliant media—now seem archaic.
Many HR (Human Resource) directors at multi-national companies (MNCs) paint to me similar caricatures of the typical Singaporean worker—hardworking and smart, but unable to question authority, think outside the box, or work collaboratively across the organisation. Though our government has been moderately successful in attracting some high-value knowledge work to Singapore, many firms have had to look outside for talent.
The “Singapore model” is good at churning out disciplined, process-oriented workers who can follow orders in their own silos. It is less adept at developing creative, dynamic people who can think strategically or build companies.
Liberalising school curriculums, increasing funding for the arts sector, and prodding people to “be creative”, as our government has done, is all well and good. But these efforts are doomed if Singaporeans have to contend with a stuffy social and political atmosphere. Everybody must feel comfortable voicing their opinions and defending their points of view, particularly contrarian ones.
We Singaporeans tend to take our cue from those above. More debate and opposition in parliament, therefore, will trickle down through society, creating a more conducive environment for all of us who want higher-income jobs.
But why should we care about fluffy notions of creativity? After all, Singapore has still been developing fabulously, hasn’t it?
Well, not really. Though impressive, Singapore’s headline GDP growth numbers obscure some real problems. Consider income inequality. In the decade to 2007, the bottom 30 per cent of households saw their real incomes stagnate, even as Singapore continued to churn out millionaires. By some measures, Singapore today is more unequal than China and the US. Economic growth has not benefitted all. The cost of living, meanwhile, has spiraled.
The government is not entirely to blame for all this. Singapore is subject to the same disruptive economic forces that affect other countries, including globalisation and resource shortages. Nevertheless, some policies, such as promoting high immigration, have certainly accentuated their impact.
That speaks to the other benefit of electing more opposition Members of Parliament (MP) — Singapore desperately needs discussion about alternative growth models.
Part of the reason for high immigration is that the PAP has been pursuing a high-growth economic growth strategy that involves feeding greater quantities of “inputs”, such as low-cost labour, into the system, rather than focusing on improving the productivity of existing workers.
This depresses low-end wages—the median salary in Singapore is S$2,400. In other words, 50 per cent of Singaporeans earn, at most, only as much as a university grad’s first paycheck. The most poignant description I’ve heard of Singapore today is a “first-world country with a third-world wage structure”.
This is not to suggest that migrants are unwelcome. They are, and will always be, important contributors to the Singapore story. The point here is that society needs to take pause and contemplate—do we really need to grow this way, or is there a more inclusive, sustainable path to economic development?
Without a more open society and active political debate, we will never know—Singapore will not benefit from the rigorous competition of ideas that is essential for better policies. Sure, income inequality is discussed more today, but why wasn’t it in, say, 2005? The PAP, for all its virtues, is prone to groupthink, just like any hierarchical organisation.
Judging by its new candidates, the PAP also continues to prefer likeminded personalities. This is best exemplified by Tin Pei Ling, who recently admitted that her greatest regret in life is that “I didn’t manage to bring my parents to Universal Studios.”
Some might salute her filial piety. But that is a given—we expect every candidate to love and respect their parents. Ms Tin’s answer, in fact, betrays a shocking lack of ambition and imagination.
More worrying are her thoughts on income inequality. In a 2007 speech, she makes it a point to state that while the rich have gotten richer, “the poor have NOT gotten poorer”. (Emphasis hers.)
Imagine that by 2030, some 70 per cent of Singaporeans are driving around in BMWs and Ferraris, while the bottom 30 per cent live exactly as they do today, some struggling to put food on the table. Is that development?
While the PAP’s recruits are cut from the same cloth, the opposition offers some diversity. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong recently questioned how the opposition can find many talented people if the PAP cannot. It’s probably because some talented people do not agree with all of the PAP’s policies.
Consider Gerald Giam and Ong Theng Khoon, two first-time candidates. I have known both for more than 15 years. Gerald is a family friend, while TK was my junior college classmate. They are affable, compassionate and smart, and I expect will make fantastic politicians.
Gerald is running for the Worker’s Party, while TK is running for the PAP. Is one much better than the other? No. They just have different ideas about how they can serve Singapore. Candidates like Gerald prove that the opposition can recruit talent.
The PAP has always attracted people who have somewhat similar credentials and consistent views on policy. But Singapore also needs alternative voices that can infuse politics with fresh ideas. Gerald will certainly do this—for instance, he has spoken about the need for Singapore to reduce its reliance on government-linked companies (GLCs) and MNCs, partly because that will spur job creation in our small and medium enterprises (SME) sector.
All this does not imply that Singapore needs to dabble with multi-party democracy. The PAP remains competent, effective and transparent. Singapore’s ideal model may indeed be having one dominant party that is kept on its toes by an able, vocal, strong opposition.
The current situation, however, is pitiful. There are just two elected opposition members in parliament. An ideal scenario, in my opinion, is for Singapore to elect up to 20 credible opposition members in the upcoming election. Out of a total of 87, that will still leave the PAP with more than three-quarters of the elected seats.
It will be able to pass legislation, but will have to pay much more attention to alternative views. Some worry that if the PAP loses a Group Representation Constituency (GRC), Singapore will lose a crucial minister. But the PAP is bigger than any individual, with enough ministerial material in reserve.
This scenario will allow the opposition parties to improve, and will force Singapore’s staid mainstream media to report on more non-establishment opinions—both of which are in Singapore’s long-term interest. Our efficient civil service, meanwhile, will continue to chug along, implementing policies, and keeping Singapore working as smoothly as ever.
The only ‘downside’ is that politicians might have to engage in lengthier debates. But that’s precisely what will lead to better policies. Besides, I suspect our MPs will be adequately compensated for their time.
We should not, of course, expect the PAP to advocate such an outcome. The PAP will continue to behave like any successful monopoly.
Last year Minister Vivian Balakrishnan admitted that the PAP strives to grab all available talent in Singapore. In 2006, meanwhile, PM Lee said that if there are 10, 15 or 20 opposition members in parliament, “I’m going to spend all my time thinking what’s the right way to fix them, to buy my supporters votes…”
Recall that in Singapore’s exacting meritocracy, we are taught the virtues of competition from the time we are toddlers. Students fight it out for the best grades. Our free-market economy is lauded for promoting the fittest companies.
When it comes to politics, however, Singaporeans are suddenly told that we should forget competition, and instead embrace a monopoly.
Isn’t that odd?
————–
Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh is an editor at The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). The views expressed here are purely his own.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
To 42 SAR
I am quite sure Lily Neo is doing this out of genuine concern for the poor and not to ‘enrich’ herself. There really are some good people in the Pap…pity not enough of them.
Sg people are ready for the opposition.
i spoke to a few frens, they seem not ready to hear
But in the end, two told me they will vote for opposition candidates.
The majority must see and hear the opposition parties much More and KNOW
that their voices will be HEARD in parliament, they will then vote you in.
@The Pariah
According to the new changes made to proceedings in parliament :
It only means the Opposition has much more tough work to do in parliament.
Now is the time opposition parties cannot
take a break, please go all out.
From the domestic staff working in the Lim Goh Tong’s Home, Goh already got the wrath of God when alive, he ate only rice porridge for all his three meals, with only a very small piece of chicken, as he could not digest more than that.
With all his wealth, he could not savour
abalone, sharks’ fins, chicken rice,and all the expensive foods that his money could buy, and for decades, not only just before his death.
If this is not punishment, what is.
I got $100 for the GE goodies this year, and i have to donate this, as I am scared of retribution also, it is part of sin money from the casino proceeds. I want no part of it.
Gerald Giam, Singaporeans are waiting for any hint that you are a credible candidate that can do the job. Little is heard about your plans for Singapore. Concern. ??? ??? ???
@Robert Teh
the ones picked to ask questions have duly been screened
they are there to help PM talk about his own success and PAP “good” policies
waste time
U opposition parties still have a lot of
work to do on the ground..
I am not in any party. Met my friend and
talked about election. Talked about the major issues in depth especially HDB /
non-HDB housing high prices, influx of foreigners, PAP iron grip on parliament
and dictator-like decisions and policies,
conclusion my friend and her brother will vote the opposition! Hoorah.
So if you are opposition, how much do you
have to go about doing??
…..Now I see….that is why he sued bankrupted jailed and imposed so many restrictions on the Opposition to prevent them from gaining power. Because the PAP has done such a wonderful job it is not possible for the people to vote for the opposition because they have suffered pain from bad PAP policies ….if people vote for the opposition they have to be crazy bored or fickle minded..MM Lee has also reminded us that Western-style democracy cannot work in Singapore because it is hard to get able people into power when you are judged in accordance with your persuasive powers . We better watch out for people with persuasive powers who try to persuade us the PAP is not the best govt for us and their policies are not the best things that happen to Singaporeans.
The headline , ” Why Singapore needs more opposition MPs ” should
change to ” Why Singapore must HAVE more opposition MPs ” .
Enough said.
income stagnated bcos of cheap labour aka FTalents.
meanwhile cost of living goes up .
t poor got poorer!!
t rest gets richer..bcos of pap/govt land policy.
t rich owns private properties.
by setting MInimUM bid/tender prices even in recessionary years -
mah/pap has put up a safety net for t rich.
barring a world wide earth quake..
private property prices in spore will NEVER NEVER drop blow
t last peak.
property ownership oso enable high leverage..
leveraging is t multiplier to mega wealth creation..
I wonder if the US govt had indeed shut down last week – all because of the “benefits of a two (or more) party system”, would the author have changed his views?
Lim Boon Heng says he believe in 1st world parliament where there will be healthy debate to come up with better policies…and not opposition parties tearing at ruling party to win popularity at the next poll.
why adopt such a narrow/negative perspective of some of our credible opposition parties like WP or SPP (Mr Chiam)who has shown they do not oppose for the sake of opposing. Unless PAP is the one that will behave in that way in a multi-party system and assume or expect that same treatment.
Otherwise, if he believes the 1st world parliament is an ideal worth pursuing, he should dream big and works towards it…isn’t that what S’pore is supposed to be .. a city of possibilities (PM Lee inaugural promise to S’pore when he assume PMship)..But I guess..absoulte power has gotten to those in power and their heads..and they have lost their idealism….Absolute power corrupts!
Singapore not only need more Opposition MP to provide Check and Balance but also it needs a SHADOW Government which can take over in future as soon as the people demands it.
Although 80 plus MP in parliament is a bit too much , in my view, for a city as tiny as this where this tiny city is the country which is still not, as someone claimed.
The country only need so many MPs in future, not now. Even if 80 plus MP needed to form a government. Singapore should have more than enough to form a shadow government. That is, another 80 for the opposition should not be a far fetched idea. Singapore easily already should have another 90 talents who has yet stepped forward. Some may be running their empire. So, with current opposition numbers, they can form 1 shadow government already. With training and exposure, these could mature to really take over the steering.
Policies can be formulated by permanent secretaries. The brains behind the policies. So, with existing perm secs, a shadow government can easily take over. Even now. this moment.
But they will need to create a audit industry to audit the 50 years accounts.
Many Top Audit firms may prosper.
Mr Leong should lead the team or be the Finance minister.
I should be the minister without any portfolio.
LKY has worked it all out – if a new govt were to come in (ie the opposition) the country will freeze… the bureacracy is so entrenched with PAP bosses and our President guards the county’s purse strings. Tamasek runs key cos that are singapore pillars. So quite a frightening thought how entrenched singapore is in the PAP – they are in every aspect of Singapore. to untangle it is going to take decades, but for a start – we need to ‘train’ our system and opposition members – give them time and exposure… by voting them in.they shd npot be measured on the same score as PAP, they shd be given a handicap – since there are natural odds against them – same rules as Golf.
Only during Election time that LHL starts to have sessions with Singaporean. Is it too late? Look at those Foreign Trash flooding our housing estates.
Look at total number of Prostitutes and fake talents we have in our industries.
Is time to vote opposition into the parliament to ensure voices are heard every now and then.
LHL, your days are numbered.
PAP’s candidates for the coming GE come mainly from the labour movement, army,civil service and children of former PAP MPs. It is a cycle of inbreeding of likeminded people, who more or less think along the same line. This is no good for the nation as it is unlikely that men of different ideas would come from this type of political inbreeding. No matter how good your selection process is, only likeminded people want to join you and you are inclined to select those who are in your mould. An infusion of fresh ideas into the political landscape has to come from outside the PAP.
No point of talking,just vote opp.
The PAP has done a wonderful job:
1. Singapore has nearly full employment, despite the influx of foreigners.
2. Over 80% of Singaporeans own their own homes.
3. Health care facilities are among the top in the world, possibly better than France, Germany and the Scandinavian countries.
4. Education system trains our kids so well at English & Math.
5. Infrastructure is top notch; our airport, seaport and roads are among the best in the world.
6. Public transport is so affordable, compared to other developed countries.
7. The country is so safe, clean and efficient. All public services are functioning.
8. CPF provides us a reliable source of pension for our old age.
9. While there are no unemployment benefits, the PAP makes us improve our skills rather than depend on handouts.
10. And everything at such low tax rates
Where else in the world can you find such a great country? All hail the PAP!The opposition candidates are nothing but clowns. We have no place for these fools. For those who don’t like the PAP, maybe you should just leave the country.
Bai Chi
You are a foreign trash just got your citizenship and licking the balls of your master the pap
@Bai Chi
you idiot! the world is laughing and have
been laughing that 80% singaporeans own HDB as the only roof over their heads
The Saint,
Of course. I’ve got a top job, paying top dollars, and I live in a plush condo in District 9. What about you? Some low-class fellow living in HDB? Do some soul-searching, and don’t be jealous of the success that people such as I and the PAP bring to Singapore
Forget about that clown, Chen Show Mao.
Whatever his credentials, our PAP MPs have as well. He is a hypocrite, better to stick with our well-trusted PAP MPs.
Contrary to what you ungrateful people think, PAP does not stand for Pay And Pay.
It means: Pride And Progress
I like to disagree with this claim:
All this does not imply that Singapore needs to dabble with multi-party democracy. The PAP remains competent, effective and transparent. Singapore’s ideal model may indeed be having one dominant party that is kept on its toes by an able, vocal, strong opposition.
Why should Singapore not “dabble” with multi-party democracy? What is the harm? Moreover, it is debatable what is competent and effective but the PAP is certainly not transparent. If it were transparent, it would open itself to much more criticism than it likes! No one is perfect, but the PAP likes to portray itself as such.
A related question is who knows what is the real and practical reason for the post of Minister WIHTOUT ANY PORTFOLIO???
If any of you can answer this, I swallow this laptop.
@BaiChi
Cannot trust PAP, they are holding Sg hostage to fatten themselves and to fatten you, greedy pig.
LOCAL TALENTS DON’T JOIN A PARTY THAT IS MADE UP OF THE FOLLOWING ;
1) WITHHOLDING OF CPF FROM RIGHTFUL OWNER AFTER 55
2) GREEDY FOR MILLIONS, BUT DOING NOTHING FOR THE NATION’S POOR.
3) NO ACCOUNTABILITY ON ALL THINGS AND MATTERS
4) NIL INTEGRITY ON ALL THINGS AND MATTERS
5) ZERO PRINCIPLE ON ALL THINGS AND MATTERS
6) NO IDEA OF COMPASSION FOR HANDICAP, POOR, OLD AND HOMELESS
7) MADE UP OF ONE OLD MAN
8) TRAITORS
9) SHAMELESS CHEATS
10)KANGAROO COURTS
11)NO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION
12)FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL PROTEST
13)GRC
14)4% GDP FOR HEALTH CARE BUT HUGE MILITARY SPENDING FOR NOTHING
15)BANKRUPTING ALL OPPOSITION AND VOICES
16)CROYNISM
17)NEPOTISM
18)FAVOURITISM
19)KILLING OF LOCAL ENTREPRENEURS BY ALL GOV LINK/ CREATED ENTITIES
20)SKY HIGH PROFITS ABOVE ARE CHANNELLED INTO GOV/CRONIES POCKETS
21)SLAVE TRADING BY MASS IMPORTS OF SLAVES FROM INDIA, CHINA, BURMA,MALAYSIA,PHILIPINES, IN THE GUISE OF TALENTS, THUS MAKING MONEIES FROM LEVY AND LEVIES OF ALL KINDS
DO NOT VOTE THIS GOV AS IT HAS ALL OF THE ABOVE CARVED ON IT’S HEAD
AS LOCALS TALENTS ARE MUCH MORE THAN ANY OF THE ABOVE, REPEAT,
AS LOCALS TALENTS ARE MUCH MORE THAN ANY OF THE ABOVE
After so many elections, ppl stil haven’t crossed the first hurdle.. that is to allow more Opp. in parliament in order to challenge to make more stringent consideration before passing policies.
Why is it so?
Cos after so many yrs of PAP rule, ppl have listened and are used to watever they say. That is the plain simple truth.
Ppl ask qns like “What can the Opp do ? wat policies can they come up wif ? can they deliver wat they say?”
It’s true that PAP has done wat they say (most of the time) but they’ve had the resources, the money, the people who constantly join them. Of cos they can do it !!
But the Opp, has also shown to be capable.. such as holding HG and PP for so many yrs. This proves there are capable Opp as well.
Ppl have been trained by PAP to think of naive things the Opp cannot do, cannot deliver (when they haven’t been given the chance to prove themselves), den attacking their credibilities using the media newspapers on certain foul-ups.
It’s clear the ruling party has all the tools at hand to attack the Opp.
Furthermore, the greatest issue IMO is that of FEAR. Many ppl still have fear of voting against PAP. I am very sure if ppl can remove that fear, the Opp would have won more seats in the House by now already. This is based on clear evidence based on some very close election results.
So, The PAP jus continues to play cool, put up a good image aided by the media at parties n functions.. and ppl are continuously distracted from the simple and impt fact that only Opp can challenge the policies passed which directly affects their life.
So , ppl of Singapore, pls vote correctly this time, ok ?
I have a Malay worker , he earns S$2500 a month, he has a wife and three children(all poly students)to feed. However, i have never heard him complaining how tough life is or blame the government but just work hard and they are doing fine. The point is , if you know how to manage your income then life is not that tough afterall.
@Simon Ng
Your statement is self-serving. Why would you want to pay your worker more?
Let’s see whether you say the same thing if you’re the salaried worker, you arsehole.
@Low Income Citizen
I am also a wage earner like my Malay collegue . From your statement , your are quite well educated , if you can’t earn more don’t blame others . Please try to upgrade yourself and in future please be more polite because we are in a civilised debate. If you are an opposition supporter,then your bad manner reflects badly on your leaders.
@Miss Vivian Nathan
The post of Minister without Portfolio been created to take over ANY minister relinquished his/her post due to unforeseen circumstances. Are you going to swallow your laptop.
How can the argument in Parliament, that Singapore is so special, that its ministers so smart, requires millions of dollars annually, past muster with the citizenry, if the groundwork of terror by defamation laws, ISD, Courts and the whole State legal apparatus for legal hunting, hounding and sentencing is not perfected. It took 30 years to reach perfection. Now is payback time.The world today stands in awe of the legal infrastructure erected in Singapore over the last 50 years and never could guess, except in a very few places, that this same monumental infrastructure for dispensing the Law is the holy talisman protecting the discovery of a magnificent heist, a scheme to replace and increase the local population for the fattest cow to be milked in the region and perhaps in the world.
Mark my words. The Ruling party will not easily give up such a goldmine, where the gold is easily picked from the surface of the mine, under the protection of the Law of the Land and its secret faceless police, the ISD. It is harder for Gaddaffi, as he had to get his hands dirty with blood of his people. Be prepared for a major witch-hunt, after the election.
Meantime do not be so surprised that financial aid is with-held from the poor. In the minds of the ruling party, the poor does not exist and soon will disappear from the political landscape as more and more foreigners swarm our country.What matters to the Ruling Party is the timing of the next increase in their own salaries which currently is in the millions per annum, far and away beyond even Obama’s pay.
Those of you who are qualified in the Law, kindly research this matter: whether the decision by Parliament to pay such mind boggling remuneration to ministers is legal, given the fact that it is a one party Government making the ruling to pay itself. If there is a legal hook, we should find a way to hang them in the International arena of Human Rights.
Merely having opposition in Parliament is not enough. In fact it is too late for any opposition to reverse the damage already done: the big payout to ministers, the swarm of foreign workers and new citizens, the suppression of communication among citizens by witch-hunts conducted by the ISD and the Courts etc
We need a legal process for all these things to be heard. We need to get help from the International community, now.
@Simon Ng
Although I may be low income, I’m not too desperate yet, thank you very much!
And if you’re a wage earner like your Malay colleague, you’re probably not earning too much yourself, unless you’re his manager.
In either case, you attitude shows you are a very good student of the PAP (ie. Low income, go upgrade your skills. If too stupid to learn, your problem). Very well done!
Dear Sudhir. I salute your attempt to reason through the need for opposition in Singapore but I think your arguments are finally nothing more than the the classic basis for promoting democracy. The real question is, is the PAP government in Singapore any different from the typical party in a democracy and if so, does this difference argue for it to be exempt from the merits(or demerits) of a multi-party government? Are there multi-party governments in the world and in the region which have had greater success, particularly in looking after the less fortunate? A multi-party system seems to work best where the electorate are matured and sophisticated. Are Singaporeans ready for this? If we conclude that a healthy does of opposition is needed, what are the mechanisms to be put in place so that we do not become paralysed by endless debate that would slow our progress. If it ain’t broke, why fix it?
For the good future of sg more competition should be introduce in parliament. It has been proven again and again competition improve performance much like what the ft policy achieved.
Good article, good read, thank you.
In a plot of land, a farmer painstakingly takes out the weeds so to let his crops grow properly. Opposition’s task is that of the farmer’s. It is going to be backbreaking but there isn’t any choice. Almost everything is rotting in this plot when it is filled with foreign invasion.
Something must be wrong if there is no good crop from the plot of land which is in PAPayas’ custody. It’s time we change the farmer!
Why Singaporeans bother to tune in CNA Forum with the PM. This TV Station is under instruction to arrange it, choosing the participants with care, with prearranged questions, and with our PM having prepared scripts and answers already learnt by rote.
Let him attend one in the two Us, with impromtu student audience and unprepared impromtu questions thrown at him, and you would find him stumped and sweating under the collar.
i guess our PAP MPs are too elitist to speak for poor sinkies.
we need common singaporean oppo MPs to speak for us,the voiceless.
we are vocieless in so many ways .
we got no say when they decide to give themselves such ridiculous salaries and incredible bonuses.
we got no say when they suka-suka increse gst or cost of water that is pegged to oil)maybe nuclear power in future),
we got no choice when they openly tell us that we cannot withdraw our CPF – even if we no money to eat or see doctor – until our retirement and they keep pushing our retirement age older but at the same time,most jobless are getting younger and younger?
we got no choice when they decide to call us ‘no talent ‘ in order to repalce us woith foteigners.
we got no choice but to be content to be cheaper and cheaper while our general cost of living gets higher and higher?
we need oppo MPs urgently,we do!
Solid Article.
Just like monopoly goes against interest of consumers, a monopolistic government is risky for the people in the long run. The dangers are even greater as there is no “antitrust law equivalent” to prevent a monopolistic government from abusing its power.
In the case of PAP, they have already crossed the line with policies like GRC, selective estate upgrading, gerrymandering (electoral boundaries redrawing to favour themselves)
For the benefit of Singaporeans, we need the best possible candidates to enter the parliament regardless of which party they are from. However these entry barriers favour PAP and makes it more difficult for new opposition candidates (even if they are better) to enter politics. Hence we have a conflict of interest between PAP and Singaporeans.
If PAP really thinks they have the best candidates, make it a cleaner fight. That’s how you win the respect of Singaporeans.
@Low Income Citizen
To be honest i am very disappointed with your attitude in life. To upgrade oneself has nothing to do with who is in power. You are expecting handouts without real hard work and please do not preach this idea to your children, this will make a even worst generation of new Singaporeans. What do you expect the government to do if you are too stupic ? Government to provide you a brain transplant FOC ? I think you have chosen a career that is free and easy although is less paid therefore please do not complain , you may be a no income citizen in other countries with your kind of attitude.
@Simon Ng
“What do you expect the government to do if you are too stupid ? Government to provide you a brain transplant FOC ?”
The reason I’m stupid is because of the media (constant brainwashing and one-sided), the education system (where questioning and participation is not encouraged, just copy notes), and the military (where you have to listen to orders, never question or even make suggestion, or risk being charged and have your future destroyed).
How are we to compete with the foreigners coming in? The upgrading programs are not targetting the right problems, which are a lack of critical thinking skills, and lack of culture of experimentation for fear of failure
@Simon Ng
i agree in Sg everyone need to work, and
i think people do not wish to lose their jobs.
But do you know that since 20 years ago,
this govt had quietly taken so much of local citizens taxpayers’ monies every year to freely sponsor foreign countries’ students to full degree courses in our 2 universities. Then they auto. become pink ic holders with their parents and tribes. Some received costly
scholarships in western countries too.
These officers of MOE had been going on such missions as regularly as yearly to
various countries, promising them and their families that if they will come :
everything from degree fees, accommodations, free allowances, free transport, in other words so many freebies that Sgreans do not even enjoy.
We were not much aware until in last few
years, with our own eyes we literally see
an explosion of foreigners here.
If you are an ordinary citizen, i think
the prices of every thing you need to live and survive on will keep going up or double.
By then, many will regret and mourn that they are put into that state.
Dear Gentlemen
Thank you very much for your comments and i think the government is listening and will try to improve.
Simon Ng,
In another words, Minister without Portfolio is a Spare Minister. We have 7(?) Spare Ministers on standby for 14(?) ministers. Non of the minister of state can take over the minister?
In the first place, the malay worker doesn’t complain to you, doesn’t mean he doesn’t complain. Just like if you don’t see Japanese cry on TV, you can’t conclude that Japanese don’t cry under such an adverse situation.
LSS said “We (PAP) are DEAF to all criticisms!”. As long as LSS is in the cabinet, I don’t believe the government is listening.
It is a long time that I have come across a very well written and unbiased article worthy of support. Anyway, PAP has already prepared for nine opposition MPs to be elected into Parliament, failing which NCMPs will fill the vacancies. The opposition WP is the most credible and worthy opponents to PAP and should be supported. The other opposition MPs are like empty tins and making the most noise without any substance, including SPP for senior citizens only.
Even the WP is not credible. Just look at the calibre of the opposition candidates; do we want these useless fools in parliament, when all they know is to oppose. Ask them to propose and they falter.
Dear Spare Minister
I am trying to put up a definition of the term Minister without Portfolio and do not engaging in any form of arguments. Just like we do not argue why there is a need for spare tire in a car.As for my Malay collegue , i think i know him ( 17 years ) better than you know him.
“An ideal scenario, in my opinion, is for Singapore to elect up to 20 credible opposition members in the upcoming election.”
This sounds nice, but how are the voters in any given constituency supposed to know whether they need to return a PAP candidate or a non-PAP candidate in order that such a balance might be guaranteed?
“We should not, of course, expect the PAP to advocate such an outcome.”
On the contrary, my guess is that the PAP might love this idea. It meant for Parliament to incorporate a rather smaller number of ‘alternative’ voices than 20 and it didn’t mean to allow those voices an opportunity even to lose in any important parliamentary vote, but it did increase the minimum number of seats that would be allocated to non-PAP MPs regardless of what might happen in the polls, didn’t it?
“All this does not imply that Singapore needs to dabble with multi-party democracy.”
This much is actually true. There are other, less ancient processes that might allow a country (or any other type of collective for that matter) to be governed without any political parties needing to exist at all. Sociocracy is a system of governance, using consent-based decision making among equivalent individuals and an organizational structure based on cybernetic principles, for example.
“The only ‘downside’ is that politicians might have to engage in lengthier debates.”
Visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociocracy to read about Sociocratic processes by all means, and do please expect to feel skeptical about whether or not it could work.
Frankly, I am inclined to imagine a world without politicians might be a happier and rather more peaceful world than the one we currently live in.
Or perhaps I should quietly offer up my support to the PAP and have done with it all?