Govt doesn't encourage Opposition parties
-
The govt says it is not its job to encourage opposition parties.The govt even wants to encourage ppl to have more babies,but encouraging ppl to take part in politics (either in ruling or OPPOSITION party) is not its job?
Can democracy work without any opposition parties or individuals?If the govt is bad or coorupt, who can take over the govt when opposition parties are discouraged?If a person has better political ideas than PAP has,doies it mean he shouldn't form a party to contest with the ruling party when which doesn't want him?
Yes,encouraging the opposition is not the job of the PAP. Is Govt = PAP?Ministers,pls understand you have dual roles, i.e. leaders in the govt and the party.Pls don't mix the two roles.The ministers' salaries are paid by all tax payers.
The govt should encourage good opposition parties.Then it wouldn't matter whether votiers choose ruling or oppostion party. -
got a question:
would you give support to the very enemy who would destroy you? -
they wouldnt want it because they wana be in charge! why support something that might bring them down
-
Lee Kuan Yew is sponsoring 47 million to Worker's Party to overthrow PAP in my dreams.
-
My reply is: Oppositon is not enemy.They have a equal role as the ruling party.Encopurage ppl to take part in politics -- even in oppostion paties.Originally posted by the Bear:got a question:
would you give support to the very enemy who would destroy you? -
Derfel reply is: Your keyboard is damaged or your typing is horrible. Change please.Originally posted by PRP:My reply is: Oppositon is not enemy.They have a equal role as the ruling party.Encopurage ppl to take part in politics -- even in oppostion paties.
Ha! Ha! Ha! -
Under any accountable and transparent system, opposition will be treated as alternative voices representing the people as well for checks and balances.
I don't see why this role cannot be performed or tolerated by the dominant party in power. If the policies or implementations of the governing party are right as against the alternative proposals of the opposition, they will always enjoy the support of the people.
Why is the party in power so narrow-minded in regarding opposition as a threat to its power as posted by some forumers. I fear that when the party in power becomes self-centred and wants to have the power solely to itself will it regard the opposition as a threat. -
would the opposition do the same thing?
seriously...
frankly, i'm kinda tired of people saying it is "the responsibility of the gabrament to encourage opposition parties" blah blah...
wrong... it is NOT the responsibility of the gabrament...
in a democracy, it is the responsibility of THE PEOPLE to encourage opposition if they feel their voices are not heard...
to blame the gabrament and diminish the responsibility of the people.. their personal responsibility.. is just a cop-out and a sell-out...Originally posted by PRP:My reply is: Oppositon is not enemy.They have a equal role as the ruling party.Encopurage ppl to take part in politics -- even in oppostion paties. -
Well, if PAP supports opposition parties, then the opposition parties are just puppets of PAP under a different name, so what's the difference?
The joke is that some think CSJ is paid off by PAP to act stupid with his wild antics so that Singaporeans are put off by opposition parties.
And Singaporeans are too passive to press for changes. So what to do? No wonder so many people I know want to leave this country! -
Singapore goverment is nither democratic nor communist, it is a new type of system. But tis system seems to be working. Maybe it would be best that it remains the same. Countries such as usa and taiwan have waste alot of money in their campaining, when they can spend their money in helping the people. With a single party, there would be lesser time slots on the tv for parlament, that is a good thing .
tried visiting the oppostions party website. There are many funny stories haha.
p.s. careful of wat u say, the goverment is watching -
In any system there will be beneficiaries and disadvantaged. Whether something is good or not is measured only finally by the degree of support of existing system or government. If high costs affect the people and policies are causing loss of economic competitiveness and unemployment and difficulties in making ends meet, then what will be the good being talked about.
If next year, it is hoped due to continued world market forces, the economy remains on the uptrend, there may be forgiving acceptance of all the autocratic rule and denials.
If high costs come down under the new leadership and government becomes more caring and pro-Singapore and accountable, then there is a possibility that one party or even dictatorship will be somewhat acquiesced by the people.
For now, high costs are affecting the people, and there is a lack of economic strategy to take the economy forward. The domestic sector of economy is full of problems. The beneficiaries like the MPs, grass roots and party supporters naturally have nothing to worry about. Think, will the people bear with such problems and for how long.
-
bear has put it in a nutshell: politics is a dirty game.Originally posted by the Bear:got a question:
would you give support to the very enemy who would destroy you?
Take for example the discounts offered by Singapore power. Why was it given to PAP MPs in alternative wards? Why was it not given to the appropriate MPs represented? It's not a question of competency, its a carrot offered by the government, hence it will be offered through an arm of the government.
Perhaps we have adopted the wrong approach. I would have asked the question: Why aren't Singaporeans, enough educated ones at least, joining the alternatives? Why join young PAP? If one truly wishes to improve the situation of Singapore, the alternatives would be a better start.
Give Chiam See Tong and Low Thia Khiang some hope. -
Sing Power has clarified that the vouchers were given to the grassroot organisations of the People's Association, which is a govt stat board and not politically affiliated.Originally posted by BillyBong:bear has put it in a nutshell: politics is a dirty game.
Take for example the discounts offered by Singapore power. Why was it given to PAP MPs in alternative wards? Why was it not given to the appropriate MPs represented?
It is interesting why the opposition ward MPs are not in control of these grassroots organisations, when they are govt entities and in theory, non partisan. -
I thought PA was non-partition as mentioned somewhere by ministers before. If so, why was not it be seen as non-partition in its conduct of grants of benefits such as SP vouchers to constituents?Originally posted by yoongf:Sing Power has clarified that the vouchers were given to the grassroot organisations of the People's Association, which is a govt stat board and not politically affiliated.
It is interesting why the opposition ward MPs are not in control of these grassroots organisations, when they are govt entities and in theory, non partisan. -
Yes,it is not the responsiblity of the government to encourage opposition parties.BUT,it is also not the responsibility of the government to "Twist" the "rules n regulations of the election" until it is so damn obvious in favour of the "ruling party"!!!Originally posted by the Bear:would the opposition do the same thing?
seriously...
frankly, i'm kinda tired of people saying it is "the responsibility of the gabrament to encourage opposition parties" blah blah...
wrong... it is NOT the responsibility of the gabrament...
in a democracy, it is the responsibility of THE PEOPLE to encourage opposition if they feel their voices are not heard...
to blame the gabrament and diminish the responsibility of the people.. their personal responsibility.. is just a cop-out and a sell-out...
Frankly speaking,i am also quite sick of some ppl keep saying that "it is not the responsibility of the government to encourage opposition party".Yes,we know that,even an idiot also know that PAP have no obligation to encourage opposition party.But please,when come to election,make it "simple,fair and square"!!!Dont come out with what F**KING ideas of what GRC lar,finding "excuses" to disqualified opposition parties in the election lar,threaten to "sue" opposition party members lar.Let me ask u all 1 thing,in other advance n democracy countries,where got this kind of "low-class" election?
If the ruling party can anyhow amend the "laws" of election,let me ask u,who is going to respect the laws lay down by them?By anyhow changing the rules,the PAP are actually telling us that if u are strong,u can do what u like!!!Which means if i have a gun,i can go rob the bank.If i am strong,i can go around "raping women".If i have a knife,i can stab at anyone who i dislike!!!This is exactly what PAP is showing us by the way they treat the opposition parties during the election!!!And furthermore,their behaviour in the election only show that they are "not gentleman,narrow-minded,stubborn n petty old fools".This is the reasons why many ppl "despise" PAP!!! -
PAP don't suppress opposition tao chio liao. Cannot expect them to encourage opposition lah!
-
Originally posted by drawer:Yes,it is not the responsiblity of the government to encourage opposition parties.BUT,it is also not the responsibility of the government to "Twist" the "rules n regulations of the election" until it is so damn obvious in favour of the "ruling party"!!!
Frankly speaking,i am also quite sick of some ppl keep saying that "it is not the responsibility of the government to encourage opposition party".Yes,we know that,even an idiot also know that PAP have no obligation to encourage opposition party.But please,when come to election,make it "simple,fair and square"!!!Dont come out with what F**KING ideas of what GRC lar,finding "excuses" to disqualified opposition parties in the election lar,threaten to "sue" opposition party members lar.Let me ask u all 1 thing,in other advance n democracy countries,where got this kind of "low-class" election?
If the ruling party can anyhow amend the "laws" of election,let me ask u,who is going to respect the laws lay down by them?By anyhow changing the rules,the PAP are actually telling us that if u are strong,u can do what u like!!!Which means if i have a gun,i can go rob the bank.If i am strong,i can go around "raping women".If i have a knife,i can stab at anyone who i dislike!!!This is exactly what PAP is showing us by the way they treat the opposition parties during the election!!!And furthermore,their behaviour in the election only show that they are "not gentleman,narrow-minded,stubborn n petty old fools".This is the reasons why many ppl "despise" PAP!!! *clap clap* i like tat -
In the SP voucher incident, I don't recall it being mentioned that the vouchers fell into PAP representative hands in those wards. It was given to grassroots organisations, and the MPs for those areas only claimed they did not receive them.Originally posted by robertteh:I thought PA was non-partition as mentioned somewhere by ministers before. If so, why was not it be seen as non-partition in its conduct of grants of benefits such as SP vouchers to constituents?
I would think that the grassroots organisations there shd be reporting to the MP, or that the MP shd be taking charge of these organisations. It suggests a lack of communication within. If it truly was directed to PAP rep hands, the grassroot leader needs to be taken to task by the MP. -
LTK complained he received none even though he is the rightful MP in Hougang ward. Instead it was Eric Low who was tasked to distribute them. And the former was blamed for not giving them to his constituents. In the first place, he was denied the chance to exercise his duties. It was never his fault.Originally posted by yoongf:In the SP voucher incident, I don't recall it being mentioned that the vouchers fell into PAP representative hands in those wards. It was given to grassroots organisations, and the MPs for those areas only claimed they did not receive them.
I would think that the grassroots organisations there shd be reporting to the MP, or that the MP shd be taking charge of these organisations. It suggests a lack of communication within. If it truly was directed to PAP rep hands, the grassroot leader needs to be taken to task by the MP. -
So it is clearly established that public funds and resources have been misused to serve party purposes.Originally posted by iveco:LTK complained he received none even though he is the rightful MP in Hougang ward. Instead it was Eric Low who was tasked to distribute them. And the former was blamed for not giving them to his constituents. In the first place, he was denied the chance to exercise his duties. It was never his fault.
Should a penalty be imposed on the party by Party regulatory body as the Media Development Authority or IDA has done to media companies for breach of regulatory codes. The penalty in such a case should be at least a million. -
Hmm.. I think youÂ’ve got me there. Just did more researchÂ…Originally posted by iveco:LTK complained he received none even though he is the rightful MP in Hougang ward. Instead it was Eric Low who was tasked to distribute them. And the former was blamed for not giving them to his constituents. In the first place, he was denied the chance to exercise his duties. It was never his fault.
PM appoints the CDC mayor, who appoints the Grassroots OrganisationÂ’s Advisor.
http://app.sprinter.gov.sg/data/pr/2004081002-PMO.pdf
Under the current scheme of things, most, if not all, public assistance, is channelled through the CDC.
This would suggest that an MP.. if not holding a concurrent post of mayor or grassroots advisor, is nothing more than a town council chairman, with no discretionary power when it comes to public assistance schemes. It would not make sense if got problem and looking for assistance.
Gee.. being just a town council chairman is quite a thankless job. Those who have performed MCST chairman jobs should know. -
Singapore government is neither democratic nor communist,and this "new system" seems to be working?First of all,i would like to stress that this so-called "new system" is nothing new at all.In fact,the Nazi germany in WW2 do it much better than our PAP leaders,they 1 shot arrested all the opposing parties n citizens n throw them into jail!!!They also felt that the "general election" is a nuisance n cancelled it away n save all their trouble!!Not like the PAP,only forced the opposition parties into one corner n let them "hanging half dead" in the parliament which bring out criticism from the public n foreigners n let them have the chance to "sympathise" the opposition.So unwise of those PAP leaders!!!Originally posted by ZaberX:Singapore goverment is nither democratic nor communist, it is a new type of system. But tis system seems to be working. Maybe it would be best that it remains the same. Countries such as usa and taiwan have waste alot of money in their campaining, when they can spend their money in helping the people. With a single party, there would be lesser time slots on the tv for parlament, that is a good thing .
tried visiting the oppostions party website. There are many funny stories haha.
p.s. careful of wat u say, the goverment is watching
And moreover,every 5 years the PAP still have to put up a show called "general election" which everyone already knows what is the "outcome".Waste money,waste voters time,and wasting their own time!Unlike PAP,the Nazi germany n Communist Russia directly "cancelled" away the general election,save money,save voters time,save their own trouble also.BUT,many years have passed,what happen to them now?Nazi germany brought out the most destructive war in the world n brought about suffering both to other countries n their own ppl!!Communist Russia is at the verge of bankcrupt n was overthrown by their "national hero" Boris Yeltsen.Are we going to make the same mistakes of what the Nazi n Communist Russia already been through?Well,let our "great leaders" to decide.
But first,if next time they want to "create" a system n say it is "uniquely invented" by them,please go n check back "history" whether got other ppl already done it or not.Otherwise they might violate the international "copyright" laws!!! -
When Indonesia People Power got rid of dictator Surharto, Lee Kuan Yew publicly condemned the act.
Therein lies the clue, here is a man who is worried about his own dictatorial rule too. Would Singaporeans follow the example of Indonesians and get rid of him one day - soon?
Whether oppositions will serve us well is subjective and many wild negative speculations have been made by PAP and their boot lickers.
The problem with us is, we never ask ourselves this - is it healthy to have a one party big-majority party run our lives?
Should'nt we make PAP people work harder for the people? Give them less votes and reduce their representation in parliament?
Are we committing a big stupid mistake of handing them easy victories in the elections? There is no voice to speak against many of their high-handed constitution. NS is one good example.
Why no reduction in NS term when many countries dont think NS term should be longer than 1 year?
My doubts about PAP grows with each passing year.
They have nothing to offer to us in terms of progress in culture, well rounded social life and now, job security.
LKY and his merry men are mainly more concern about making headlines for themselves than the social and spiritual well beings of most Singaporeans.
The old dictator has led us into this path of all work, study and no play for Singaporeans.
Is this what we want? Is this what life is all about for Singaporeans? -
hey miong, i'm with u buddy. when's the next general elections after 2007? i cannot vote in 2007 leh...Originally posted by miong:When Indonesia People Power got rid of dictator Surharto, Lee Kuan Yew publicly condemned the act.
Therein lies the clue, here is a man who is worried about his own dictatorial rule too. Would Singaporeans follow the example of Indonesians and get rid of him one day - soon?
Whether oppositions will serve us well is subjective and many wild negative speculations have been made by PAP and their boot lickers.
The problem with us is, we never ask ourselves this - is it healthy to have a one party big-majority party run our lives?
Should'nt we make PAP people work harder for the people? Give them less votes and reduce their representation in parliament?
Are we committing a big stupid mistake of handing them easy victories in the elections? There is no voice to speak against many of their high-handed constitution. NS is one good example.
Why no reduction in NS term when many countries dont think NS term should be longer than 1 year?
My doubts about PAP grows with each passing year.
They have nothing to offer to us in terms of progress in culture, well rounded social life and now, job security.
LKY and his merry men are mainly more concern about making headlines for themselves than the social and spiritual well beings of most Singaporeans.
The old dictator has led us into this path of all work, study and no play for Singaporeans.
Is this what we want? Is this what life is all about for Singaporeans?
-
Mr Lim Swee Say said it did not matter whether a person join the opposition or the ruling party as long as he was for S'pore.
Does his boss,i.e. the PM,agree with his viewpoint?