Happy organization for Election 2006- Singapore.

• bic_cherry

  8 Jan 06, 14:30

  Ideal organization for Election 2006- Singapore.
  .
  1) Return to the original concept of GRCs- (to maintain social harmony through a 25% representation of minority races).
  - Remember the principle of meritocracy is not to deprive the ‘poor with good ideas’, having >4member-GRCs is akin to turning elections2006 into a ‘High stakes Gamble’- that only favors ‘high stakes capable players’- ie.PAP (current situation).
  - It is thus truth- that SG is only a good place to stay if you are Rich and Powerful, -- the small and ordinary-u have been forgotten.
  - Please do not fool around with the lives of SGporeans- we have families and daily needs- we need every choice possible to select leaders whom we think will serve us well. We need to be given more options wrt the planning of our countryÂ’s future.
  - PAP and us know that continuing the GRC system of elections will make it continually difficult for smaller parties/ independents to succeed, only PAP has the large membership rates and good financing to participate in as many GRCs as prescribed- all independents will then have to stand in single seat constituencies [SSC]- over participation in SSC will result in the consequent dilution of opposition votes & this will favour the PAP- so opposition is disadvantaged on ALL fronts.- smart PAP engineering but bad for the future of SG.
  - Last minute election boundary revelations only serve to confuse the voter and opposition candidates further- giving opposition political parties little time to plan/ announce their election plans/ promises. - As a citizen, it seems that my constituency is being changed to suite the needs of the PAP- the loss of voting rights because of opposition non-participation for a/m reasons only adds to my misery.
  - PAP has done well in the past- but that is no guarantee about the future- and the lack of opposition consensus- will hurt SGpore eventually- we need a more mature governance.
  - And this prejudice has existed since 1988- a dishonesty that will perpetuate through society- people learn from their leaders- so I wouldnÂ’t be surprised if the average SGporean might scheme, cheat and swindle- learning by the example- of the ruling elite!
  - Example: Enron, NKF? (http://happycitizen.blogspot.com/2005/12/only-10-cents-per-dollar-donated-goes.html)
  In short:
  - Earlier announcement of election boundaries the better (stop gerrymandering!)- - so SGporeans can have a decent access and wider choice of views/ ideals of their potential leaders/ be heard.
  - 2/3 of SG can be 4member GRC, the other 1/3-SSCs. (my rough estimate).
  - DO NOT out place individual creativity just for the sake of PAP elitism.
  .
  .
  2) Discuss mature and relevant rally issues;
  - Stop the illicit use of National funds for the selective benefit PAP supporters. National funds are the contributions of ALL SGporeans; so voter’s choice should NOT deprive them the rightful use of such funds. By linking estate upgrading to party support- PAP has effectively manipulated voter’s rights for their personal party gain (a blatant act of bullying the voter)- use of such funds should in future lie with the govt in discussion with MPs and the access to such funds should NOT be used as an election carrot (concept: how to utilize vs the ‘right’ to utilize).
  - I feel embarrassed for the 70odd% of voters who might have voted PAP for personal benefit instead of collective good of the country- these are myopic people.
  - Topics IÂ’d like discussed incl:
  - The worldÂ’s 3rd lowest birth rate (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html)Â…,
  - The economy
  - The poor/ jobless in SG http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/poverty.html
  - High health care costs.
  - Terrorism- thoughts and concepts- the more SGporeans get swept aside- the more depressed and ignored folks there are around- some will jump down fr Swiss hotel, some will mess up MRT tracks, , the worst are those way laid by radical terrorist (and who feel betrayed enough)- these are the worst situations- they blow them selves in Swiss hotel/ Suntec/ IR [lost all his $$]- this cannot be good for the future of SG (no way immigration can possibly stop the trafficking of 1 kg high explosive- with dire consequence!)- so dear PAP- for the good of all SGpore- please resolve poverty issues- and keep all SGporeans observant and happyÂ…
  .
  - IKEA: ‘U don’t have to be rich to be clever [/happy]’
  - ‘Make room for ideas’
  
  Happy.
  
  
• ndmmxiaomayi

  8 Jan 06, 15:59

  Ermm, somehow I feel that you are contradicting yourself.
• bic_cherry

  8 Jan 06, 16:48

  Does Decency and Capability ONLY lie in the hands of the PAP?
  Obviously NOT! (PAP govt managed elections are not fair either...)
  
  So Please in next election:
  
  Return power to the people:
  Make the PAP= PEOPLEÂ’s Action Party.
  NOT: PAP= Political Authority (in) Perpetuality!
  
  http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/forum/story/0,5562,363521-1136671140,00.html?
  Jan 7, 2006
  Too many GE walkovers, so will I get to vote this time?
  THE electoral register will be ready next month to prepare for the coming general election. And my name will appear on it.
  But in practical terms, whether my name is on the register does not excite me, as it is very likely that again, I will not have the opportunity to exercise my right (and duty) to vote.
  I cannot recall when I last voted: I live in a constituency which has had recurring walkovers.
  The proliferation of group representation constituencies (GRCs) has caused too many walkovers and the unintended disenfranchisement of many citizens.
  The GRC scheme was conceived to help elect candidates from the minority races and to deflect the race factor (according to the opposition, it is another way of making it difficult for it to contest). The scheme has succeeded in its objectives but it has succeeded too in rendering many citizens mere spectators on election day.
  The creation of mega GRCs of five or six seats especially perpetuates this inexcusable 'right to vote but no chance to vote' paradox.
  The electoral process must seek to increase citizen participation, not reduce it.
  In some countries, people are prevented by intimidation and violence from voting. Here all is so peaceful on election day and there is a holiday atmosphere, but many who want to vote cannot and some who can vote do not.
  This is the Singapore electoral story - a success and yet a failure.
  More single-seat constituencies will redress the situation somewhat, and will better test the mettle of wannabes and even incumbent MPs - it is about time they are elected more on their own credentials than on the reflected cachet of notable ministers.
  So will I get to vote in the coming general election?
  One's vote should not be a rhetorical question: it is a citizen's basic right. It is his most important involvement in the political process every few years.
  Tan Chak Lim
  Copyright © 2005 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.
  
• ndmmxiaomayi

  8 Jan 06, 19:26

  Originally posted by bic_cherry:

  Does Decency and Capability ONLY lie in the hands of the PAP?
  Obviously NOT! (PAP govt managed elections are not fair either...)
  
  So Please in next election:
  
  Return power to the people:
  Make the PAP= PEOPLEÂ’s Action Party.
  NOT: PAP= Political Authority (in) Perpetuality!
  
  http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/forum/story/0,5562,363521-1136671140,00.html?
  Jan 7, 2006
  Too many GE walkovers, so will I get to vote this time?
  THE electoral register will be ready next month to prepare for the coming general election. And my name will appear on it.
  But in practical terms, whether my name is on the register does not excite me, as it is very likely that again, I will not have the opportunity to exercise my right (and duty) to vote.
  I cannot recall when I last voted: I live in a constituency which has had recurring walkovers.
  The proliferation of group representation constituencies (GRCs) has caused too many walkovers and the unintended disenfranchisement of many citizens.
  The GRC scheme was conceived to help elect candidates from the minority races and to deflect the race factor (according to the opposition, it is another way of making it difficult for it to contest). The scheme has succeeded in its objectives but it has succeeded too in rendering many citizens mere spectators on election day.
  The creation of mega GRCs of five or six seats especially perpetuates this inexcusable 'right to vote but no chance to vote' paradox.
  The electoral process must seek to increase citizen participation, not reduce it.
  In some countries, people are prevented by intimidation and violence from voting. Here all is so peaceful on election day and there is a holiday atmosphere, but many who want to vote cannot and some who can vote do not.
  This is the Singapore electoral story - a success and yet a failure.
  More single-seat constituencies will redress the situation somewhat, and will better test the mettle of wannabes and even incumbent MPs - it is about time they are elected more on their own credentials than on the reflected cachet of notable ministers.
  So will I get to vote in the coming general election?
  One's vote should not be a rhetorical question: it is a citizen's basic right. It is his most important involvement in the political process every few years.
  Tan Chak Lim
  Copyright © 2005 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.
  

  On the surface, it doesn't seem fair because of the GRCs. But the GRCs help to promote racial harmony by getting members of the other races to participate in the politics.
  
  PAP attracted people because it is multi-racial. That was the basis when senior Lee started the party. And it still is the basis.
  
  There are definitely ways to improve the situation. One of them is to remove the GRCs. But the problem is will PAP approve of this? The PAP will only approve if the other races participate. What if after removing the other races no longer participate?
• claudetnt

  10 Jan 06, 13:04

  GRC is totally abusing the system. if it is confined to 3 mps to a GRC then it can be somewhat acceptable but look what its happening today!
  
  How naive can singaporeans be was JBJ elected by the majority tamils?
  
  Racial harmony is used only as an excuse for the PAP to stay in power.