Undemocratic!
-
Translated from ZaoBao News
Òª¹¤È˵³�ÞÕþ¸Ù
¡¡¡¡�õ³ÌÇ¿£º²»ÃñÖ÷£¡
Demanding Workers¡¯ Party to amend Manifesto ----- Low Thia Khiang: Undemocratic!
ÆóÒµ¹«¹Ø�ø ¡ñ ºéÒÕ�¼¡¡�ÖÒåÃ÷
¡¡¡¡¹¤È˵³ÃØÊ鳤¡¢ºó¸ÛÇøÒéÔ±Ã�õ³ÌÇ¿×òÌìÅúÆÀÖ´ÕþµÄÈËÃñÃ�Ã�¶¯µ³ÒªÇóÃ�ÃÒ»¸öÕþ
µ³Ã�Þ¸ÄÕþ¸Ù£¬²»·ûºÃ�ÃñÖ÷ÕþÖεÄÔÂÔò£¬¶øÇÒÒ²ÔٴαÃÃ÷½«¼á³ÖÃ�¢³¡£¬²»Ô¸°´Ã�Ã�¶¯
µ³�ìµ¼È˵ÄÒªÇóÈ¥�޸ŤÈ˵³µÄÕþ¸Ù¡£
The Secretary General of Workers¡¯ Party, MP for Hougang constituency Mr. Low Thia Khiang criticize PAP¡¯s demand of another political party to amend their manifesto as contradictory to the principles of democracy.
¡¡¡¡Ëû×òÌì�¸¹ýµçÓʽÓÊܱ¾±¨¼ÇÕß·ÃÎÊʱ˵£º¡°¾�ÎÒËùÖª£¬Ã»Ó�Ò»¸ö×Ô³Æ×ÔÓÉÃñ
Ö÷µÄµØ·½£¬Ôø·¢Éú¹ýÒ»¸öÕþµ³ÒªÇóÃ�ÃÒ»¸öÕþµ³Ã�Þ¸ÄÕþ¸Ù֮ʡ£ÃñÖ÷ÕþÖεÄÔË×÷£¬
¾�ÊÇÈø÷Õþµ³°ÑÕþ¸Ù°ÚÉ�̨Ã棬ÈÃÑ¡Ãñ×ÔÓÉÑ¡Ôñ¡£ ¡±
His reply to our reporter email query states: according to what I know, there isn¡¯t an instance in a self declared free and democratic country whereby a political party demanding another political party to amend their manifesto. The workings of a democratic process is to let all political parties to put their manifestos on the table and let voters have a freedom of choice.
·´²µ¡°·çó�˵¡±
Rebuttals to ¡°Flying Kite¡±
¡¡¡¡Õë¶ÔÈË�¦²¿³¤¡¢��¶¯µ³×éÖ¯ÃØÊ飨ÌرðÈÎÎñ£©»ÆÓÀºêÒ½ÉúÇ°ÌìÔÚ¼ÇÕß»áÉ��Î
È�Ëû¡°ºÃ�ñÊÇÔÚÂÒ·Å·çó�£¬¿´ÄÄÒ»Ö»·çó�£¨¾ºÑ¡¿ÎÌ⣩»á±»·ç��Æð£¨ÄÜÓ®µÃÑ¡
Ʊ£©£¬¾�¼Ì�ø·ÅÄÄÒ»¸ö¡±ÕâÒ»µã£¬�õ³ÌÇ¿»ØÓ¦µÀ£º¡°ÎÒ²»�þµÃ»Æ²¿³¤¿ÉÓ�·Å¹ý·ç
ó�£¬ÇëÎÊÈçºÎÒ»ÊÖ�¬Ê±·Å¼¸¸ö·çó�ÄØ£¿ÎÒº�¹¤È˵³¶¼Ã»Ó�ÕâÖÖ±¾Ê¡£¿öÇÒ£¬�¬Ê±
·Å¼¸¸ö·çóÃ�»á´ÃÃ�ß½»²æ£¬ÎÒÃÇûÓÃ�¾À²ø²»ÇåµÄÃ�°¹ß¡£¡±
Countering Dr. Ng Eng Hen¡¯s illustration of him flying kites, he said ¡°I do not know whether Minister Ng has flied kite before but could anyone fly multiple kites at one time? Workers¡¯ Party and I do not have such skills. Moreover, flying a few kites concurrently will entangle the strings, we do not have the habit of entangling together (with issues).¡±
¡¡¡¡²»¹ý£¬Ã�õ³ÌÇ¿±ÃʾËû»¹ÊǵøÃ�Ã�»»ÆÒ½Éú»¨Ã�˲»ÉÙ±¦¹óµÄʱ¼äÈ¥ÔĶÃ�¹¤È˵³µÄ
Õþ¸Ù¼°¶ÔËüÌá³öÒâ¼û£¬²¢¿à ¿ÚÆÅ�ĵØÈ°¸æ¹¤È˵³µÄ�ìµ¼²ã¼°Æäµ³Ô±º��¦�Þ¸ÄÕþ¸Ù¡£
But Mr. Low Thia Khiang expressed gratitude to Dr. Ng in spending great amount of precious time in reading the Workers¡¯ Party Manifesto, raises his views and to urge us time and again earnestly and kindly to amend our manifesto.
¡¡¡¡Ëû˵£º¡°Ã�ÖÔÚÖ´Õþµ³ÒªÇó¹¤È˵³Ã�Þ¸ÄÕþ¸Ù£¬ÊÇ·ñÒòΪִÕþµ³ÈÃ�Ϊ×Ô¼ºµÄÀÃÄî
ÊÇ×îºÃµÄ£¬È´ÓÖ¶ÔÑ¡Ãñû�Å�Ä£¬²»È�ΪѡÃñÄܹ»×ö³öÕýÈ·µÄÑ¡Ôñ£¿Õâ¿É´Ó¼¸ÄêÇ°
Îâ×÷¶°×ÊÕþÇ¿µ÷¡®¼¯Ñ¡ÇøÖƶÈÄܱ£Ö¤Ö´Õþµ³ºòÑ¡È˲»»á±»ÄÜÑÔÉƱçµÄ·´¶Ôµ³ºòÑ¡
ÈËËù»÷°Ü¡¯µÄÑÔÂÛÖ�¿´µÃ³öÀ´¡£µ«ÊÇ£¬Õâô×öʵ¼ÊÉ�ÊÇÎ¥±³�ËÃñÖ÷ÕþÖεľ«Éñ¡£¡±
He said, ¡°Now that the ruling party demands Workers¡¯ Party to amend its manifesto, does it mean that the ruling party thinks that its own ideas are the best but still lack confidence in the voters so much so that it thinks that voters could not make the right choice? This could be seen from an emphasis made by SM Goh Chok Tong a few years ago that the GRC system could guarantee that ruling party¡¯s candidates will not be defeated by those opposition candidates with glib tongue. However by doing so is against the spirit of Democratic politics.¡±
¡¡¡¡ËûÖ¸³ö£¬Èç¹û�¼ÓƵÄÑ¡ÃñÕæµÄÈçÖ´Õþµ³ËùÈ�ΪµÄ»¹²»³ÉÊ죬ʹµÃ��¶¯µ³²»
µÃ²»³¢ÊÔ�¨¹ý´ó�¦Åê»÷¹¤È˵³µÄÕþ¸ÙÈ¥°µÊ¾Ñ¡ÃñÔÚ´óѡʱ�¶Ñ¡¹¤È˵³ÊÇΣ�յģ¬
ÄÇ��¶¯µ³Î¨Ò»¿É��µÄ×ö·¨¾�ÊÇ·�³ýÑ¡¾ÙÖÆ£¬ÓÉËüÄ긴һÄêµØ�ìµ¼�¼ÓÆ£¬Ö±µ½Ñ¡
Ãñ¡°³ÉÊ족Ϊֹ¡£
He pointed out that if Singapore¡¯s voters are truly immature like what ruling party depicted, then the only solution the PAP could provide to ensure that it could continue to rule until the voters are matured enough is to abolish the whole electoral process.
ÒªÇó��¶¯µ³
Ò²�û²¼Õþ¸Ù
Requesting PAP to announce its Manifesto
¡¡¡¡¹¤È˵³ÊÇÔÚ±¾ÔÂ14ÈÕ�û²¼�ÂÕþ¸Ù¡£»ÆÓÀºêÉ��ÇÆÚ�ùÊ×�ȶÔÕâ·�Õþ¸Ù¿ªÅÚ£¬Ö¸
ËüÂñÓ�ËÄ¿Å¡°¼Æʱըµ¯¡±£¬¼´ÒªÇó·�³ý×éÎ�ÇøµÄÖÖ×å±ÈÂʶ¥�Þ¼°¼¯Ñ¡ÇøÑ¡¾ÙÖÆ¡¢·�
³ýÃñÑ¡×Ü�³ÖÆ¡¢½âÉ¢ÓɾÓÃñίԱ»áÓ빫Ãñ×ÉѯίԱ»á×é³ÉµÄ»ù²ã×éÖ¯ÒÔ¼°ÎªÃñÖÚ
Ìṩ¸ü¶à µÄ½òÌù¡£
Workers¡¯ Party announced its new manifesto on 14 Jan 2006. Dr. Ng Eng Hen fired his first salvo at this manifesto last Saturday, pointing out that there are four ¡°time bombs¡±, i.e. abolishment of HDB quota and GRC system, abolishment of Elected President, abolishment of RC and CCC, and provide more subsidies to the people.
¡¡¡¡ÀîÃ�ÔÃ�ú×ÜÀÃÃ�ÇÆÚÌìÒ²Ö¸³ö£¬¹¤È˵³Ã�ÂÕþ¸ÙÀïÌá³öµÄ²¿·ÖÖ÷ÕÅ£¬µß¸²Ã�ËÃ�¼ÓÆÂ
Ã�¢¹úµÄ»ù±¾ÔÂÔò£¬Òò´Ë´ÙÇëËüÖØÃ�¿¼ÂÇÕþ¸ÙÄÚÈÃ�£¬²¢¼ÓÒÔÃ�Þ¶©¡£
On Sunday, PM Lee also pointed out that part of the Workers¡¯ Party Manifesto ideas have subverted the corner stones of Singapore Nation building and thus urge it to reconsider the content of the manifesto and amend it accordingly.
¡¡¡¡µ«ÊÇ£¬Ã�õ³ÌÇ¿¹ýºó±ÃÃ÷¹¤È˵³²»»áÃ�Þ¸ÄÕþ¸Ù¡£»ÆÓÀºêÇ°ÌìÃ�ÎÈÃ�ËûµÄ»ØÓ¦¹ýÓÚ
²Ö´Ù£¬²¢±Ãʾ¶ÔÕâÑùµÄ»ØÓ¦¸Ã�µ½Ê§Ã�û£¬»¹ÔÙÈýºôÓõ¹¤È˵³Ôٶȿ¼ÂÇÃ�Þ¸ÄÕþ¸Ù¡£
But Mr. Low Thia Khiang has stated clearly that Workers¡¯ Party will not amend its Manifesto. Dr. Ng Eng Hen describe his response as too hasty and express that this respond is disappointing. He has again urge Workers¡¯ Party to reconsider amending the manifesto.
¡¡¡¡¶ÔÓÚ»ÆÓÀºêÔÙ¶ÈÅúÆÀ¹¤È˵³�ÂÕþ¸ÙÂñÓ�ËÄ¿Å¡°¼Æʱըµ¯¡±£¬Ëû×òÌì»ØӦʱ˵£¬
¹¤È˵³µÄÕþ¸Ù¹²Ó�52Ò³£¬��¶¯µ³Õë¶ÔµÄÖ»ÊÇÆäÖ�µÄËÄ�îÖ÷ÕÅ£¬È´±Ü¿ª�ËÆäËûÖµµÃ
¹Ø×¢µÄ¿ÎÌâÓ뽨Òé¡£
With regards to Dr. Ng Eng Hen¡¯s repeated criticism of Workers¡¯ Party new Manifesto containing 4 ¡°Time Bombs¡±, he responded that Workers¡¯ Party Manifesto has 52 pages altogether, PAP only aimed at 4 of its many ideas but avoided the other issues and ideas that need valuable attention.
¡¡¡¡¡°ÎÒ¸Ã�Ã�»Õþ¸®»¨Ê±¼äÈ¥ÔĶÃ�ÎÒÃǵÄÕþ¸Ù¡£»òÃ�ÃÃ�ÖÔÚÒ²ÊÇÃ�Ã�¶¯µ³Ã�û²¼ËüµÄÕþ¸Ù
µÄʱºò�Ë¡£¡±
¡°I thank the government of spending time reading our manifesto. Maybe it is also time for PAP to announce its own manifesto.¡±
¡¡¡¡ËûÖØÉ깤È˵³Ö÷ÕÅ·�³ý×éÎ�ÇøµÄÖÖ×å±ÈÂʶ¥�Þ¼°¼¯Ñ¡ÇøÑ¡¾ÙÖÆ£¬ÊÇÒòΪËüÈ�
Ϊ�¼ÓƲ»�¬×åȺ֮¼äµÄ�½âÒÑ´ïµ½¸ü¸ßµÄˮƽ¡£
He reiterates that Workers¡¯ Party advocates the abolishment of the HDB quota and GRC system because it is in the view that the different races of Singapore have reached a higher level of understanding.
¡¡¡¡¡°ÎÒÃÇÓ¦¸Ã³¬Ô½ÒÔÈ˹¤»¯µÄÕþ²ßÈ¥´Ù½øÖÖ×å½»�÷µÄ²ã´Î£¬ÈÃÈËÃÇ×ÔÓÉÑ¡ÔñסËù¡£¡±
¡°We should go beyond using artificial man made policy to promote the level of racial exchanges, let people have their freedom of choice in selecting their flats.¡±
¡¡¡¡Ö�ÓÚ¹¤È˵³ÎªºÎÖ÷ÕÅ·�³ýÃñÑ¡×Ü�³ÖÆ£¬�õ³Ìǿ˵¹ú»áÓ¦µ±ÊÇ¼à ¶½Õþ¸®µÄ×îºÃ
»úÖÆ£¬¶øÕþ¸®±£³Ö�¸Ã÷ÊǶžøÌ°ÎÛµÄ×îºÃ°ì·¨¡£
With regards to why Workers¡¯ Party advocate the abolishment of the Elected Presidency, Mr. Low TK said that the parliament should be the best system that keep the government in checks and the best way is for the government to maintain transparency.
¡¡¡¡¡°¶Å¾øÌ°ÎÛµÄ×îºÃ·½·¨ÊÇʲô£¿Ö»¿¿Ò»Î»ÃñÑ¡×Ü�³À´¼à ¶½£¬»¹ÊÇ°ÑÊý¾�·ÅÔÚ
Ã�øÕ¾ÉÃ�£¬ÓÉÃ�Ã¶à ¹«ÖÚÀ´¼ì²é£¿¡±
¡°What is the best way to prevent corruption? To rely on ONE elected president to watch the government or putting the data on the net and let all citizens to do the checking?¡±
¡¡¡¡¹¤È˵³Ò²Ö÷ÕÅ»ÃÃâÉú»î±ØÃ�èÆ·µÄÃ�û·ÑË°¡¢Ã�ÆÃ�Ã�ʧҵ±£Ã�ռƻ®£¬²¢ÎªÈËÃñÌṩ
±£·Ñ»®Ò»µÄ»ù±¾×¡Ôº±£�ռƻ®£¬µ«ÊÇ»ÆÓÀºêÈ´ÅúÆÀËüÖ»Êdz�ŵ¸øÓèÃñÖÚ¸ü¶à µÄ½ò
Ìù£¬È´²»½âÊ�½òÌùÔ´×Ժ䦣¬Ëµ²»¶¨»¹�ë´ò¹ú¼Ò´¢±¸½ðµÄÖ÷Òâ¡£
Workers¡¯ Party also advocate the exemption of GST of goods of necessity, unemployment insurance, to provide a standard premium basic hospitalization insurance plan but Dr. Ng only criticize that we only promise more subsidies for the people without explaining how such subsidies could be finance, probably we want to touch on National reserves.
¡¡¡¡¶Ô´Ë£¬�õ³ÌÇ¿·ñÈ�¹¤È˵³Ìá³öÕâ�©½¨Ò飬ÊÇΪ�˰ѹú¼Ò´¢±¸½ð»Ó»ôµô£¬Ò²²»
ÊÇҪʹÕþ¸®ÆƲú£¬¶øÊÇÒªÉè·¨Ã�ÂÖúÄÇÃ�©ÔÚ»·Çò»¯³å»÷Ã�ÂÃ�Ã�ÈëÀ§¾³µÄ¹úÈË¡£
With respect to this, Mr. Low TK denies that the intention of Workers¡¯ Party advocating these ideas is to squander the National reserves or bankrupt the government, but it is to help those citizens who are trapped in the difficulties due to the impact of globalization.
»ù²ã·þÎñ
²»Ó¦±»ÕþÖλ¯
Grassroot service should not be politicized
¡¡¡¡Ö�ÓÚ¹¤È˵³½¨Òé½âÉ¢ÓɾÓÃñίԱ»áÓ빫Ãñ×ÉѯίԱ»á×é³ÉµÄ»ù²ã×éÖ¯£¬�õ³Ì
ǿ˵¹¤È˵³ÎÞÒâĨɱ�ÖÓ�µÄ»ù²ã�ì�äµÄ¹±�×£¬¹¤È˵³Ö®ËùÒÔ½¨Òé½âÉ¢�ÖÓ�µÄ»ù²ã
×éÖ¯£¬ÔÂÒòÔÚÓÚ»ù²ã·þÎñ²»Ó¦±»ÕþÖλ¯¡£
As for Workers¡¯ Party suggestion of abolishing the RC and CCC grassroot organization, Mr. Low TK stresses that Workers¡¯ Party has no intention to blot out the contributions of grassroot leaders. The reason of suggesting the abolishment of the present grassroot system is that grassroot services should not be politicized.
¡¡¡¡ËûÖ¸³ö£¬»ù²ã×éÖ¯ÕþÖλ¯¶ÔÄÇ�©Ã»Ó�Õþµ³±³¾°£¬Ö»�ëΪÉçÇø·þÎñµÄ»ù²ã�ì�ä
ÊDz»¹«Æ½µÄ¡£¡°ÎªºÎ¾Óί»áº�¹«Ãñ×ÉѯίԱ»áµÄ³ÉÔ±¶¼µÃÓÉÖ´Õþµ³ÒéÔ±½¨ÒéίÈΣ¿¡±
He pointed out that the politicized grassroot organization is unfair to those grassroot leaders that have no political background whom only want to serve the community. ¡°Why must the members of RC and CCC be suggested for appointment by the ruling party MPs
¡¡¡¡Ëû˵£¬¹¤È˵³Òò´Ë½¨ÒéÃ�¨¹ýÉçÇøÑ¡¾Ù£¬Ñ¡³öÃ�ªÂçËù¹ÜÀÃίԱ»áµÄίԱ£¬ÔÙÓÉ
µ±Ñ¡µÄÒéÔ±³öÈÎίԱ»á¹ËÎÊ¡£
He said that is why Workers¡¯ Party suggests that we should go through the local election to elect the Chairman of the management community of CC and let the elected MPs be the advisor. -
I mentioned before in another thread.
Singapore is probably the only country whereby the incumbent party tells the opposition parties how to contest elections and even to the extent of asking them to amend their manifestoes.
-
I don't think PAP is telling WP what to do, neither is this anything new.
It is only normal in politics for parties to criticise each other's stand. -
Is this not a tragic comedy - a Government a.k.a. Ruling Political Party that claimed to have build A COUNTRY equal to that of any in the FIRST WORLD, will react and behave with a mentality of THIRD WORLD POLITICS
The TIME BOMBS were created by the Ruling Political Party - when they introduced POLITICS into HDB residential policy - by DILUTING concentrations of any one MINORITY GROUP within a SOCIETY formed by ONE MAJORITY ETHNIC GROUP - under the very innocent guise of not duplicating the ghettoes of the larger cities of the USA.
However, the simplistic argument to justify this rule did not delve into the deeper socio-economic issues of the ghettoes found in the USA.
The Political Rights of the Singaporean MINORITY GROUP have been trampled not only in terms of where they choose to stay, but also WHO THEY CAN RESELL their HDB homes to - so as to maintain this Politically Racist Policy of dilution.
The Time Bomb of the GRC was created by the Ruling Party and it will cut both ways in the manner that the Election Boundary is constantly changed and enlarged.
The Ruling Political Party's present action in gerrymandering will set a poor precedent for the future STABILITY in the manner politics is to be practised.
The Time Bomb of an IMPOTENT Elected Presidency that is compliant to any Ruling Party can only explode when the Elected Presidency is POLITICISED BY THE POLITICAL APPOINTMENTS currently decided by the Ruling Political Party.
The Time Bomb of the poor socio-economic infrastructure in supporting the aged, the under class, the needy, and the unemployed is the creation of FORTY YEARS of arrogant policies implemented and legislated by the present Ruling Political Party - and not by the sudden creation of a WP Manifesto or that from any other Opposition Party.
The Time Bomb of the strict Family Planning Policy of the 1960s and 1970s has NOW EXPLODED - with the PRESENT Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Political Party instituting all kinds of incentive schemes to get Singaporeans to increase their family size - without any thought to the corresponding economic burden that Singaporean Families are encountering.
Are we looking for any handouts ?
Did Singaporeans ask for the GST refunds paid in 2003 and 2004 ?
All we have asked is for a realistic scheme to lower costs by reducing the high tax on fuel so as to lower transport and utility costs; the 5% GST imposed on all forms of economic activities when the earlier 3% GST had produced a huge surprise SURPLUS when first introduced; lower HOUSING COSTS by lowering land prices arbitrarily and aritificially fixed by the Government a.k.a the Ruling Party; LOWER THE COST OF GOVERNMENT by reducing the FAT WAGES paid to MINISTERS and Senior Civil Servants.
The condescending attitude of the Ruling Political Party certainly reveal a streak of insecurity, of self-doubt, and short confidence - when they have to mobilize all their personality (big and small) - PLUS the national media which they control - simply to give publicity to themselves, and to negate the excitement and hoopla generated by the release of a very CREDIBLE and ACHIEVEABLE MANIFESTO of an Opposition Party. -
Originally posted by Salman:
Criticize
I don't think PAP is telling WP what to do, neither is this anything new.
It is only normal in politics for parties to criticise each other's stand. 
Is this a word that you have so often associate with 'whiners'
We certainly have some new members in the form of some very WHITE WASHED WHINERS joining our humble ranks. -
Politics sadly to say it a game of power where if you are in power, if you are a politician, you will also do everything to hand on to your power while your opposition will do everything to topple you isn't it?
Every policy there will always be two face to it the good and the flaw. There is no such thing as a perfect policy so no matter who is in power, there will always be criticism to every policy.
While our present goverment may not be the best, but certainly they have been governing Singapore for the past 40 years which result us to reach where we are now as compare to 40 years ago. Even though not all decision made by them is good, but still our economic is growing and we are moving forward.
So if they can keep moving this country forward, i don't see why they shouldn't be in power and instead let some other that does not have the experience to take over which will place us with a more uncertainty future.
It always good to have opposition around to give their side of view as the goverment do not always do the right thing, so with opposition around, they will and hopefully will see the flaws of their policy and try to come up with a better one.
In life there can't be smooth sailing and expect everything to be perfect. Compared to most countries, we are indeed very fortunate already so what more can we ask for?
For example, many thing that australian are earning alot and their houses are cheap, but in fact there are many that still renting houses from real estate agency. So even though our houses are pretty expensive and it take a pretty long time to pay it off, still we have our own houses, so what more can you ask for?
In short, we won't and we can't understand why goverment do this and do that unless we are in their shoes for we all have our own thinking which will not always be fully understood by others. -
i cant read chinese but anyway, what do you expect pap to do? tell wp their manifesto is excellent and just give up power? you as a politician in some way should know that once a person or group has held power for a long period of time it is nearly impossible for them to give it up willingly unless they're toppled either by peaceful or violent means. its just plain human nature.
-
I do hope that the WP leadership can stay afloat and bonded so as not to make some foolish mistakes for the PAP to play their well tested way of suing the opposition as done in every election since who knows when!
Some of my foreign friends are having a hilarious time when reading about the ruling party's concern for the opposition's manifesto. Instead of "fighting" it out at elections and letting the electorates decide the PAP knows fully well the WP challenge this time is more serious than on previous occassions and more than 3 GRCs will fall flat. perhaps its better to get WP in legal battle before the election than after as usually done, previously. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
I don't think they are whining like you.
[b]Criticize
Is this a word that you have so often associate with 'whiners'
We certainly have some new members in the form of some very WHITE WASHED WHINERS joining our humble ranks. [/b] -
I hope the PAP do not revive the Tamil Language Week lawsuit against the Hammer again. It may spell doom for the WP.Originally posted by claudetnt:I do hope that the WP leadership can stay afloat and bonded so as not to make some foolish mistakes for the PAP to play their well tested way of suing the opposition as done in every election since who knows when!
Some of my foreign friends are having a hilarious time when reading about the ruling party's concern for the opposition's manifesto. Instead of "fighting" it out at elections and letting the electorates decide the PAP knows fully well the WP challenge this time is more serious than on previous occassions and more than 3 GRCs will fall flat. perhaps its better to get WP in legal battle before the election than after as usually done, previously.
-
who knows?
-
But the impression PAP is giving seems like they are telling them what to do.Originally posted by Salman:I don't think PAP is telling WP what to do, neither is this anything new.
It is only normal in politics for parties to criticise each other's stand.
-
strikefreedom,Originally posted by strikefreedom:Politics sadly to say it a game of power where if you are in power, if you are a politician, you will also do everything to hand on to your power while your opposition will do everything to topple you isn't it?
Every policy there will always be two face to it the good and the flaw. There is no such thing as a perfect policy so no matter who is in power, there will always be criticism to every policy.
While our present goverment may not be the best, but certainly they have been governing Singapore for the past 40 years which result us to reach where we are now as compare to 40 years ago. Even though not all decision made by them is good, but still our economic is growing and we are moving forward.
So if they can keep moving this country forward, i don't see why they shouldn't be in power and instead let some other that does not have the experience to take over which will place us with a more uncertainty future.
It always good to have opposition around to give their side of view as the goverment do not always do the right thing, so with opposition around, they will and hopefully will see the flaws of their policy and try to come up with a better one.
In life there can't be smooth sailing and expect everything to be perfect. Compared to most countries, we are indeed very fortunate already so what more can we ask for?
For example, many thing that australian are earning alot and their houses are cheap, but in fact there are many that still renting houses from real estate agency. So even though our houses are pretty expensive and it take a pretty long time to pay it off, still we have our own houses, so what more can you ask for?
In short, we won't and we can't understand why goverment do this and do that unless we are in their shoes for we all have our own thinking which will not always be fully understood by others.
3) there is a problem with the general definition of government. Certainly, the current Party has been governing us for 40 years, however its members have changed a significant deal. Hence, it is rather inaccurate to compare the achievements of present politicians with those of past politicians whilst claiming that both groups are the same people.
4) Our future is uncertain, whether or not they stay in power; everythign cahnges too fast nowadays. THe problem with letting them stay in power for too long is that they may atrophy. They may not realize, as former DPM Tony Tan points out, tha they need to change the core of their policy to keep the nation afloat in social or economic sense. In fact, we are already seeing this inertia in their refusal for example, to expand freedoms, to accept the criticisms of accredited international watchdogs such as Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders, and of the Australian govenrment recently. The same thing has occured with their response to the WP manifesto.
5) ermm... I agree with this para, but why assume that teh government and the opposition must be in permanent positions?
6) fortune is subjective; it depends on the indicators you are using.
7) The point is that Aussies can afford the rent; it takes up a relatively small proportion of their income. Whereas down here, HDB appears to be guzzling up incomes. THe irony is, the government is supposed to be transparent and explain to the citizens clearly what is the rationale for their policies, which alot of times they don't, or do only cursorily.
adios
the pikamaster -
I will agree with your statement if NEH, KBW & LHL criticise it as a PAP politician and not as Ministers.Originally posted by Salman:I don't think PAP is telling WP what to do, neither is this anything new.
It is only normal in politics for parties to criticise each other's stand.
Anyway Salman you can't even except the fact but keep twisting and turning.
-
U are pro PAP aren't yah? Glad to know PAP have such loyal fellowers. With fellowers like u PAP will always be the teacher in the playground. HURAH!!!!Originally posted by Salman:I don't think PAP is telling WP what to do, neither is this anything new.
It is only normal in politics for parties to criticise each other's stand. -
Nothing wrong with being pro PAP.Originally posted by NewAge:U are pro PAP aren't yah? Glad to know PAP have such loyal fellowers. With fellowers like u PAP will always be the teacher in the playground. HURAH!!!!
Just that he seems to follow blindly and accepting whatever the party says without questioning the rationale of it all. -
With Goh Meng Seng starting this thread. I really would like to know, what drive him to be an Opposition and since he has put it as being unfair and not right for the ruling party to change their plans. Its going to be a losing battle. So how he motivate himself?
-
It takes plenty of drive and sufficient guts to even join an ALTERNATIVE political party and offer an ALTERNATIVE voice for the people.Originally posted by ahtansh:With Goh Meng Seng starting this thread. I really would like to know, what drive him to be an Opposition and since he has put it as being unfair and not right for the ruling party to change their plans. Its going to be a losing battle. So how he motivate himself?
For too long, men like Goh and our generation X and Y of Singapore, being more educated and less likely to follow the 'lemmings-style' governance of our Ruling party, are prepared to give sound thought to the many policies (perceived to be right), disect them and determine whether we have been taken for a less then thrilling ride.
It is our generation of younger singaporeans that the Ruling party, for so long entrenched in their deepseated mentality, are afraid of. Our generation are the ones more likely to step outside the boundary of thought and ideas, a boundary that the Ruling party has so created and whom now blame us for a lack of creativity.
Now is as good a time as any to 'poke holes' in their propaganda, to show the people that there exists other possibilities, other opportunities and certainly other parties than the 'infallible' PAP, and if successful, could lead to the formation of a coalition govt, which will become a impartial check unto itself.
Over 40 years ago, when MM LKY first asked singaporeans to trust him to lead them into the future, the PAP was an untried and untested party with no experience in government, with policies where success was far from certain.
Today, the WP is simply asking for the same trust. With a new party leadership and creditable party members, we should at least hear their game plan. -
Dear ahtansh,
I think this is a good question. The battle could only be lost if your mind has already surrendered. Look at the Vietcongs in the Vietnam War. Nobody back then in the early days of the Vietnam War could ever imagine the almighty US Army would lose the war. The Vietcongs, in your very own words, were fighting a losing battle.... at least that's what everybody back then thought. On hindsight, everybody now knows that it is not the advanced weaponry that will help anyone to win the war, it will be the "mind" that will determine the outcome of the war.
As for why I want to fight a "seemingly" losing battle, I will put it in four simple forms:
1) Social consciousness to political consciousness.
2) Sense of social justice.
3) Non-conformist.
4) My children.
I have been active socially in various ways back from my schooling days till I join WP. It takes a gradual path from social consciousness to cultivate the political consciousness. Believe it or not, I was active in community centre back then. After being disillusioned by this "grassroot organization", I volunteer myself to charitable organization. Why disillusioned? Mr. Low's reply to the grassroot leader has explained it all. The fact that these grassroot organizations being totally "politicised" make someone like me (back then) who are not interested in PAP politics but just want to serve the community feel totally disgusted.
It was in 1997 GE when PAP brought up the HDB upgrading as "carrots" for voters to vote for PAP that invoke my great sense of social justice. I was outraged basically because such moves will destroy Singapore as it sets the social atmosphere into a totally individualistic and materialistic one. I do not want my future generation, especially my children to be cultivated under such social structure and atmosphere of materialism. This is the first seed of political awakening for me.
In 2001, PAP's further pepertuation of HDB upgrading with "PRECINCT COUNTING" irks me. I was debating with an old PAP veteran in soc.culture.singapore about why PAP's "time bomb" should not be allowed to continue, he challenged me that why would I want to support an opposition camp that does not seem to have any "working faculties" at all. In my heart, I wanted a more balanced and diversed democratic system but my head tells me that that PAP veteran has a point.
Thus the only logical conclusion for me is that I will have only two options left:
1) Shut up and prepare to migrate out in order to find a better place with a better social atmosphere to nurture my children and future generation.
2) Join the alternative party and make it works.
After a week of pondering, I decided to join Workers' Party and the rest is history.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by ahtansh:With Goh Meng Seng starting this thread. I really would like to know, what drive him to be an Opposition and since he has put it as being unfair and not right for the ruling party to change their plans. Its going to be a losing battle. So how he motivate himself? -
Hhhhmmmmmm ........ I wonder who is doing all the "whining" - those with substantive issues, or simply those who makes "no brainer; one-liners" gripes about "whiners" ?Originally posted by Salman:I don't think they are whining like you.
Your performance is pathetic, and it seems that we need to train you longer in the manner of your response -
Kudos to you was making this big step.Originally posted by goh meng seng:It was in 1997 GE when PAP brought up the HDB upgrading as "carrots" for voters to vote for PAP that invoke my great sense of social justice. I was outraged basically because such moves will destroy Singapore as it sets the social atmosphere into a totally individualistic and materialistic one. I do not want my future generation, especially my children to be cultivated under such social structure and atmosphere of materialism. This is the first seed of political awakening for me.
In 2001, PAP's further pepertuation of HDB upgrading with "PRECINCT COUNTING" irks me. I was debating with an old PAP veteran in soc.culture.singapore about why PAP's "time bomb" should not be allowed to continue, he challenged me that why would I want to support an opposition camp that does not seem to have any "working faculties" at all. In my heart, I wanted a more balanced and diversed democratic system but my head tells me that that PAP veteran has a point.
Thus the only logical conclusion for me is that I will have only two options left:
1) Shut up and prepare to migrate out in order to find a better place with a better social atmosphere to nurture my children and future generation.
2) Join the alternative party and make it works.
After a week of pondering, I decided to join Workers' Party and the rest is history.
Goh Meng Seng
It is however necessary to see the actions of the PAP from different angles.
Their 1997 upgrading carrot was exactly that - a carrot sweetener. We cannot hide the fact that it was a significant political tool that swelled the election results in their favour, nor can we hide the fact that it is materiarialistic in nature.
But if the people were swayyed by this dangling offer, then isn't it true that the people themselves are materialistic? Should we blame the govt for this failure to evolve as a person? To be principled in schools of thought and learn to look beyond material gains is something a person has to do on his own.
In that sense, a large portion of our population already have the dependency mindset intrinsically inculcated by our govt. While their policies have somewhat created this nanny-mentality, the people must take some of the blame for staying in their comfort zone and seeing with their eyes closed.
Your party has made the right moves in bringing creditable people onboard with affluent backgrounds. The difficult part - changing the people's mindset - will be the challenge. -
just want to make some comments about kaw boon wan's likening of the opposition's manifesto to poison.
my question is: is it poison to democracy? is it poison to justice and righteousness? or is it poison to suffocating suppression? poison to unfair dominance? poison to social inequality? -
Ask the PAP to read our Pledge and they will find out the word democratic
-
What I find most sad is that many of my friends laugh and shrug off these things by saying that 'Look, when you're in power, of course you'll do everything you can to make things difficult for your opponents.'
I'm having an extremely difficult time convincing them that you can't really reconcile that with the very ideals of democracy.
Why do the PAP have to tell us that 'Hey... they're in the wrong, they had better change their manifesto.' Why not let the voters decide for themselves? If the PAP is so convinced that they're right, then the voters will give them their approval at the polls. If the WP is in the wrong, then the voters won't vote for the WP.
It seems to me that the ruling party can't trust Singaporeans to decide for themselves.... -
they wanna control our thinking, tats all they wan.Originally posted by fudgester:What I find most sad is that many of my friends laugh and shrug off these things by saying that 'Look, when you're in power, of course you'll do everything you can to make things difficult for your opponents.'
I'm having an extremely difficult time convincing them that you can't really reconcile that with the very ideals of democracy.
Why do the PAP have to tell us that 'Hey... they're in the wrong, they had better change their manifesto.' Why not let the voters decide for themselves? If the PAP is so convinced that they're right, then the voters will give them their approval at the polls. If the WP is in the wrong, then the voters won't vote for the WP.
It seems to me that the ruling party can't trust Singaporeans to decide for themselves....