Challenge the PAP for a TV debate on estate upgrading
-
Staying together. Moving aheah. Ya, right!
-
If the ruling party accept the challenge,of course TV would broadcast the debate.Originally posted by Purplehaze623:even if they challenge, the media and news group wouldn't dare to take this challenge to boardcast it. -
Staying together,PAP wards moving ahead first.The opp. wards move last.Right?Originally posted by NUS_Superst@r:Staying together. Moving aheah. Ya, right! -
Challenge PAP for a televised debate?Nah,i dont think those PAP leaders can take it.That time Lee Kuan Yew was questioned by a group of teens on the television around the election period about his political policy n i see him nearly got questioned until going to cry,how are Lee Kuan Yew,Goh Chok Tong n Lee Hsien Loong going to take it if they were going to be questioned by a group of matured Singaporeans?Originally posted by PRP:I think the oppostion should challenge PAP for a televised debate on whether the govt can use public fund unfairly (or favouring the ruling party). If the PAP dares not to take up the challenge,that would means it knows the estate upgrading policy is wrong but it still do it for some selfish reasons.
Becoz no matter how bad a person is,there is a thing call "self-conscience" deep inside our heart that remind us to feel shame or remorseful when we did something wrong.Especially when we know it is wrong,yet we do it!!!Lee Kuan Yew,Lee Hsien Loong n Goh Chok Tong have done many wrongs in the past,even now,they continue to make the same stupid mistakes.How are they going to defend themselves if they were to be questioned by a group of matured ppl(these ppl must not have any link to PAP or instructed by them) n opposition party members?
There is something we have to remember,if a person know what is wrong n yet he did it.Then even if he is the best lawyer in the world,he also cant deceive the whole world n his "self-conscience",there will always be a "guilt" deep inside his heart.Even god will also dessert him!!! -
Here, challenge this....
================================
Chiam, Sitoh in spat over facilities
Residents upset both are unwilling to repair damaged footpath lights
By Aaron Low
Aug 03, 2006
The Straits Times
NEARLY three months after the General Election, some residents in Potong Pasir are feeling the effects of their votes as the People's Action Party (PAP) man scales back aid to the constituency.
The latest facility to suffer are the lights that guide residents along a concrete footpath as they walk home at night from the Potong Pasir MRT station.
Six of the eight solar-powered lights have been vandalised and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, the PAP candidate who lost in the ward in the May election, has no plans to repair or replace them. The lights had cost $20,000 to install.
Earlier, he had also stopped other amenities, including the extra Meet-the-People sessions and the $2 abalone porridge.
Last night, Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong, who won with 55.8 per cent of the votes, made it plain that he too will not fix the lights.
Their responses have annoyed several residents, including Mr Andrew Leow, who accused them of playing a cat-and-mouse game.
Said the 37-year-old accounts manager: 'The lights have been broken for a few weeks and at night, people are walking in the dark. Why can't anyone fix them?''
Another resident, Ms Lee Li-Cheng, 35, had written to The Straits Times Forum page to complain about the danger the situation posed to children and the elderly.
'I understand that Potong Pasir residents had made a choice and now have to live without upgrading frills, but these lights are a basic amenity, offering security for residents returning home late,' the human resource manager said.
Mr Chiam told The Straits Times last night that fixing the lights with town council funds would be illegal as the area in question is not under the council's control.
Mr Sitoh had leased the land from the Singapore Land Authority early last year to set up the lights. The adviser to Potong Pasir grassroots organisations said he would not be fixing the lights as the lease for the land would run out on Oct 31.
He told The Straits Times yesterday that grassroots organisations were formed to organise events for the community and they do not provide amenities.
But he and his grassroots leaders made an exception last year and raised funds for the lights.
Recently, some were vandalised, with one losing its solar panels. It would cost about $5,000 to repair the lights, said Mr Sitoh.
'But if I am running the town council, I would apply to take over this piece of land and build a brightly lit covered walkway immediately. I will not wait,' he added.
Mr Chiam, when asked whether he would raise money to repair the lights, retorted: 'This is his baby. He did it to show voters that he is such a caring person.'
'But now what has happened? It just shows he was doing it for the election, no more, no less.'
Mr Chiam added that he had put up spotlights at Block 147 facing the poorly lit pathway, to alleviate the situation.
But residents like technician Tan Yi Da, 23, are not impressed, saying that the lights do not help much at night as they are placed too far away to be of any use.
When asked if he was not doing all the extras he used to do before the election because he had lost, Mr Sitoh replied that he 'tried very hard to convince the residents' that he wanted to run the town council and make it a 'better place'.
'But the residents made their decisions and I have to respect them.'
Like some residents, Mr Leow is disappointed at how things have panned out.
He said: 'Now that the election dust has settled, both have refused to acknowledge that more needs to be done for the residents of Potong Pasir estate. Instead, we get them playing a cat-and-mouse game.''
Mr Chiam, who told residents during the campaign that voting for him meant voting for the services of two MPs, laughed off such concerns.
'When the time comes, it will be two-for-one again. Things are just quiet now,' he said. -
Voters of the opp. wards are not so selfish
I think voters of the opp. wards are not so selfish & kiasu. They didn't only think of their own benefits but also the benefit of the country to have a few elected opp. MP in the Parliament. With that kind of good attitude,the govt should at least fairly treating their wards with regard to estate upgrading. -
Hey, what happen to the opp. parties?Never take up my 'challenge'!Originally posted by PRP:I think the oppostion should challenge PAP for a televised debate on whether the govt can use public fund unfairly (or favouring the ruling party). If the PAP dares not to take up the challenge,that would means it knows the estate upgrading policy is wrong but it still do it for some selfish reasons. -
MM says estates upgrading for PAP wards is a bonus for PAP wards.He says the sytem can't work without it.
Voting for PAP need a bonus or material reward!Isnn't it a bribery or look like a bribery? -
Of course,everybody knows voting is to choose a candidate whom one think is best among the choices.Do PAP leaders forget about this?
The opp. candidate didn't offer material rewards.Why did the voters vote for them, PAP? -
would u be willing to take up the challenge on national tv if the opposition party supports u?Originally posted by PRP:If the govt honestly believe the policy is fair,then it should take up my suggestion. -
this will be an eye opener for everyone.another first for history of singapore.
BUT WHEN?!. ...... STILL WAITING. -
hardly the hallmark of evolved politics and inclusive posturing.Originally posted by TooFree:Residents of PP and HG are not completely void of a chance for estate upgrading. The incumbent party mainly prioritised the timing of upgrading for citizens who voted for the them into office as a little gesture in return for their support and loyalty.
Honestly. All is fair.
-
I have done my part but the opp. parties haven't done their part.Originally posted by xxthunder:this will be an eye opener for everyone.another first for history of singapore.
BUT WHEN?!. ...... STILL WAITING. -
SM said he respected the choices of the opp. wards.What is his meaning of "respect"?The opp. wards are discriminated against on estate upgrading.
Why don't he & his colleagues say the opp. wards chose wrong candidates?Then the ppl can be 'politically educated'. -
That is the real world we live in though, every other democracy also is practised like so, in that the ruling part will apportion more of the "goodies" to their supporters first.Originally posted by PRP:SM said he respected the choices of the opp. wards.What is his meaning of "respect"?The opp. wards are discriminated against on estate upgrading.
Why don't he & his colleagues say the opp. wards chose wrong candidates?Then the ppl can be 'politically educated'.
However, those "developed" democracies with viable oppositions --- who subsequently win (ie, become the ruling governement) will overturn some policies if they deemed important (that's why they got voted in), and in turn halt or retard goodies in the now opposition constituencies. They also then prioritise developments for their supporters.
In the absence of viable full government-capable parties in Singapore where by our electoral franchise, we can enable one or disable one party from governing, means that our words and protests are whining - no bite.
It may be to Singapore's political development advantage to have a shock PAP loss and a coalition government for 4 years. The economy will be shell-shock and decisions paralyzed for a term of parliament, but Singaporeans will get real action from PAP after that when they win, unless the opposition gets very savvy and smart about governing after that period for coalition.
Unfortunately, we don;t really get to vote when opposition don;t come up with viable policies for governing, DETAILED plans and budget for funding their ideas and programs - so we are stuck with no shadow government, only a shadow of an opposition. It SUCKS. -
In other democracies, a polical party says it will give some benefit to farmers and the other party say it will give benefit to bosses when they form govt. Each party might have different veiwpoints so they have different policies.As long as their reasons are genuine,they are not wrong to make such election promises & carry them out if they form the govt.
For the estate upgrading policies,it is a different story. The PAP wards get prioprity in estate upgrading because the majority of votes voted for the party.It means that they get reward only because they voted for PAP.Why should voting for a party get reward?Isn't it a bribery? -
Majority of the voters in opp. wards were wrong for not voting for PAP's goodies which its candidates stood for?
-
opposition ward residents aint any different to any other pap supporters...
they contribute to the nation in many ways too...
but why are they not getting the same benefits...?
-
According to PAP's estate upgrading policy,the voters have to vote for a PAP candidate even if he is not the best candidate,insincere guy, dishonest or corrupt.Otherwise,their estates would be be served last.
-
Because they are not PAP supporters mah.Originally posted by GHoST_18:opposition ward residents aint any different to any other pap supporters...
they contribute to the nation in many ways too...
but why are they not getting the same benefits...? -
The above argument shows that the election tactics & the MND's policy is certainly wrong.PAP,what have you to say?Originally posted by PRP:According to PAP's estate upgrading policy,the voters have to vote for a PAP candidate even if he is not the best candidate,insincere guy, dishonest or corrupt.Otherwise,their estates would be served last. -
Corrupt PAP minsters were Teh Chiang Wan & Wee Toon Boon.Both of them served in MND which formulated the favour PAP policies.So the corrupt minister made the favour PAP policies.The present PM & minister continue similar kind of polices.Have there been no rethink?
-
According to PAP, PAP supporters voted for PAP. Without their support, there wouldn't be a PAP govt.So they must be rewarded. Priority in estate upgrading is just a small gesture for their support!Originally posted by GHoST_18:opposition ward residents aint any different to any other pap supporters...
they contribute to the nation in many ways too...
but why are they not getting the same benefits...? -
I think the govt didn't reviiew the pro-PAP policies which were initiated by the corrupt minister Teh Chiang Wan,GCT even further developed it into an election tactics.The govt makes it very open about such unfair policy.But I believe such eletion tactics is considered bribery under the regarding law.
-
I think both MM and PM will have high blood pressure and heart attack. An open debate is not possible.