Political reform proposal No. 1
-
Walk the talk - form a political party with the proposal.
Did the current ruling party consider your proposal?
Did any alternative parties consider your proposal?
In fact, would any one of them respond to you at all?
Is any one gonna take instruction from you? on your proposal?
No, no, I ain't pouring cold waters over thee proposal, it is not how good your proposal but whether there are like-minded people with like minded zeal to want to carry out the execution. It is the whole damn system sank into decades of political practice.
When people are working at what they have been doing all along, telling them what they should be doing instead is akin to telling a person engrossed in his computer games to stop playing to listen to you suggesting a better game in the offerings.
That's why they say... are you invited?... members have its privileges but at the same time they are 'bounded by rules', it is universal in any entities or organisations.
-
Originally posted by PRP:
Hi PRP,
[b]Details
Under my my proposal,the 1st stage would be parliamentary election.It should be all single seat constituencies.All parties would have to field a certain percentage of candidates from minority races.The election wouldn't involve forming a govt.
A few month after parl. elelction,the 2nd stage would be electing a political party or a group of ppl to form a govt.Under this stage,the campaigning would likely to focus on national policies & issues.All members of the govt shall automatically appointed as MP -- like the NCMP.[/b]
The GRC concept has its merits when it come to fielding candidates from the minority races so as to ensure a fair and equity system truly based on meritocracy without eroding racial-cohesion. Your idea of respective parties fielding a certain percentage of minority races contesting for single seat constituencies is idealistic though not realistic. Singapore compromises of chinese majority and you are going to have a case of either all single seat constituencies won by the chinese candidates or you might face problem of segregating the constituencies into 'races'. All these are detriment to the society evolution and racial harmony.Originally posted by PRP:
If all individuals using own funds are to stand as candidates, it is not only going to destroy the parliamentary system that works well in a party-system parliamentary debate but also creating an unhealthy rift between the rich and poor.
Proposed Parliamentary Election
I propose all candidates for parliamentary election should stand as an individuals and should not make use of political fund or machinary.They should win on the basis of individual merit & effort & shouldn't behloden to a political party[/b]
On your proposal for 2nd stage election, as to whether it is a political party or a group of people that is forming a goverment, the allocation of funds to respective constituencies have not been taken into consideration. Matter gets worse if it is the latter group which form the government as they are face with the formidable task to channel limited funds into 84 wards or into their 'affiliated' party. This is likely going to create unhappiness in people living in constituency not funded time and again. If a political party is government, you are going have a similar case everywhere where funding are likely to be serve to their own party-constituency first.
There is no complete fairness in politics regardless the system. -
TooFree,
I don't think most of the ppl vote based on the race of a candidate.One example was JBJ could win the by-election despite his race.
Eyebuzz,
Thanks for your comments.I believe members can have a discussion on my proposal or show support.Should there be? -
you cant elect a party to form a governmnent if they're not gonna be MPs.\Originally posted by PRP:I'm not thinking of copying the American system.In US,they vote for a president.My proposal is still vote for a party to form the govt.
just doesnt make sense
we ned to elect a prime minister, followed by MPs. the prime minister then chooses his ministers from the pool of MPs. -
Is this the final draft of your proposal?Originally posted by PRP:TooFree,
I don't think most of the ppl vote based on the race of a candidate.One example was JBJ could win the by-election despite his race.
It seem there are not enough information and yet carry a possible risk to revamp the tested and proven Westminster democracy system based on your own assumption in a multi-ethnic society like Singapore. -
Why not?U should think out of the box.Originally posted by OO_OO_OO:you cant elect a party to form a governmnent if they're not gonna be MPs.\
just doesnt make sense
we ned to elect a prime minister, followed by MPs. the prime minister then chooses his ministers from the pool of MPs.
In fact, the MPs don't elect the govt.The party leadership selects MP candidates.So who elect whom? -
Maybe not.Originally posted by TooFree:Is this the final draft of your proposal?
It seem there are not enough information and yet carry a possible risk to revamp the tested and proven Westminster democracy system based on your own assumption in a multi-ethnic society like Singapore.
Do u think Westmister democracy very good?I believe nothing wrong to change it for improvement. -
One merit of my proposal is that govt leaders concentrate their work on their appointment and need not take care of a constituency.That means seperating the jobs of MP & govt office holder.
-
Members,Originally posted by PRP:General election is to be in 2 stages.The first stage is to elect a government.The 2nd stage is to elect MPs.
Govt offier holders are not allowed to stand for parliamentary election but they are automatically made MPs.They have sufficient heavy responisblities and so they shouldn't be further burden with taking care of a constituency.
If you agree with my proposal,pls show your support by simply quoting my msg if u don't have any comment to make. Overwhelming support is necessary if u want to see the idea implemented.
If u agree with my idea,pls show it by doing what i said in the above msg.Would u? -
In my proposal,I suggest the ruling party can appoint govt office holders who need not stand for election.
-
How can i attract members to read this topic? :
-
The above msg seems to be a very good comment.Originally posted by eyebuzz:Walk the talk - form a political party with the proposal.
Did the current ruling party consider your proposal?
Did any alternative parties consider your proposal?
In fact, would any one of them respond to you at all?
Is any one gonna take instruction from you? on your proposal?
No, no, I ain't pouring cold waters over thee proposal, it is not how good your proposal but whether there are like-minded people with like minded zeal to want to carry out the execution. It is the whole damn system sank into decades of political practice.
When people are working at what they have been doing all along, telling them what they should be doing instead is akin to telling a person engrossed in his computer games to stop playing to listen to you suggesting a better game in the offerings.
That's why they say... are you invited?... members have its privileges but at the same time they are 'bounded by rules', it is universal in any entities or organisations. -
How good is my proposal does matter.Don't u think so?Originally posted by eyebuzz:Walk the talk - form a political party with the proposal.
Did the current ruling party consider your proposal?
Did any alternative parties consider your proposal?
In fact, would any one of them respond to you at all?
Is any one gonna take instruction from you? on your proposal?
No, no, I ain't pouring cold waters over thee proposal, it is not how good your proposal but whether there are like-minded people with like minded zeal to want to carry out the execution. It is the whole damn system sank into decades of political practice.
When people are working at what they have been doing all along, telling them what they should be doing instead is akin to telling a person engrossed in his computer games to stop playing to listen to you suggesting a better game in the offerings.
That's why they say... are you invited?... members have its privileges but at the same time they are 'bounded by rules', it is universal in any entities or organisations. -
Frankly speaking I don't think u r getting the support u need... I don't understand why does current office bearers (if I am not wrong, ministers in the sense)need not run for election since the whole idea of the election is to determine who to run these offices...
And before u jump the gun, I don't support your policy as well... -
Originally posted by PRP:
Stupidissmart,
[b]An amendment to my orginal proposal:
Parliamentary elections should be held first.After a few months,the election of a govt should be held.The reason is the new govt should be monitored by a new parliament.[/b]
In fact,my proposal includes the ppl elect a party or a group to form a govt -- unlike now the ppl vote for a govt & MP together.
Not many members disagree with my proposal,i think the rest of the members who did read this topic and kept silence are likely to agree with my proposal. -
but aren't u already choosing your party when u vote for either pap or opposition ?
-
What i propose is: In the parliamentarty election,all candidates (even thou they can be members of politcal parties)would stand as individuals and should not use party fund for election campaign.I prefer them to be non-partisan when they discharge their duties in the parliament.Originally posted by stupidissmart:but aren't u already choosing your party when u vote for either pap or opposition ?