1st Time MM Lee admitted Singapore needs a system
-
It seems to be the 1st time MM Lee had admitted or conceded that Singapore needs a system to ensure its future survival as can be read from brief comments reported in Today's on 16.9.2006:-
"My Focus is Singapore, not the PAP: MM"
"The day Singapore can produce a political opposition group as strong as the People's Action Party is the day the Republic is in a "safer condition".."
Well said. Then perhaps he could take some actions to demonstrate that he seriously means what he said this time.
He should take concrete actions to liberalise political participation by citizens without such prevalent use of defamation suits against oppositions so that oppositions or alternative parties could arise over time to serve the bigger role of nation building and not be subjected to tweaking and control by the incumbent.
He should grant greater freedoms of speech including letting the press and media to feature any aspects of unsolved NKF types of problems faced in nation building, and writing objective articles by citizens who criticise policies which did not do well for Singapore like the pro-foreign investment and employment policies and high-cost policies.
Actions so far do not correspond with words, and everything done and being done is still top-down depending on the wishes of a few men at the top.
To demonstrate his seriousness in opening up and welcoming a proper political model or system to evolve henceforth, he is the one who should clearly set an example.
Many past policies are anti-progress and anti-national and have to be changed and changed fast. He is the one who could and should make the change because all his ministers seem to be holding back and waiting for his signals. -
I am very concerned about his remarks on the role of the SAF.
The SAF only swears loyalty to the Constitution, and every senior commander should take note of that. Anyone that has a problem with defending our Constitution and being neutral in times of domestic conflict, better resign his commission. -
I don't know Rob., but it appears to me, he's speaking udner pressure of scruntinizing eyes and the presence of world medias....Originally posted by robertteh:It seems to be the 1st time MM Lee had admitted or conceded that Singapore needs a system to ensure its future survival as can be read from brief comments reported in Today's on 16.9.2006:-
"My Focus is Singapore, not the PAP: MM"
"The day Singapore can produce a political opposition group as strong as the People's Action Party is the day the Republic is in a "safer condition".."
Well said. Then perhaps he could take some actions to demonstrate that he seriously means what he said this time.
He should take concrete actions to liberalise political participation by citizens without such prevalent use of defamation suits against oppositions so that oppositions or alternative parties could arise over time to serve the bigger role of nation building and not be subjected to tweaking and control by the incumbent.
He should grant greater freedoms of speech including letting the press and media to feature any aspects of unsolved NKF types of problems faced in nation building, and writing objective articles by citizens who criticise policies which did not do well for Singapore like the pro-foreign investment and employment policies and high-cost policies.
Actions so far do not correspond with words, and everything done and being done is still top-down depending on the wishes of a few men at the top.
To demonstrate his seriousness in opening up and welcoming a proper political model or system to evolve henceforth, he is the one who should clearly set an example.
Many past policies are anti-progress and anti-national and have to be changed and changed fast. He is the one who could and should make the change because all his ministers seem to be holding back and waiting for his signals.
Hence, I doubt there's much bedrock in it....it's like liquifaction.... -
he only want to score points for himself and PAP infront of the international media.
will he walk the talk? i dont think so base on what robert teh mention. -
Besides swearing to the defend the Constitution, also included in the Oath of Allegiance is to obey the President of Singapore - (who so far has always been a PAPa's Man). If I am not mistaken, the pledge also require the swearing of allegiance to the Government of Singapore.
Did MM LKY make any admission that 'Singapore needs a system' ?
I would not count on any news report in the free handout of TODAY', which is a misnomer as it reports only 'yesterday's news.
In the large tabloid The Straits Times - which one has to pay, not handed out free - its front page highlighted :
S'pore must preserve its system of govt: MM
This statement is straight forward enough to mean that the 'status quo' shall be maintained till eternity.
The aritcle went further in reporting :
"My ambition, having created this Singapore, is to preserve the system that produces the answers we must have as a society to survive," he said yesterday.
"MY hope is that there will be a government that is equal to the job, as the PAP was," said Mr Lee, referring to the ruling People's Action Party he co-founded in 1954.
"We have structured the system such that a competent group which gets in will find a machine that works. Don't tinker with it. Run the system properly on the basis of merit, not nepotism, and you will always find a way out of the problem."
"My ambition is not to preserve the PAP," he added.
If the above is not an attempt to preserve the 'Old Ways' instead of evolving an institutional system that meets with the aspiration of the people in the 21st Century, what else can be more obvious.
Will a winning team - that creates the ground rules to ensure its monopolist susccessess, bother to change those ground rules to adapt to the current societal challenges ?
The last statement must be the best understatement of the Year' - coming from LKY, and probably intended for the consumption of the delegates attending the IMF / World Bank conference.
Can we believe him in this seemingly altruistic statement ?
Of some concern to all Singaporeans is MM LKY's insistence that :
the problem with Singapore was that it had "now reached a very odd stage" - an electorate which wants the PAP in power, but also an opposition to "squeeze" the Government.
"Well, that's all right. But if they become the government, that's real trouble," he added.
"Our problem really is how to make the electorate sufficiently wise and sophisticated to understand that these are the limits."
Beyond the limits, he painted two dark paths: one, which would happen in the absence of the Elected President (EP) to protect the reserves from rogue regimes, is a military coup.
"Without the Elected President, if there's a freak result, within two to three years the army would have to come in and stop it," he warned. "And once you break that, by military intervention, you have destroyed a system which works on the basis of who was voted into office."
Two, even with the EP, a corrupt government can still bankrupt the country:
"Even with the Elected President, if they (the opposition) win a second time, the reserves are open, because they can then arrange for their president to be elected and the country comes to a grinding halt," he said.
He believes the present opposition parties, if they became the government, would cause Singapore to collapse.
"You have seen the candidates who have turned up. If they win, this place goes down. And nobody doubts it," he said.
He added: "The day we can produce an opposition of the same quality as us, that day we are in a safer condition."
The problem, he said is that the opposition, unlike the PAP, has been unable to "induce" people of top quality to join it.
Is the truth now not made more obvious, in LKY's earlier efforts to ensure that the Heads of the Civil Services, Judiciary, SAF and Police Force will be constitutionally protected, and any new government of the day - that is elected by the Citizens - will NOT have the authority to remove these persons from their position of authority.
Can these heads of the various civil and military groups stay neutral and commit themselves to their pledge of allegiance.
If ever the day comes when the PAP gets voted out of office, will it be prepared to relinquish power gracefully, or will it resort to the 'scorch earth policy' of Third World Politicians ?
This uncalled for remarks from MM LKY begs the question : if LKY intend for the PAP to utilise the SAF to create a 'Coup de'tat to regain political power, IF EVER the day comes, when Singaporeans decide that they have enough of the Lee's ?
The weakness of the Singapore system is quite obvious, as there is no clear institution that is 'not perverted' by the presence of a PAP person in the Civil Service, the SAF and the Police Force.
This present situation is caused by the PAP refusal to acknowledge that there are personalities, who are more capable than those whom they have recruited, and have largely declined participation in the political process.
Some who have decided to be involved and have decided to work with the opposition - to present themselves as the Alternatives Solution to the PAP - have been faced with abusively derogatory treatment from the PAP members, and with a mentor to lead them in the worst political behavior in the able LKY.
Is MM LKY justifying his position in the light of the big wigs from the World Bank and IMF being in town ?
LKY's methods and history is familiar to those leading the World Bank and the IMF; and the most telling criticism was said by World Bank President Mr Wolfowitz - arising from the banning of the 27 Civil Society Activists :
Singapore would have to decide whether to show it was "authoritarian' or "at the stage of success they have reached, they would do much better for themselves with a more visionary approach to the process".
Put it in plain local English : "Either you are a Third World Authoritarian Country", or "if you claimed to have arrived as a member of the First World, then it will serve yourself well by taking part in the process as a member of the First World". -
The last statement is the only thing from Wolfy that I can agree with.
If you want to play in the Champions League, accept that the Referees are more stringent on fouls than in the EPL. Perfect analogy. -
The control mind of his obviously foresees the power base of SAF. He has to find some ways to put SAF under his control at all time.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I am very concerned about his remarks on the role of the SAF.
The SAF only swears loyalty to the Constitution, and every senior commander should take note of that. Anyone that has a problem with defending our Constitution and being neutral in times of domestic conflict, better resign his commission.
Previous control method was to rotate their chiefs every few years or so but to do that he will have to give them some sinecure high-paying jobs somewhere with pompous titles.
That should explain why there are so many top posts among GLCs reserved for retired army chiefs.
Now if time has changed and it is no longer possible to keep giving goodies to the army chiefs, he will have to bind them in some rules like faithfulness to the constitution so as to be able to shift them as he likes without repercussions or rebelliousness.
The correct way will be for him to develop a system for army chiefs to attain combat readiness and professionalism which would take away mind from mischief. -
the sheer mention of a military coup doesn't inspire confidence is it.....it's beginning to look as if pap is realising their lack of popular support for their party. he claimed he wants to leave a system and not a party, yet he refuses to extend the same system to all....however, realistically i don't think the soldiers will turn against the populace....
-
For years the byword of the government under MM Lee has been about his personal autocratic style of leadership or talent, foresight or insight.Originally posted by ShutterBug:I don't know Rob., but it appears to me, he's speaking udner pressure of scruntinizing eyes and the presence of world medias....
Hence, I doubt there's much bedrock in it....it's like liquifaction....
Under such leadership approach, which he has tried to justify with various names like family value, Asian values, Confucianism, he has been talking about ideas and concepts instead of doing and achieving targets and results.
There were constant talks for years about the need to produce a value-adding industrial upgrading and building of a knowledge-based economy.
There were constant talks about the need to promote entrepreneurship and upgrade workers' skills.
There were constant talks about meritocracy and talents and concepts of management like how to think out of the box.
What have this kind of conceptual leadership produced : elitist education and a meritocracy system of public service with scholars crowding out or pushing off real achievers who did not have to produce any results.
The whole meritocracy was auto-piloted for well over twenty years which produced a governing system talking about ideas and policies rather than results.
Town councils and CDCs were ideas set up to perpetuate control of the municipality which do not produce any job creation or competitiveness except to burden the citizens with more taxes and hgher fees.
HDB and PSA and SIA and many ministries kept growing in size incurring higher and higher costs without any corresponding results in terms of serving the people or lowering the rising costs of living.
The economic value-adding restructuring as announced was left as concepts without the desired results. Instead based on conceptual approaches, government took the easy path of increasing fees and double charging on lands and infrastructures to increase burdens on the people.
As for the desirables like creating world products wanted by the world and creating brand names, what have they done? Has any one of our scholars got half the world-beating mind like Stanley Shih who from his graduation was concerned with producing products wanted by the world and brand names that sell the products.
There are many desirables like getting workers to excel in whatever they are doing as part of their daily works, but what have conceptual leadership done to produce the results?
Sooner or later when leaders will have to realise the shortcoming of conceptual leadership approach which does not produce any implementation system or excellence.
For years the government has been neglecting middle management and implementation excellence which the scholars no matter how brilliant have been unable to achieve.
I for one have pointed out the flaws in the leadership concepts of governance to the Feedback Unit and asked ministries to take practical actions to implemtn process management which will be more effective to cut costs and avoid double charging on lands thought out by scholars to get their easy way out.
It is not that the scholars are not good in their works but they need time and have to prove themselves in producing results and not be pushed up to occupy position of responsibility without half the efforts.
The economic restructuring plans for the past two decades have been largely identified in the form of projects like attracting value-adding industries and businesses but the scholars have yet to achieve a market positioning for our economic strategy and plans in this regard.
Sadly owing to the overzealous auto-piloting of leadership and elitism today we could hardly find a minister like Dr. Goh Keng Swee to give the economic restructuring the needed practical big push.
Every minister claims to be a talent but they would come and go without improving citizens' livelihood or upgrading of their economic competitiveness talked about for years.
Sooner or later the leaders will have to change such elitist conceptual leadership to one which is more practical, result-oriented hands-on process management as recommended to the leaders many times. (read www.managefranchise.blogspot.com and www.ospforohsopolite.blogspot.com)
Therefore MM Lee should have known that his conceptual leadership and meritocracy is too superficial an approach.
He needs to decentralize the governing system based on process management where every ministry and department will be properly delegated with responsibilities and targets and who will be held accountable for any lack of results.
He could not just talk about concepts like leadership or meritocracy any more.
On the larger perspective government is not about law and order but empowering of the masses in all their endeavours which up to now is hardly acknowledged.
f he wants to change to a system approach to complement his staunch leadership top down approach he will have to start getting people interested in social and cultural belonging and sharing to build up the whole system from scratch.
He will have to liberalise the controls and empower the masses so that they will respect the leaders who will care for them and treat them with a part to play instead of like a digit easily replaced by foreign talents of no particular definition in order to attain final efficiency and accountability and results. -
communism is better than PAP's democracy
-
wah u not scared later ISD catch u n put u b hind bars for promoting communism...
-
no im behind Lenin and his Bolsheviks partyOriginally posted by asdfzhao:wah u not scared later ISD catch u n put u b hind bars for promoting communism... -
Originally posted by Atobe:
I cannot see any change of his leadership approach even two years after the junior Lee took over the rein.
Besides swearing to the defend the Constitution, also included in the Oath of Allegiance is to obey the President of Singapore - (who so far has always been a PAPa's Man). If I am not mistaken, the pledge also require the swearing of allegiance to the Government of Singapore.
Did MM LKY make any admission that 'Singapore needs a system' ?
I would not count on any news report in the free handout of TODAY', which is a misnomer as it reports only 'yesterday's news.
In the large tabloid The Straits Times - which one has to pay, not handed out free - its front page highlighted :
[b]S'pore must preserve its system of govt: MM
This statement is straight forward enough to mean that the 'status quo' shall be maintained till eternity.
The aritcle went further in reporting :
Put it in plain local English : "Either you are a Third World Authoritarian Country", or "if you claimed to have arrived as a member of the First World, then it will serve yourself well by taking part in the process as a member of the First World".
[/b]
Hisstyle is and will always be - "I shall do as I please". So despite all the solemn pledge in the inaugural swearing to build a cosmopolitan and inclusive society, the younger Lee dares not change the older Lee style.
All the press were warned to avoid crusading journalism. If there is no change to the press freedom what can people expect to change.
All the ministers continue to deny NKF types of problems such as high costs of living without accountability to people.
So I quite agree with you that these latest about change of system to ensure survival of future Singapore is nothing but rhetoric to serve as justifications of the iron rule.
Citizens will not expect to see change to pro-foreign investment and employment policies will not be changed.
So unless we see actions like dropping of high costs of living, double charging on lands or abolitions of unnecessary posts at town council and CDC, we can only take the latest announcement as hot air intended for his immediate audience at the IMF. -
he probably wants a pap spilt party that is still under his management, and his philosophy in governance.
-
There is a possibility of this happening because if there is going to be a change, this is about the only way to change - pleasing both camps one believing in playing safe in their career without challenging the authority of the past leaders while another going for renewal and change the only forward to meet the more competitive real world outside.Originally posted by Ito_^:he probably wants a pap spilt party that is still under his management, and his philosophy in governance. -
The speech he gave greatly discredited the opposition party. Just what is he trying to do by giving such speeches to important delegates which greatly affects the FDI and economy in Singapore. Should't he be awear of the consequences? If the opposition takes over the control of the government one day, investor will practically flea Singapore after he painted a picture of doomsday for Singapore when the opposition take over. I cld say that he is indirectly threatening voters that only the PAP will be able to let u maintain yr current job for without us the invester will leave for Singapore has entered an unstable political climate.
-
by the way anyone know where Dr. Goh Keng Swee went or why he left the PAP. I feel that Singapore economic sucess is as much a contibution of LKY as to Dr. Goh Keng Swee.
-
Did he get a police permit for politicking outside the Election period ?Originally posted by NewAge:The speech he gave greatly discredited the opposition party. Just what is he trying to do by giving such speeches to important delegates which greatly affects the FDI and economy in Singapore. Should't he be awear of the consequences? If the opposition takes over the control of the government one day, investor will practically flea Singapore after he painted a picture of doomsday for Singapore when the opposition take over. I cld say that he is indirectly threatening voters that only the PAP will be able to let u maintain yr current job for without us the invester will leave for Singapore has entered an unstable political climate.
If the Alternative Political Parties were to do the same during the off-election period, the PAP would have lambasted them - as had happened when the heavy PAP guns weighed in to take pot shots at Chiam See Tong for politicking instead of fixxing the damaged street lamps along the footpath that were put up by the PAP man in Potong Pasir.
Was MM LKY saying anything brilliant about politics in Singapore that has not been repeated a thousand times over since he stepped down from the PM's office ?
Times have changed and society have moved on with the time, he knows it, and yet he continue to bring back the ghosts of a by-gone era to scare us and justify the methods that he insist on using to govern Singapore.
Can PM LHL fulfill his own wish to be his own Man, or is it simply for politics ?
Can PM LHL be his own Man when his father is overbearing on him ?
As matters stand now, the Father is bringing the Son along to show sonny boy how to combat FEER.
Can the SAF Chief of General Staff, MINDEF, and the entire SAF personnel be beholden to the PAP and its Executive Committee ?
It is afterall a Citizens' Army, or does he intend to use the 'super secret' special force' whose organisation takes cover in the Commando Unit, but is a separate unit operating under the direct command of MINDEF HQ.
This super secret unit was the unit that took down the Pakistani hijackers of the SIA aircraft SQ117 in 1991
Could this unit be trained to do the biddings of the PAP Government, and perform a coup de'tat to restore the PAP Government - if it were to lose its seat of government sometime near the future ? -
I still think he is just trying to pacify his ever-growing amount of detractors.....................................................
-
It's just a limp attempt at trying to look convincing today. And some of his words, border on the unconstitutional and are quite unfair to fellow Singaporeans. He should be advocating on the unity of Singapore as a plus point for investors, instead, he paints such a bleak picture which anyone in academia or global finance, would understand to be alarmist in nature.Originally posted by missqi:I still think he is just trying to pacify his ever-growing amount of detractors.....................................................
I am saddened by the words he chose to use regarding political change, where is the unity? I only see words that serve to accentuate the gulf. -
HE says so far there hasn't been any credible oppositions that shows potentials in taking over their role..
But seriously, WILL they (have they so far) allow such a capable opposition to exist in the first place??