Originally posted by Atobe:i, for one, do not think she retracted her statement, just that she felt, in retrospect, the choice of words could have been better. of course, if in the beginning she did not use this word, this incident would not have happened, but none of us would think "why din use the word 'betray'?" but now that she used the word and got chastised, she became a hero to many. so her using that word could have been a political move of her own.
While she was brave enough, unfortunately, like all the other past PAP MPs, on hindsight, they will retract what they have said and would have preferred to have chosen some other words.
These "Birds of a feather, flock together too often, and will seldom canibalise each other".
Extracted from the Straits Times: Wednesday, 3 September 2003
Later, when asked to comment on her choice of words, Dr Khor said it was made 'in good faith to implore the Government to take the concerns of the middle-income group into consideration.'
She told The Straits Times: 'It was a genuine expression of what I felt the ground was telling me.
'On hindsight, [b]'betrayal' is an emotive word. Perhaps I could have used another word to express the same sentiment .
'But I have to take responsibility for it. As an MP, I must be able to face robust rebuttal.'
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/singapore/story/0,4386,207878-1062626340,00.html?
[/b]
I think Amy employed the word because this is PRECISELY how the Singaporeans saw this as that usual act of policies being forced down their throat, like it or not.Originally posted by wuming78:none of us would think "why din use the word 'betray'?" but now that she used the word and got chastised, she became a hero to many. so her using that word could have been a political move of her own. .
theres another thread tokking abt the poll here. mabbe u wanna go take a lookOriginally posted by Gun:Eh? What poll ?
I hv already lowered my expecation of this current garment capacity in keeping promises for over a decade. My only last (hopeless) wish what this "more-good year" garment can bring is that my Cha-Gue-Diao would still be platable when GSP hits 5% in 3 months time.
No one can look into the Crystal Ball and predict what will happen tomorrow, a week later, a year later, five years, a decade or more later, or whatever length of time.Originally posted by wuming78:theres another thread tokking abt the poll here. mabbe u wanna go take a look
as for expectations and promises, i think we haf to be fair to them as well. many many things happened during the past years tt we all never expected. mabbe the wrong thing they did was to promise something when they knew anything could have happened - and things did happened.
yes. but we mus understand making promises like this is part of politics and politicking. of cos lots of politicians suffer politically when they fail on their promises.Originally posted by Atobe:No one can look into the Crystal Ball and predict what will happen tomorrow, a week later, a year later, five years, a decade or more later, or whatever length of time.
However, the Government will have to be responsible for setting a course that they wish to take, without considering the full dynamics of the policy action that they intend to implement.
A question that need to be asked is that since 1990 when GCT came onto center stage, what has been accomplished to attain this goal ? Health cost has gone up, Education Policy remain confused, Social Welfare is non-existent, Housing cost is at an all time high, Environment engineering is a luxury.
During the late 1980's and early 1990's, there was the constant talk and chiding from the "Old and Retired PAP Warhorses" to the "Danger of Moneytheism" or "Money Worshipping" by the younger set.
The "money chase" had begun, and encouraged by the Government, which culminated in the increase to the PM's salary to that made Singapore PM's pay to be higher than the President of the USA.
While there are external world events and factors that can affect Singapore, there are many policy decisions that could have been better formulated had there been more room for open and honest debate.
Such bad Government Policies can now be avoided, if the Ruling Party can be made to realise that they DO NOT have the Monopoly of Talent and Ideas.
In an "open democratic process", failed promises by Politicians will certainly result in them being kicked out of office.Originally posted by wuming78:yes. but we mus understand making promises like this is part of politics and politicking. of cos lots of politicians suffer politically when they fail on their promises.
u canot deny that lots of things haf improved for the past 10 odd years. anyway such improvements are continuous and really canot be attributed to any single period of time, esp when spore is still young and developing. cost increasing or inflation is in fact part of a growing economy and not a anomaly unique to singapore. the price of living in london, tokyo and new york are just as high as in singapore if not higher. in fact many economies around the world are espousing setting inflation targets - a manageable inflation rate to manage growth in their economies. these are developed countries we are talking about. and being materialistic is a lifestyle choice rather than policy. of course its a by product of our life of chasing for materialistic wants. but increasingly people are moving away from this.
minister's pay is not a consequence of the money chase. if they want money they would have stayed in the private sector, e.g. dhanabalan. o cos there are other reasons for their high pay. i canot comment on how high it shud be though.
yes, with hindsight many things could have been done better. but history is useless if its regret and no lessons learnt. and we haf to move on rather than lament wat was not done. nothing can be absolutely correct esp in politics where its always the second best choice and not the best choice. so i dun think we can comment fairly tt a policy is bad. we all agree that in the past it was less consultative. but we haf moved on to become more so. isnt tt improvement in itself?
if singaporeans r not happi im sure alot of them will not vote for the incumbent. i guess we will haf to see if this happens in 2007.Originally posted by Atobe:Unfortunately, Singapore does NOT practise an 'open' nor 'democratic' process in the Political Life of Singapore.
However, if you compare the Quality of Life in Singapore between 1993 and 2003, has there been any improvement ?
The 5-Room HDB flat is smaller then the old 5-Room by nearly Twenty Percent in area; but the price has gone up by over FORTY Percent from what was sold in 1993.
With the introduction of the NEL in 2003, has the quality of life for the people that it serves improved ? Doubtfully so, with the number of complaints to the large number of bus services being taken off the road, and the people in the North East of Singapore being forced to pay for a higher piece of transportation to get to where they used to be going for nearly half the cost for the last 10 years.
Comparing the cost of living in Singapore to that of New York, London, or Tokyo - will be quite disingenious.
Are the Standards of Life - and its Quality - in Kuala Lumpur, Taipeh or Hongkong incomparable to what is available in Singapore ? These will be closer comparison considering that they are Asian and also Cosmopolitan in lifestyle as in Singapore.
"If the Ministers want money they should have stayed in Private Sector" was actually used as the very reason to pay them the High Salary to COMPENSATE these "supposed talents" to take up Public Office. So if it is not for a sense of Public Service to be a Minister, then it must be "Moneytheism" - as had been dreaded by the likes of Dr Toh Chin Chye, the late Rajaratnam and other PAP Old Guards who have made way, leaving LKY to implement his visions without any sturdy opposition from the New Generation Leaders.
Yes, they talk, they discuss, they listen, but the Policy continue to be implemented, because they KNOW BEST WHAT IS GOOD FOR SINGAPORE.
Is this Consultation ?
One of the Committee's finding concern the manner in which Politics have been practised in Singapore, and recommendations were made for changes to be made to allow for more transparency and certainties to allow a level playing field to all Political Parties.
Yet, this has become a futile exercise.
Is this improvement in Singapore ?
Great to have an exchange of ideas with you, although we maybe seeing the situation with two different set of experiences and thoughts.Originally posted by wuming78:if singaporeans r not happi im sure alot of them will not vote for the incumbent. i guess we will haf to see if this happens in 2007.
im sorrie to tell u i cannot remember much about wat happened betw 1993 and now cos i was one of those apathetic youths then. but the least i can rem is the opening of the NW line. but once again i mus say inflation is part of economic growth. u realise no one was complaining when times were good then. when times are bad now everyone is complaining and digging up the past as well.
the nel u mentioned canot be said to be a good example as its only months since it was opened.
btw tokyo is asian and cosmopolitan as well. and HK has comparable if not higher std of living as singapore. realise HK is also suffering at this point of time.
its true we need higher pay to attract the good people to serve the country i think no one denies tt. of cos how much shud the premium be i cant say.
in the end after consultations a decision has to be made. i guess in the case of singapore the political price of such decisions are not alot. but can we say tt the government has been frivolously making decisions for the past years? and can we say tt the people has been totally ignored all the way? not all consultations will lead to implementation, and not everyone can be consulted. even the government now says its still working on being more open and consultative when it has improved already. this process is continuous and there is no end point.
if we realli have not improved over the years why r people still here?
if u were to be the PM for one day one wk or one mth wat wud u do? and do u think u can make everyone happi and do everything right?
not trying to be offensive here. jus wan to trigger some ponderance.![]()
btw saf officers are still being taught to lead by example now.Originally posted by dansplace:Some years back, SAF officers were taught to "lead by example".... now extend that to the political arena.
I think the mission statements for our politicians have to be reviewed. Somehow, someone instilled a rule that the Singapore Parliament is meant to have no other views other than the ruling party's view. Now that does not sound very democratic, does it? I am beginning to wonder if the Singapore pledge stands for anything now.
To lead by example is one of the strongest (and I believe) most difficult principle to live by. Humans are selfish by nature and politicians are human. One of the hardest admission to make is that all humans err and are not infallible. Everyone makes mistakes - one's true worth then is whether that person is willing to admit to that mistake.Originally posted by Atobe:It is maturity of a Political System such as Hongkong that allow Citizens to demonstrate peacefully, to protest a Law that they feel so strongly about, and which the Government had haphazardly blundered along thinking that the Government position is correct.
This is paranoia on the part of the Ruling Party, and is but a tool to help themselves to stay on in Political Power.
With supposedly potential leaders claiming that since there are no million person protesting in Parliament Square, it shows that Government Policies are clearly accepted by the Citizens - this is an insult to the goodwill of Singaporeans, who have placed their trust that the Government will do good.
In a political system that deny space for honest and sincere objections, can Politics exist when the opinions from a few is forced through over the others ?