LHL govt encourage us to play a part ..but
-
how to speak up,where to speak?
if he really was a man of deep sincerity,come to sgforum.
or let us vote for the Casino to prove that singaporean really want.( i will vote for casino)
send some people to coffee shop to interact with singaporean..cos mostly singaporean drink at coffee shop and not Coffee Bean.
althought i consider half pro-govt. cos i feel sg govt so far had earn my support . but there are alway room for improvement.
open a website, people who wish to speak up will register and every month LHL will balloting all the application (maybe about 10-20) and join him for lunch or dinner conversation. -
if u do not know yet, there are ppl watching sgforums definitely, as well as other local forums....
there are oso casual kopi-drinkers at kopitiams with wide open ears.....
website? u heard of youngpap.org.sg? the forum is hot!
makan lunch with ppl? pls lah.....u think he is social escort ah? and if u dunno, there's meet-the-ppl session once a month....
oh! the casino....
since when govt say want to build then no build one? -
Quite a good suggestion to send direct email to LHL or put up ideas with discussions with him.
If there is no such connections, how to say you are the people's PM. Robust debates were welcome by him. So if it is for real, the casino idea can be openly debated in such a gettogether with him without all the bureaucracy pre-determining on the issue.
Idea club of sgforums can generate ideas and convey to him in such informal setting. If he disagree with any ideas, it does not matter as he will give his reasons and be open. All could agree to interact in a certain acceptable above-board manner. -
thank for ur info..i really dont know about the PAP forum..Originally posted by FireIce:if u do not know yet, there are ppl watching sgforums definitely, as well as other local forums....
there are oso casual kopi-drinkers at kopitiams with wide open ears.....
website? u heard of youngpap.org.sg? the forum is hot!
makan lunch with ppl? pls lah.....u think he is social escort ah? and if u dunno, there's meet-the-ppl session once a month....
oh! the casino....
since when govt say want to build then no build one?
what wrong to makan with people?
about the casino, even they really want to build..let more people have more involvement or make a debate on TV.
and let us know how the setting of casino have gone so far. -
There are a few avenues for you to voice your suggestions.Originally posted by paperduck:how to speak up,where to speak?
if he really was a man of deep sincerity,come to sgforum.
or let us vote for the Casino to prove that singaporean really want.( i will vote for casino)
send some people to coffee shop to interact with singaporean..cos mostly singaporean drink at coffee shop and not Coffee Bean.
althought i consider half pro-govt. cos i feel sg govt so far had earn my support . but there are alway room for improvement.
open a website, people who wish to speak up will register and every month LHL will balloting all the application (maybe about 10-20) and join him for lunch or dinner conversation.
http://www.remakingsingapore.gov.sg/
http://www.cutredtape.gov.sg/
http://app.feedback.gov.sg/asp/index.asp
http://www.cutwaste.gov.sg/faqs.html
If you dun like PAP you can go through NSP
http://www.nsp-singapore.org/
A national referendun is costly and ineffective. The govt shd implement policies that it think will benefit the country, even if it is unpopular.
There is only one LHL but a few million Singaporeans. If he meet everybody, I dun think he has any time left for work. -
dun worry, they will have that.....AFTER they have planned eberythingOriginally posted by paperduck:about the casino, even they really want to build..let more people have more involvement or make a debate on TV.
and let us know how the setting of casino have gone so far.
rber the rebuild Chinatown issue some yrs back?
so many ppl oppose
but they still went ahead.....when all the blueprint out liao then open a session for ppl to voice their opinions.....
as expected, eberyting was refuted by them and they happily went ahead with the plans......
oredi spent so much money and effort on the project, where got bcos of some ppl dun like then they drop one? -
so it time to make a change.Originally posted by FireIce:dun worry, they will have that.....AFTER they have planned eberything
rber the rebuild Chinatown issue some yrs back?
so many ppl oppose
but they still went ahead.....when all the blueprint out liao then open a session for ppl to voice their opinions.....
as expected, eberyting was refuted by them and they happily went ahead with the plans......
oredi spent so much money and effort on the project, where got bcos of some ppl dun like then they drop one? -
im waiting for change to happen too
but im brought up in an environment which taught us that as a singaporean, u are not supposed to have an opinion.... -
How ironic this posting coming from the forumite with the most postings.Originally posted by FireIce:im waiting for change to happen too
but im brought up in an environment which taught us that as a singaporean, u are not supposed to have an opinion....
-
but u don't see many in Speaker's CornerOriginally posted by tspg:How ironic this posting coming from the forumite with the most postings. 
-
can't they just send people to interact...dont act like 007.Originally posted by FireIce:there are oso casual kopi-drinkers at kopitiams with wide open ears..... -
then i will call LHL to let me go combat
-
This line that 'national referendum is costly and ineffective' is a con job put into the minds of Singaporeans.Originally posted by tspg:There are a few avenues for you to voice your suggestions.
http://www.remakingsingapore.gov.sg/
http://www.cutredtape.gov.sg/
http://app.feedback.gov.sg/asp/index.asp
http://www.cutwaste.gov.sg/faqs.html
If you dun like PAP you can go through NSP
http://www.nsp-singapore.org/
A national referendun is costly and ineffective. The govt shd implement policies that it think will benefit the country, even if it is unpopular.
There is only one LHL but a few million Singaporeans. If he meet everybody, I dun think he has any time left for work.
It is LKY's way of telling Singaporeans that their minds should be put into oiling the machineries to get Singapore working, and leave the politics of Singapore to Politicians such as those in the PAP.
When there was a groundswell of resentment towards government policies being forced down the throat of Citizens, and with Singaporeans feeling frustrated and helpless - resulting in a drastic drop in percentage of votes given to the PAP in the election of 1996 - LKY and the PAP dreamed up Town Councils, in which Singaporeans become participants in managing their little environment but leave the larger issues of National Politics to the PAP.
If LHL is sincere about including and involving Singaporeans in all policies related to the future of Singapore, then such demarcation and 'Out-of-Bound' Markers should be dropped.
If LHL believe in robust debates, then let fair, alternative and independent voices be heard, and remove the PAP method of exclusion by demanding that Politics are only for Politicians.
The future of Singapore is POLITICS in itself, not just being merely political, and it demand the attention and involvement of every Singaporean. -
A referendum refers to a direct vote by all the people of a nation or area on some particular political issue.Originally posted by Atobe:This line that 'national referendum is costly and ineffective' is a con job put into the minds of Singaporeans.
It is LKY's way of telling Singaporeans that their minds should be put into oiling the machineries to get Singapore working, and leave the politics of Singapore to Politicians such as those in the PAP.
It cost millions of dollars to hold a referendum and it takes months if not weeks to prepare. Thats why I say its costly and ineffective.
There are short-term pains and long term gains to certain policies. If we were to hold a referendum, such policies may not go through because most people do not see long term benefits.
It would be a better way to hold public discussion and feedbacks on important issues which will help in policy making.
The only referendum I can think of that is held recently in a western democratic state is the one held by Quebec, Canada :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referenda_in_Canada
Referendums although deem democratic, may cause divides in the society as different interest groups lobby for votes as shown in Quebec. -
How should one decide if an issue is important enough to be put up for the Citizens to decide ?Originally posted by tspg:A referendum refers to a direct vote by all the people of a nation or area on some particular political issue.
It cost millions of dollars to hold a referendum and it takes months if not weeks to prepare. Thats why I say its costly and ineffective.
There are short-term pains and long term gains to certain policies. If we were to hold a referendum, such policies may not go through because most people do not see long term benefits.
It would be a better way to hold public discussion and feedbacks on important issues which will help in policy making.
The only referendum I can think of that is held recently in a western democratic state is the one held by Quebec, Canada :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referenda_in_Canada
Referendums although deem democratic, may cause divides in the society as different interest groups lobby for votes as shown in Quebec.
Should the cost of holding a referendum be reason enough NOT to hold a referendum that can result in a higher cost when a BAD POLICY or POLITICAL DECISION is made by the Government or Political Party in power ?
"Public discussion" and "feedbacks session" should NOT be used as a deviant tool to allow the Citizens to vent their frustration, and allow the Government to still continue with the unpopular policy or policies.
In politics, there will always be differences in opinions; however, when a Political Party adopt an omnipotent superior position over all other opinions, it can spell trouble for Singaporeans.
How many "U-Turns" has the present PAP 'quietly' admitted, and made changes to stubbornly held position AFTER one or two decade of stubborn pursuit of a wrong policy - that had been pushed through despite public resentment and protests ?
What is the price that will be paid for the present and subsequent generations, when all the effects of skewered policies implemented in the 1960's, 1970's, 1980'sl, 1990's till the present period ?
Population Control - 1960's; Educational Policies - university admission suitability certificates - 1970's, university admission policies of 1980's till present date, Streaming Policy - 1980's; Changes to the Constitution for an Elected President, and subsequent amendments that curtailed the Elected President's powers - 1990's; Changes to CPF contribution and pay-out policies through the last thirty years; Political Successions of 2004.
These are just a sampling of important issues decided by a Government that is formed by a single Political Party that dominates Parliamentary proceedings, and even will ignore the alternative views of Back Benchers from within their own Party.
If the GIC can waste Singapore reserves on questionable overseas investment (which the Singapore Citizens will never know the full picture), is the cost so high that we cannot waste SINGAPOREAN OWNED RESERVES to allow Singaporean to decide in a REFERENDUM on IMPORTANT POLITICAL ISSUES that AFFECT the FUTURE OF SINGAPOREANS ? -
After one week, we begin to see some ministers' making announcements on changes. First, Minister Lim Swee Say disclosed that he would re-look at the past policy on creation of jobs. This seems to spell a certain positive change reversing past thinking that Singaporeans are too choosy and nothing more could be done.Originally posted by Atobe:"Public discussion" and "feedbacks session" should NOT be used as a deviant tool to allow the Citizens to vent their frustration, and allow the Government to still continue with the unpopular policy or policies.
How many "U-Turns" has the present PAP 'quietly' admitted, and made changes to stubbornly held position AFTER one or two decade of stubborn pursuit of a wrong policy - that had been pushed through despite public resentment and protests ?
Population Control - 1960's; Educational Policies - university admission policies, and suitability certificates - 1960's through 2000's, Streaming Policy - 1980's; Changes to the Constitution for an Elected President, and subsequent amendments that curtailed the Elected President's powers - 1990's; Changes to CPF contribution and pay-out policies through the last thirty years.
These are just a sampling of important issues decided by a Government that is formed by a single Political Party that dominates Parliamentary proceedings, and even ignore the alternative views of Back Benchers from within their own Party.
Second, Minister of state Dr. Vivien Balakrishnan announced that he welcomes all feedbacks from all youths via SMS.
Third, Lim Swee Says says that people should not keep going feedbacks on past issues and problems or past policies but should give new ideas.
Sizing up the whole of these pronouncements, it looks to me that there is an emphasis that the past policies were right and nothing much can be done to change things. I may be wrong in this assessment. Similarly let us hope that the calls on the young or openning up of more feedback channels is not just an eye-wash to close on past issues and problems. If Singaporeans are indeed more educated and mature, they should be able to see this is not change but the same as before. Nothing has changed. See other people's views and opinions on this first-week new cabinet thinking? -
Different times calls for different policies. An example is the two child policy. It was implemented based on the circumstances then. When the circumstances CHANGE the policy has to CHANGE to keep up with the new situation and there is no such thing in this world call a risk free investment.Originally posted by Atobe:How should one decide if an issue is important enough to be put up for the Citizens to decide ?
Should the cost of holding a referendum be reason enough NOT to hold a referendum that can result in a higher cost when a BAD POLICY or POLITICAL DECISION is made by the Government or Political Party in power ?
"Public discussion" and "feedbacks session" should NOT be used as a deviant tool to allow the Citizens to vent their frustration, and allow the Government to still continue with the unpopular policy or policies.
In politics, there will always be differences in opinions; however, when a Political Party adopt an omnipotent superior position over all other opinions, it can spell trouble for Singaporeans.
How many "U-Turns" has the present PAP 'quietly' admitted, and made changes to stubbornly held position AFTER one or two decade of stubborn pursuit of a wrong policy - that had been pushed through despite public resentment and protests ?
What is the price that will be paid for the present and subsequent generations, when all the effects of skewered policies implemented in the 1960's, 1970's, 1980'sl, 1990's till the present period ?
Population Control - 1960's; Educational Policies - university admission suitability certificates - 1970's, university admission policies of 1980's till present date, Streaming Policy - 1980's; Changes to the Constitution for an Elected President, and subsequent amendments that curtailed the Elected President's powers - 1990's; Changes to CPF contribution and pay-out policies through the last thirty years; Political Successions of 2004.
These are just a sampling of important issues decided by a Government that is formed by a single Political Party that dominates Parliamentary proceedings, and even will ignore the alternative views of Back Benchers from within their own Party.
If the GIC can waste Singapore reserves on questionable overseas investment (which the Singapore Citizens will never know the full picture), is the cost so high that we cannot waste SINGAPOREAN OWNED RESERVES to allow Singaporean to decide in a REFERENDUM on IMPORTANT POLITICAL ISSUES that AFFECT the FUTURE OF SINGAPOREANS ?
Nobody can predict the future neither can anyone turn back time
The year is 2004. If you choose to live in the past and paste stamps over your eyes I cant help you. I see a more open society compare to the 1980's and I see reforms and changes taking place.
If you choose to wallow in misery and self-pity you can do it in your ivory tower. -
The fact that certain policy of the past was proven greatly mistaken and need to be changed also implies that there was a lack of correct foresight at that time !!!Originally posted by tspg:Different times calls for different policies. An example is the two child policy. It was implemented based on the circumstances then. When the circumstances CHANGE the policy has to CHANGE to keep up with the new situation and there is no such thing in this world call a risk free investment.
Nobody can predict the future neither can anyone turn back time
The year is 2004. If you choose to live in the past and paste stamps over your eyes I cant help you. I see a more open society compare to the 1980's and I see reforms and changes taking place.
If you choose to wallow in misery and self-pity you can do it in your ivory tower. -
Nope it means that the decision was taken in spite of the opposition or risks involved because of the potential benefits. I have cited the example of the two child policy and overseas investments.Originally posted by robertteh:The fact that certain policy of the past was proven greatly mistaken and need to be changed also implies that there was a lack of correct foresight at that time !!!
If the govt can only implement policy if 100% of the population is happy with it, it would probably be paralyse by inaction.
Anyway there is a new channel for you to voice your views.
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 1800-353-5555
SMS: 6353-5555
Fax: 6354-8128 -
Originally posted by tspg:
Different times certainly call for different policies.
Different times calls for different policies. An example is the two child policy. It was implemented based on the circumstances then. When the circumstances CHANGE the policy has to CHANGE to keep up with the new situation and there is no such thing in this world call a risk free investment.
Nobody can predict the future neither can anyone turn back time
The year is 2004. If you choose to live in the past and paste stamps over your eyes I cant help you. I see a more open society compare to the 1980's and I see reforms and changes taking place.
If you choose to wallow in misery and self-pity you can do it in your ivory tower.
When the two child policies was implemented, there were voices already warning of the long term effects of such a policy that can be only realised in about two or three generation later.
Mathematical models were created to prove the consequences in Manpower requirements, CPF Scheme - (in which the pay-out funds to the retiring population will be affected by the smaller paying-in funds from a shrinking work force).
Against the better advise of trained minds from academia and the group of Singaporeans who are better educated, the Government leaders of that period ignored alternative views.
Ignoring history and not appreciating past mistakes made, and continuing to believe that the PAP is always right, and the PAP has a group of people who are thinkers, is tantamount to putting stamps over your own eyes too.
Surely, it seems that you do not need any help in perpetuating the bliss of ignorance ? -
Originally posted by tspg:
The two child policy of the 1960s has resulted in the Singapore Population shrinking, and which is now made worse by the events of the 1990s and during the beginning of this 21 Century.
Nope it means that the decision was taken in spite of the opposition or risks involved because of the potential benefits. I have cited the example of the two child policy and overseas investments.
If the govt can only implement policy if 100% of the population is happy with it, it would probably be paralyse by inaction.
Anyway there is a new channel for you to voice your views.
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 1800-353-5555
SMS: 6353-5555
Fax: 6354-8128
Government policies that affect daily administrative matters need not have the backing of the entire population.
However, policies that affect Singapore future generations and into posterity should have the approval of the majority of Singaporeans.
The problem with the present Singapore Political System is that there is no Sense of Accountability by the Government towards anyone or any institutions.
The Laws are made by the "First Brain" in the "First Family", used by the Political Party and the Government formed, to perpetuate themselves and in the process control all aspects of Singaporean Life to benefit themselves.
At the moment, the new PM has restored the 10 percent paycut to himself and to his Government, claiming that the economy has recovered - even when unemployment remains unchanged at 4.5 percent.
New broom sweeps clean.
Let us see how the broom perform in two years time. -
Ignorance is definitely not a bliss.Originally posted by Atobe:Different times certainly call for different policies.
When the two child policies was implemented, there were voices already warning of the long term effects of such a policy that can be only realised in about two or three generation later.
Mathematical models were created to prove the consequences in Manpower requirements, CPF Scheme - (in which the pay-out funds to the retiring population will be affected by the smaller paying-in funds from a shrinking work force).
Against the better advise of trained minds from academia and the group of Singaporeans who are better educated, the Government leaders of that period ignored alternative views.
Ignoring history and not appreciating past mistakes made, and continuing to believe that the PAP is always right, and the PAP has a group of people who are thinkers, is tantamount to putting stamps over your own eyes too.
Surely, it seems that you do not need any help in perpetuating the bliss of ignorance ?
I am just trying to tear the masks off hypocrites who come here disguised as a member of the academia and try to mislead the public with their crap. -
Originally posted by tspg:
There are hypocrites who pretend to be knowledgeable, and help to perpetuate the lies that have misled the less informed and the less critical.
Ignorance is definitely not a bliss.
I am just trying to tear the masks off hypocrites who come here disguised as a member of the academia and try to misled the public with their crap.
There are also hypocrites who pretend to be tolerant of alternative views, but cannot swallow the fact that some alternative views are correct and real.
There are also hypocrites who appoint themselves as the guardian of public truth but deny the existence of the shroud of falsehood that is being perpetuated.
Do you know where you are heading with this self-imposed appointment, or have you assumed a load that is bigger then your shoulders can cope ? -
I can cope no problem.Originally posted by Atobe:There are hypocrites who pretend to be knowledgeable, and help to perpetuate the lies that have misled the less informed and the less critical.
There are also hypocrites who pretend to be tolerant of alternative views, but cannot swallow the fact that some alternative views are correct and real.
There are also hypocrites who appoint themselves as the guardian of public truth but deny the existence of the shroud of falsehood that is being perpetuated.
Do you know where you are heading with this self-imposed appointment, or have you assumed a load that is bigger then your shoulders can cope ? -
come on , give LHL govt and PAP more time to change..
ppl no happy with the singpore govt, LHL or PAP, please play your part to
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 1800-353-5555
SMS: 6353-5555
Fax: 6354-8128
i personally feel people who only know how to complain in sgforum are abit loser.
play your part, help to improve. dont be a auntie will only know how to speak up in the market .
If you think you are too lonely..you can alway form a group from sgforum who share the same view as you, i can also join you too .we can work out what is best for singapore.