Tag: GE2015

  • WP’s Low Thia Khiang Hits Back At Teo Chee Hean, Calls For ‘Civilised’ Political Engagement

    WP’s Low Thia Khiang Hits Back At Teo Chee Hean, Calls For ‘Civilised’ Political Engagement

    Workers’ Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang yesterday (Aug 16) shot back at Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean’s recent withering attack on the opposition party and its leaders, by asking the public to judge the politics that the People’s Action Party (PAP) practises.

    “With all due respect, (Mr Teo) wanted to comment in that way, let Singaporeans judge and see this is the kind of standard of the PAP in politics. Is this the kind of politics we want in future?” said Mr Low. “What do we want the future of Singapore to be? Do we want to be more civilised in our political engagement? We are not a Third World country.”

    In a media interview last Friday, Mr Teo ripped into the WP for its handling of the financial lapses at its Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC), and criticised Mr Low for shedding “crocodile tears” over the stepping down of Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew.

    “It’s very in character for Mr Low to squeeze the most political mileage out of anything. The reasons that Tuck Yew decided to step down are known to everyone,” Mr Teo had said.

    Mr Low had earlier said that he was disappointed and could not understand why Mr Lui had chosen to leave politics at this point in time.

    Yesterday, he reiterated that his views on Mr Lui, whom he has known for several years from their interactions in Parliament, were authentic and “heartfelt”. Using a Chinese idiom, Mr Low said his comments on Mr Lui were grating to the PAP as “good and honest advice is unpleasant to the ears”.

    Describing Mr Lui as a “hardworking” minister, Mr Low said his departure from politics would be a loss to the Cabinet as he was accountable to Members of Parliament (MPs).

    Speaking to reporters at Chong Pang Market — where party supporters and members were greeting residents and selling its newspaper — Mr Low said: “He (Mr Lui) can even cite you details of very technical matters…(and) he doesn’t try to score political points in answering questions, neither does he try to find a way to try to attack or bully the Opposition.”

    WP chairman Sylvia Lim, who was part of the party entourage, said that the opposition party was “surprised” by Mr Lui’s decision to step down. She added that the WP was looking at the issue of collective responsibility of the Cabinet.

    Responding to Mr Teo’s criticism of the WP’s handling of the AHPETC saga, Ms Lim said it is for residents to decide if they have been taken care of.

    Hougang MP Png Eng Huat, who chairs the town council’s audit committee, said that the town council is seeking to close its financial year 2014/2015 accounts by August 31 – the deadline for all town councils. Any discussion on the town council’s financial position will be “more meaningful after that”, he said.

    Last Friday, Mr Teo pointed out that the Constitution guarantees there will at least be nine Opposition members in Parliament. He also said that the Opposition in Parliament had no bearing on the many policies introduced or refined by the PAP government since the 2011 General Election, as the foundation for these plans had been laid even earlier – a point that was echoed by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam at a separate event.

    In response, Ms Lim noted that Singaporeans have already shown a desire for elected Opposition.

    “On the opposition front, we have to make sure that we continue to give Singaporeans a credible choice. It is up to Singaporeans to decide whether they are satisfied with constitutionally-guaranteed Non-Constituency MPs or whether they would like to have elected MPs governing their constituencies,” she said, adding that it is for voters to judge whether having Opposition MPs made the PAP more sensitive to their needs.

    Mr Teo also took a jibe at WP chairman Sylvia Lim who on Wednesday posted on Instagram a picture of herself eating at Fengshan Hawker Centre with the caption, “The taste of Fengshan — heavenly!”, and the hashtag #reasonstowin. On Thursday, Ms Lim posted a blank picture with the caption, “how to avoid speculation”, along with the hashtag #electionseason. Mr Teo said: “What’s going to happen? You’re going to swallow up Fengshan for what purpose? To serve the residents of Fengshan? Or is Fengshan delicious because you want to add it into the pot to help the town council with the deficit?”

    Ms Lim said: “I think it is a pity that (Mr Teo) doesn’t’ seem to have a sense of humour.” Yesterday, she put up another picture — of her with three other WP members in Chong Pang, which is the ward of Law and Foreign Affairs Minister K Shanmugam — with the caption, “In the den of my ‘favourite’ Minister… Better move in groups.”

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Teck Ghee Residents Can Look Forward To More Upgrading Works

    Teck Ghee Residents Can Look Forward To More Upgrading Works

    Residents in Teck Ghee can look forward to more upgrading works within the constituency this year and also in the years ahead, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

    These include an improved community centre, which will be completed by 2017, and several Home Improvement Programmes (HIP) projects.

    Mr Lee, who is a Member of Parliament of the ward, said this at the Ang Mo Kio National Day Dinner on Saturday evening (Aug 15).

    “Besides that, we will be upgrading our blocks. We have several HIP projects already, but we will have more HIP projects this year and next year. Year by year, we will make this place better. Year by year, as our children grow up, we will see that we are able to make our lives improve,” he said.

    At the dinner, Mr Lee also introduced to residents the PAP candidates that will contest alongside him in Ang Mo Kio GRC in the coming elections. The candidates had been officially announced earlier in the day.

    He hoped that residents could give them their support in order to work together.

    Mr Lee again thanked the outgoing MPs – Mr Inderjit Singh and Mr Seng Han Thong – for their contributions.

    CONSENSUS WON’T BE EASY: WONG KAN SENG

    At the Bishan East National Day Dinner on Saturday, Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC MP Wong Kan Seng said as Singapore becomes more diverse, bringing about consensus on national issues will not be easy.

    As such, the country will need competent leaders with integrity, foresight and drive. He said the Government must also make decisions that are in the best interest of Singaporeans and not just because they want to be popular.

    Also present at the event was anchor minister for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, Dr Ng Eng Hen, who shared with residents how the areas in the constituency have been spruced up with the addition of facilities and amenities. These included new lifts at multi-storey car parks, subsidised hand rails for the elderly in HDB flats and fitness stations.

    Dr Ng also mentioned that the neighbouring Potong Pasir constituency has become more vibrant under MP Sitoh Yih Pin, with the completion of the Kallang River Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters Programme. He added that it would be good for the entire central region if both towns continue to improve.

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • Mohamed Fazli Talip Introduced As Potential NSP Candidate

    Mohamed Fazli Talip Introduced As Potential NSP Candidate

    The National Solidarity Party (NSP) was back at its old stomping ground of Tampines on Saturday morning (Aug 15), led by its president Sebastian Teo and secretary general Hazel Poa.

    About 15 party members and volunteers turned up for the walkabout which started at 9am from Block 201D Tampines Street 21.

    Closely by the side of Mr Teo and Ms Poa as they greeted residents at the coffee shops and food market along the stretch and handed out pamphlets, were branding consultant Mohamed Fazli Talip, 33, and Cambridge-educated lawyer Lim Tean, 50. They were introduced as “potential candidates for the NSP”.

    While Ms Poa hinted that her party will be fielding its A-team for the coming election, as to who they are, she continued to keep her cards close to her chest.

    “We would prefer for the PAP to reveal its candidates for the constituencies that we are interested in first, before we announce our candidates. It’s always advantageous to know who you will be running against first before we decide on our final line-up,” she said.

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

  • PAP Has Lost My Vote. Permanently. Forever

    PAP Has Lost My Vote. Permanently. Forever

    Would the Amos Yee Saga have an influence on our Singaporeans’ voting choices?

    And how significant would be this impact be, to our upcoming elections?

    This is the last interview Offbeat Perspectives will be posting to close off the collection of audio interviews we took @ the Free Amos Yee Rally on July 5 of 2015. Feel free to “like” us on our Facebook page – Offbeat Perspectives Facebook Page if you hope to receive updates on our upcoming street interviews where we seek on-the-ground opinions towards GE 2015.

    * DISCLAIMER:

    1) The articles of any online sites using quotes from our interviews are not representative of Offbeat Perspectives vision, mission, and aims, nor are we affiliated to any website. We are independently run as simply, Offbeat Perspectives.

    2) We respect the opinions expressed by our interviewees, but it should not be interpreted as that of Offbeat Perspectives. Our role is to act as a platform to share the diverse views of people.

    3) I didn’t ask nor require interviewees to provide their names 🙂

    UntitledProfile

    • 57 Years Old
    • Female
    • Chinese
    • Retired
    • Atheist

    Regards to public response towards Amos Yee

    “The use of his words, his behavior, his audacity is something Singaporeans are not used too and they somehow feel offended by it, which I don’t understand but; it’s not something that they have seen before and that’s something they don’t understand, maybe they fear.”

    On the openness of Singaporeans

    “I don’t think is just the older generation. The younger people are reacting, and some of them themselves are very offensive to Amos Yee so I don’t think is a generation thing.”

    How the authorities should have handled the matter

    “They should have just ignored or give him a warning. It would have all died down and it wouldn’t have all these hoo haa.”

    When asked if people might start to follow in Amos Yee footsteps

    “What will happen? What do you think? They will overthrow the government? I don’t think so.”

    Amos Yee charges

    “I don’t think the issue is to do with religion in the first place. [So you see it as the political side?] And yes, the timing also you know? One week after LKY’s death. [So you see more it as a political move?] Oh definitely. And I think they are using him as an example of – there’s a line that Singapore should not cross.”

    If she felt the Saga would impact the upcoming GE 2015

    “Definitely. PAP has lost my vote. Permanently. Forever. Actually before this, I had voted PAP but not the last election. [Was there any reason?] The same reason as now, but now, I’m even more sure. Now I just see them as being really evil, cruel, and they should not do this to their own people. And the government should take care of their own citizens and not instill fear and intimidate, and personally I don’t like bullies.”

    Whether she sees’s Singapore as a democratic country?

    “(Chuckles) I mean, I don’t understand the question, I mean if you want to talk about elections and vote – each one has a vote, that is democratic but I don’t understand democracy anymore. I don’t know what it means. All I know is that I want people to treat each other right, take care of each other. Do not bully or intimidate and be cruel, especially to your own people, to each other, that’s all.”

    If she agrees with western perspectives that deems Singapore as an authoritarian state

    “Yes, definitely. [What is one change you would like to see in Singapore?] I would like to see this not happen, and that people be given a voice to recognize we have a right to question, and that nothing and nobody is above criticism – full stop.”

    1

     “Good government includes pursuit of national interest regardless of theories or ideologies. Good government is pragmatic government.”

    – Lee Kuan Yew

    • The way the government handled the matter, are they going to gain or lose more supporters?
    • It can really go either ways as some rallied the government’s decisions, while some felt Amos treatment was too disproportionate. Only time will tell. Vote wisely.
    • Are we going to let one incident waver our vote? Are we going to let one incident change our vote? The next 4 years is going to be a very long one if we do not vote wisely. Do we want to place stability over change? Or do we want to place change over stability?
    • The ball is in our hands. It’s time to head into the playing field, the score will be out in a due. Let’s weigh our outcomes wisely and vote for what we think will do us well for the next 4 years

     

    Source: https://offbeatperspectives.wordpress.com

  • Chee Soon Juan: Will Lee Hsien Loong Be The Leader That Singapore Needs

    Chee Soon Juan: Will Lee Hsien Loong Be The Leader That Singapore Needs

    Observers will undoubtedly note that Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s decision to call for a general election two years ahead of time is a clever one. How can it not be? The celebration of our 50th National Day, itself a significant milestone, allows the Government to hand out goodwill packages in various guises that will usher in the feel good factor for the PAP.

    Add to this a system awash with anti-democratic practices – the continued use of the print and broadcast media to constantly churn out welcome news for his administration, the redrawing of electoral boundaries behind closed doors, the introduction of the GRC system in the 1980s to hobble opposition efforts, the crackdown on the online media, the employment of HDB upgrading as punishment or reward, the dishing out of financial packages just before elections, the use of state-funded organisations for political purposes, the imposition of impossibly short campaign periods – and it is not difficult to see how the next polls will again end up in overall victory for the PAP.

    It is a system that does not, indeed cannot, admit of democratic progress.

    As I said, it may be politically clever to craft such a system. But cleverness is not what Singapore needs right now – especially at this stage of our country’s development. There is not any doubt that Mr Lee’s continued adoption of such tactics will help his party secure another five years in power, as it has done so for the last 50. But he should be reminded that, in the fullness of time, such an approach has not been looked kindly upon.

    The PAP may insist, as it is wont to do, that its mandate to govern is derived from the majority of voters in regularly held elections. But it is also aware, I am certain, of the difference between elections held in undemocratic systems and genuinely free and fair elections held in democratic ones.

    Strongman-type systems led by autocrats like Suharto and Ferdinand Marcos held regular elections to legitimise their rule and, for a time, few questioned their right to govern. Whether their legacies endured the stringent test of time is another matter.

    In undemocratic states, it is not the majority’s opinion at the polls that rulers should be worried about. It is the minority, rather, the one which watches – and gets increasingly agitated at – how the system is being manipulated to buttress the status quo at which rulers should cast their nervous glance. For is there ever any doubt that it is this segment of the population that brings about change? History is replete with instances where a significant minority calls for, works towards and, ultimately, brings about political reform. These movements are especially potent when frustration and resentment with the ruling clique’s intransigence crosses the threshold.

    At home, anger at the current political situation is palpable and some have resorted to action (seehere). If the PAP is content to label this group of citizens as the ‘noisy minority’, then it should re-read the preceding paragraph. For these people, the prospect of being unable to bring about political change through the ballot box only makes the PAP’s claim of legitimate power sound dangerously vacuous.

    It will be undoubtedly (autocratic) politics-as-usual after the next election. The country will continue to hum along. But this is predicated on the assumption that circumstances in and around Singapore remain unmolested.

    It is, however, a big assumption. Socio-economic developments within our shores point to a future fraught with difficulty and uncertainty: An expensive city with limited opportunity especially for the youth, an ageing population with retirees having little or no income, an economy with wide income disparity, a crowded city set to become even more congested, and a people increasingly feeling alienated from their country of birth.

    Developments farther afield are not more encouraging. Economic uncertainty in Europe and China will not leave Singapore unscathed. The spat over claims on some islands in the South China Sea by China and her neighbours in the region is another flash point.

    When a crisis envelops Singapore, as one will sooner or later, how will the people react? More important, will Singaporeans continue to accept placidly the PAP’s undemocratic rule especially if they feel that the situation is caused, or at least exacerbated, by the party in the first place?

    On the bright side, the problem is not intractable. The Prime Minister is in a unique position rarely accorded to people. He stands at a political crossroads: He can open up the system in Singapore and seal his legacy as an enlightened statesman, or he can continue the ugly spectacle of winning elections through undemocratic means.

    I can think of two other persons who were in a similar position but who took their countries on very dissimilar paths: Taiwan’s Chiang Ching Kuo and Syria’s Bashir Al-Assad. Both became their countries’ leaders following their fathers’ rule: Chiang Kai-shek and Hafez Al-Assad. While the younger Chiang opened the door by instituting political reforms (albeit in a limited manner) for Taiwan to develop into a vibrant democracy that it is today, Bashir Al-Assad continued with his father’s dictatorial rule which eventually met with sustained rebellion and reduced his country to rubble.

    It is said that politicians think about the next elections, leaders think about the next generation. Will Mr Lee be the leader that Singapore needs?

     

    Source: www.cheesoonjuan.com