Rilek1Corner

Tag: opposition

  • Opposition Cries Foul, Calls For More Lead Time Before Polls

    Opposition Cries Foul, Calls For More Lead Time Before Polls

    Despite the prospects of a major redrawing of electoral boundaries and the short reaction time should the General Election (GE) be called as early as September, opposition parties said yesterday (July 13) they were confident their preparations would not be derailed.

    Nevertheless, some of them cried foul that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had kept the formation of the electoral boundaries review committee under wraps for the last two months, and called on him to ensure that there is sufficient time lag between the release of the committee’s report and the dissolution of Parliament.

    On its website, the Singapore Democratic Party called on Mr Lee to “ensure that at least two months are given from the time of the announcement of the new boundaries to the dissolution of Parliament”.

    “It is shocking that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong chose not to announce the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee when he appointed it two months ago,” it said.

    Mr Goh Meng Seng, founder of newly registered People’s Power Party, added: “It’s not fair to us … After the report is out, at least give about two to three months, then we can have a good showing.”

    The Republic’s first two Prime Ministers, Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Goh Chok Tong, had opted not to announce the formation of the committee. Apart from the latest instance, PM Lee, who took office in 2004, had also made public the setting up of the committee in the last two GEs in 2006 and 2011.

    Responding to TODAY’s queries after yesterday’s Parliament session, Workers’ Party (WP) Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Yee Jenn Jong said his party believes the process of setting up the committee should be “automatic and transparent”.

    “It will make (for) a fairer democratic system if the review of electoral boundaries is based on a known timeline, independent of when elections will be held,” he said.

    WP also reiterated its call for a period of at least six to 12 months between any changes to the electoral boundaries and Nomination Day.

    National Solidarity Party president Sebastian Teo said that should the GE be held in September, as some analysts had predicted, opposition parties would be at a disadvantage.

    “We will have a shorter time to plan which areas to focus on and to study the formations of the Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs),” said Mr Teo, adding that his party had begun outreach efforts since the end of last year.

    Singaporeans First chairman Ang Yong Guan noted that any drastic changes to the electoral boundaries could also hurt the People’s Action Party.

    “All the goodwill and effort made by the existing MP will also be lost,” he said, adding that “we are always mindful that the GRCs may change, it’s never cast in stone”.

    Similarly, Democratic Progressive Party secretary-general Benjamin Pwee said his party would take the changes in its stride, and redeploy its candidates accordingly.

    “As long as the number of GRCs do not change significantly, we are not likely to see drastic changes to the boundaries,” he said.

    Singapore Democratic Alliance chairman Desmond Lim said his party members would continue working the ground at Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC. If the constituency’s size is reduced, the party would adjust accordingly, he said.

    Reform Party chairman Andy Zhu noted that any redrawing of the boundaries would not severely jeopardise his party’s plan.

    On the outcome of the committee’s report, the party is adopting a wait-and-see attitude, he said.

    The opposition parties reiterated their call to abolish the GRC system, which has been in place since the 1988 GE. Mr Pwee said: “What we would like to see, is fewer GRCs, and more SMCs, where electoral candidates get voted into Parliament on the basis of their own individual credibility.”

    Dr Ang said the GRC system allows weaker candidates to ride on the coattails of stronger team members.

    A one-to-one contest is more ideal, as voters can better assess the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate, he said.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Implications Of The Pakatan Rakyat Split

    Implications Of The Pakatan Rakyat Split

    Malaysia’s three-party opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat (PR) has split up over a series of policy disputes, including calls for the implementation of the Islamic penal code, or hudud, in Kelantan.

    The Democratic Action Party (DAP) announced on Tuesday (June 16) that the alliance was dead, blaming it on Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS). But more significantly, the collapse left the third component party – Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) – in a potentially dire situation.

    Here’s what you should know about the break up of PR and what may happen next:

    What is Pakatan Rakyat?

    The opposition bloc was formed in April 2008, uniting opposition parties that had long been pushed around by the governing Umno-led Barisan Nasional (BN). Experts said PR was always a fragile alliance, given that it brought together bedfellows who were opposed ideologically, particularly the Islamist PAS and the secular DAP.

    The bloc won 52 per cent of the popular vote in the 2013 elections, tapping into growing resentment of Umno’s rule and corruption scandals. It failed to take power due to Umno gerrymandering, but its stunning performance under leader Anwar Ibrahim – jailed earlier this year on sodomy charges widely seen as trumped up by the government – had raised the possibility of a historic change of power in Malaysia.

    The PR currently controls three states: Kelantan (PAS-led), Penang (DAP-led) and Selangor (PKR-led). The DAP holds 37 of 222 seats in Malaysia’s parliament, the PKR 29, and PAS 21.

    What happened?

    When PAS saw its share of seats shrink in the 2013 election, it started to reassert its Islamic agenda and push for hudud in Kelantan state. Its president Abdul Hadi Awang was criticised for pushing a bill on hudud without consulting his opposition partners. This led to the DAP announcing in March that it would no longer work with the PAS leader.

    The rift worsened this month after the PAS leadership was captured by conservatives and the party accepted a motion by its conservative ulama (clerics) wing to sever ties with the DAP.

    In response, DAP’s Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng said in a statement on Tuesday (June 16) that the PR no longer exist. Mr Lim, who is also Penang’s Chief Minister, said it was the PAS president’s unilateral decision to push for hudud and his party’s decision to sever ties with DAP that led to the PR’s collapse. He added that the DAP would continue to work with PKR and other parties that want to end BN’s rule “to reshape and realign Malaysian politics with the aim of winning Putrajaya for the people”.

    Dismissing the DAP’s statement, PAS Youth chief Nik Mohamad Abduh Nik Abdul Aziz said the opposition alliance was still intact. “DAP’s decision will not dissolve the coalition,” he stressed.

    PKR president Wan Azizah Wan Ismail said on Wednesday (June 17) that PKR will not cut its ties with the DAP and PAS, blaming neither but chiding both for precipitating a crisis. “PR no longer functions formally,” she said in a statement, emphasising that PKR would continue to support the DAP-led Penang state government and the PAS-led Kelantan state government.

    What are the implications?

    Analysts are divided over how Umno and the ruling BN, as well as Prime Minister Najib Razak could benefit from the break up of the PR.

    “Opposition in disarray is certainly helpful for Najib’s survival. He is now actively courting Sabah and Sarawak for support even within Umno and BN. As long as he can convince the party he can still deliver, the party members will stick with him. Corruption is not a cardinal sin for Umno leaders. Mahathir had his own shares of financial scandals but he ruled for 23 years. Najib, and certainly Rosmah, see no reason why they can’t learn from Mahathir,” said Penang Institute fellow Wong Chin Huat, referring to former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad and wife of Mr Najib, Rosmah Mansor.

    But analyst Tan Seng Keat from the Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research said the impact is difficult to predict. Umno and its coalition are racked by infighting of their own, as concerns over the economy and damaging financial scandals have further raised the possibility of defeat in the next polls, due by 2018.

    On the opposition side, the DAP has asked PAS representatives to resign from their posts in the Penang state government and its agencies. PAS does not hold any influence in the state assembly as it has only one lawmaker while DAP dominates the 40-seat state legislature with 29 assemblymen.

    PAS, on the other hand, controls the Kelantan state assembly with 32 out of 45 seats. DAP has no representatives while PKR has only one.

    PKR, however, could find itself in potentially dire straits. It cannot sustain a majority in the 57-seat Selangor state assembly without the support of both PAS and DAP. The party had wanted to mediate between the two feuding partners but DAP turned down its offer.

    PAS strategist Zuhdi Marzuki has called for the formation of a new political pact involving only Malay-Muslim parties, similar to one that PAS joined and was led by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah in the 1990s. It was disbanded after Tengku Razaleigh rejoined Umno in 1996.

    “Now it is up to PKR which leads Selangor to decide whether it wants to continue with a coalition with PAS in PR or not,” Dr Zuhdi said. “If PKR also withdraws from PR, then it is not impossible that the Selangor state government will become shaky.”

    What could happen next?

    The opposition parties and even the ruling BN may seek new realignments, including:

    A new opposition pact

    Analaysts believe the DAP and PKR will try to link up with a new partner to form a new opposition pact before the next general election because this remains their only realistic path to defeating BN. Along with PAS, PR has 87 seats in Parliament against BN’s 134. A possible partner is a new party mooted by PasMa, a PAS splinter group formed last year. Following the conservative sweep in PAS’ party elections earlier this month and the collapse of PR, PasMa said it was in discussion with several leaders and parties to set up a new moderate Islamic party that could cooperate with both PKR and DAP.

    “It is back to square one until they find a replacement vehicle for PAS. May or may not be PasMa. PR needs a party for Islamists and rural areas, something PKR is not good at,” said Professor James Chin, director of the Asia Institute at the University of Tasmania.

    PAS and Umno coalition

    The possibility of a unity government of PAS and Umno – the key, Malay-based party in BN – has been talked about since before the 2013 General Election. With the conservatives now dominating PAS, it is increasingly likely that the two parties may be tempted to work together.

    However, it is unclear if Umno is willing to risk breaking up its own multiracial coalition to embrace the Islamist PAS. Although Umno supported the PAS-run Kelantan government’s plans to adopt hudud in March this year, Mr Najib has yet to make his stand on hudud.

    “It is most unlikely that Umno will accept PAS in a Malay/Muslim-only unity government as this will mean the effective breakup of the Barisan as a multiracial, multi-religious coalition,” said Centre for Policy Initiatives director Lim Teck Ghee.

    However, Mr Wong, the Penang Institute fellow, said Umno might compromise, allowing PAS safe seats in Kelantan and Terengganu in the next general election.

    “What will likely happen is a covert pact between the two, with PAS attacking DAP, PKR and the PAS pragmatists if they leave the party.

    “Since it is in the interest of Umno to keep PAS floating, Umno will not put up a full fight in some seats in Kelantan and Terengganu so that PAS will survive with 10 seats or so. A complete collapse of hardliners within PAS will drive the Islamist voters to the splinter party, PKR or even DAP.”

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • 90% Of People Polled Say They Will Vote For Opposition

    90% Of People Polled Say They Will Vote For Opposition

    “90% of those polled say they will vote for opposition”.  That’s the kind of sensational headline that will grab the attention of the reader.  That’s what my unrepresentative poll results indicate.  Hopefully, you have, by now, picked yourself up after falling off your chair.

    Poll results

    I had carried out an online poll that attracted 135 persons to vote.  It is a small sample and hardly indicative of the actual voting pattern in the country.  My readers are, quite obviously, largely opposition voters.  So, the 90% vote in favour of the opposition is indicative of the profile of my readers rather than being indicative of how Singaporeans are likely to vote.  From the outset, I had no intention to find out about the level of support for PAP.  My little survey was motivated by a recent research finding released by Blackbox Research that indicated that 80% of Singaporeans felt that PAP would either perform better or the same as the last elections if elections are to be held now.  Blackbox went on to conclude that “the PAP are now in the box seat to improve on their 2011 election result”.

    I was a little skeptical about the conclusion.  My gut instinct is that there is a general perception right now that either PAP will perform better or the same as the last elections and this perception is largely a result of pessimism among individuals that would themselves vote for the opposition anyway.  Poll results that indicate that there is a perception as to how PAP will perform are not at all indicative of how those that were polled would themselves vote.  So, Blackbox Research’s findings are neither here nor there.  My conversations with friends (who are largely opposition voters) after the passing of LKY has provided me with anecdotal evidence that there is a high degree of pessimism in the opposition camp.  Three factors loom large in the assessment of many opposition voters:

    1.   LKY’s death and the propaganda overdose following that

    2.   SG50 celebrations and the feel good factor that is likely to be generated (with taxpayers footing the bill)

    3.   WP’s continuing legal troubles with Town Council management.

    It stands to reason that middle ground voters may veer back to the PAP (as it happened in 1997) or there may be a stalemate and we may not see any change between 2011 and 2015 in terms of the popular vote.

    Given the negative sentiments among opposition voters, it is quite inevitable that Blackbox Research’s findings indicate a low 20% stating that they thought PAP will perform worse than in 2011. My view is that their research should not be interpreted to indicate that there will in fact be a vote swing towards the PAP.  Blackbox didn’t ask the crucial question: “Who would you vote for?”

    If that question had been asked, we might have ended up with a result that indicates 35% to 40% stating that they would vote opposition and nevertheless 80% stating that PAP would perform better or the same.  The other problem with the Blackbox findings is that they don’t indicate the percentage that stated that PAP would perform better and those that stated that it would perform the same.

    My poll was done to show that there exists a deviation among opposition voters.  There are a significant number of opposition voters that would vote for opposition but are nevertheless pessimistic about the general outcome in the current elections.  Among the 135 that voted, 90% would have voted for the opposition but only 66% felt that PAP would do worse.  This strongly attests to the fact that even in my small sample of 122 opposition voters, there must have been a significant percentage that were pessimistic about the opposition’s chances in the coming elections.

    There is a percentage deviation of 23% between the actual votes by opposition voters and the perception of improvement in the opposition performance.  In the course of the two weeks that I kept the poll open, at various stages of voting I saw this voting-perception deviation fluctuate from a low of 15% to a high of 25%.  For the most part, the percentage was hovering between 20% to 25%.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the findings of Blackbox Research are somewhat tainted by the fact that there exists this voting-perception deviation.  I suspect that it does exist at a national level.  So, whilst my small sample yielded a 23% deviation, at the national level this figure is bound to be different (higher or lower) but without data, it is impossible to arrive at any conclusion.  Blackbox didn’t ask the crucial question as to which party would those polled vote for.  All we have is a finding that indicates that only 20% think that PAP will do worse.  This does not mean that only 20% will vote for the opposition.  It indicates, merely, the existence of a certain degree of pessimism among those that would vote for the opposition.  It is not inconceivable that we might have had 40% of those polled intending to vote for the opposition with a large number of them feeling that PAP will perform the same or better (thereby contributing to the statistics provided by Blackbox).

    Another problem with the Blackbox Research findings is that they have conveniently failed to indicate the percentage of those that think that there will be no difference in the voting and those that think that PAP will do better.  I wouldn’t be surprised if the actual figures were along the following lines (speculating, of course):

    50% –  PAP will perform better

    30% –  PAP will perform the same

    20% –  PAP will perform worse

    We don’t know why Blackbox chose not to give a breakdown of the ‘better’ and ‘same’ categories.

    For Blackbox to make the assertion that PAP is in the box seat to improve on its performance in 2011 is a rather bold step.  Another research firm, BMI Research, whilst being generally positive on the outlook for the PAP, did not venture to assert that the vote share will improve.  “While it is difficult to ascertain whether or not the PAP’s vote share will fall again in the upcoming election, the party’s ability to form a strong majority in the parliament is virtually assured,”  Personally, I think that a general election this year is not going to threaten PAP’s majority in Parliament.  The only thing that we are really speculating about is the increase or decrease in their vote share.

    For those in the opposition camp that feel a little despondent after reading the Blackbox report, they should brush aside polls like these as they serve only to measure voter perception rather than how those voters would in fact vote.  There is bound to be a deviation between the two.  For those in the PAP camp, they would be well advised to avoid being too complacent.  Don’t underestimate the actual anger and dissatisfaction on the ground.

     

    Source: https://article14blog.wordpress.com

  • PKR Believes Pakatan Will Rise From The Ashes While PAS And DAP Think Otherwise

    PKR Believes Pakatan Will Rise From The Ashes While PAS And DAP Think Otherwise

    Just like a phoenix, Pakatan Rakyat will rise from the ashes, said a PKR leader in response to DAP’s declaration that the coalition is dead.

    PKR’s strategic director Sim Tze Tzin said the coalition will be having a meeting either tonight or tomorrow to look for a solution to the problems they’ve been having.

    “We saw it coming but Pakatan will rise again.”

    However, DAP lawmaker Charles Santiago said that there is no recovering from the move taken by PAS, which during its Muktamar earlier this month had approved for a motion to cut ties with the secular based party to be discussed by its central committee and Syura Council.

    “This is best move for us as PAS has made its decision so there is no point in us lingering around.

    “PAS left us with no choice but to declare Pakatan Rakyat dead.”

    PAS’ former central working committee member Khalid Samad said the next step for the pact, if there was to be one, is to come up with a new name.

    This is because “Pakatan Rakyat” is a coalition consisting of three component parties and should any party leave, the pact cannot go on the same way it always has.

    “Without either one of the component parties, there is no Pakatan Rakyat. So the next step has to be decided by the leadership.

    “Will we form a new coalition comprising of only two parties or will we go our separate ways and be individual parties the way we were before.

    “But either way, Pakatan Rakyat is dead,” he said to The Rakyat Post.

    DAP leaders, party supremo Lim Kit Siang and secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, have said that Pakatan Rakyat is dead and done with, blaming PAS as having killed the opposition coalition.

     

    Source: www.therakyatpost.com

  • Do We Want Another 5 Years With PAP?

    Do We Want Another 5 Years With PAP?

    More than 100 days have passed since 23 March, and business seems to be back to normal in Singapore. There is no more outpouring of gratitude whatsoever and in typical pragmatic style people have begun to realise that the next general elections could be as near as 100 days away. Given the trend of downwards support for PAP, things certainly look interesting.

    For one, the PAP has always preached that the opposition should not be given a blank cheque less they make things hard by blocking policies in parliament. As the past 5 years have shown, this is complete and utter bullshit; the WP has shown that they have acted responsibly by voting to strengthen regulatory oversight of town councils despite placing a higher burden on them.

    In fact, quite the contrast can be said. The PAP has made use of their parliamentary majority to pass laws such as the population white paper and the implementation of new media laws, which may not have been favourably received by the majority at large. Hence, more opposition power in parliament may be seen as a positive thing as democracy becomes the new norm.

    Are we willing to accept that alternative political parties in parliament have added more value? While Aljunied town council may have been portrayed as a failure, the fact that WP’s presence in parliament has proven its worth as they serve as a platform to raise difficult questions and elicit answers from the PAP to allow us an insight into their thinking.

    The questions range from the millions spent on scholarships to foreign students to government intentions on the use of ‘unaccredited’ degrees. In both instances, this left some sour feeling on the expected returns from these foreign scholars as well as the PAP government’s lack of empathy. As this catches on, slowly but surely people have begun to realise the merits of having more voices.

    So let’s think about it: do we want another 5 years with PAP?

     

    Source: http://mythoughtsinafewparagraphs.net