Rilek1Corner

Tag: opposition

  • PAP Voter: I Did Not Vote PAP Out Of Fear

    PAP Voter: I Did Not Vote PAP Out Of Fear

    To the oppies,

    I did not vote for PAP out of fear. I voted for PAP because your ideas did not take into account of global trends.

    I did not vote for PAP thinking they can resolve the problems of the world, I do expect them to make the transition more painless for Singaporeans.

    If Foreign Talent is to get the job, at least allocate enough money for Singaporeans to upgrade their skills so that they can remain competitive.

    I did not vote for PAP because I liked them, I voted for PAP because I think for now they can do the job best. The rest just talk (and anyone can do that).

    In fact, I feel that Worker’s Party fashion sense seems to be better. At least there are some colours. White shirts easy to get dirty, hard to maintain.

    I am aware that our government may have lost some money in some investment, but I think that is part of the game of investment.

    As long as the investment is not lost through dishonesty but through inevitable global / market / business trends, I am fine.

    I don’t think I deserve to receive any part of the reserves, I am just wondering why do the oppies feel so dignified and justified that they deserve our reserves.

    The reserves (through our fixed asset) should be used for the betterment of our country, provide infrastructural framework for our learning, leisure & work.

    I feel very amused that the oppies say that the whole country is against 6.9 million white paper, but I am very happy with the white paper.

    There are people who say I am happy with the white paper because I am a businessman and will benefit by having more customers in the country.

    Actually that is true as well, but what is more true is that with more population, it will drive business cost down, and some business will provide services / products affordably to the less well off segment.

    With no big population to support businesses, no businesses can afford to help the poor. The oppies are understanding this so so wrong.

    It is true that higher population will drive certain segment’s goods prices up, but it will also drive certain products and services’ prices down as well.

    Higher population is good for the poor.

    The oppies, think again of those people voting for the white uniformed PAP. It is not because we are upper class and want to maintain our edge over the poorer half of the population.

    We are voting for PAP because it will take care of the whole country. The oppies need to polish up their plans.

    And don’t get me started on the CPF problem. Yes, it is true that the government is increasing the age to withdraw CPF, and there is a logical reason to it, we are living longer.

    Also, as a funding guy, I have seen millions of dollars or hundreds of thousands at one shot. Most people in the working class has never held 100-200k in their hands before, what do you think would happen when they hold that amount of money?

    The money would be squandered. Cheated by some younger women / men. The country is doing you a favour by safeguarding for you.

    If you know how to handle the finance, the minimum sum of 100+ K is not going to make a difference to your lifestyle. If you do not know how to handle finance, then the 100+ K is better off safeguarded by the government of Singapore.

    Thanks.

    Yours Loyally,

    Source: Raymond Ng

  • Respect The Voters

    Respect The Voters

    MS LEE Li Lian said something interesting yesterday about respecting the voters. Punggol East voters had rejected her, and it didn’t make sense for her to stay in Parliament as a Non-constituency MP (NCMP), she said. Some people applaud her for her principled decision, others wonder if this was just an excuse for her disenchantment with the election results.

    She doesn’t want to be a voice in Parliament, never mind that she only lost by a whisker. If she takes up the seat, she would be the first rejected incumbent in Parliament, unless you count Mrs Lina Chiam as a proxy for her husband Mr Chiam See Tong in the last Parliament.

    Actually, her position isn’t so different from how the Opposition viewed the NCMP scheme when it was first introduced in 1984. NCMPs can talk in the House but they don’t have the critical powers of voting over money Bills or constitutional amendments. The several loud objections to the scheme was considered a sop to the losers, and the resistance waned until it looked like a prize to be fought over within political parties. Remember how there was some talk that Mr Eric Tan wanted to be an NCMP but the Workers’ Party decided that the seat be given to Mr Gerald Giam? That seems to have resulted in some kind of rupture in the party.

    In fact, the scheme appeared to have honed the political instincts of past NCMPs and given them a taste for the cut-and-thrust of debate. It is worth noting that the three NCMPs of the last Parliament have been extremely active in engaging the front bench. They took their jobs seriously, although it might be said that without a constituency to attend to, they have more time to bone up.

    Never mind Ms Lee’s motive for rejecting the seat, the key phrase she used is: “respecting the voters”.

    In this case, she behaved far better than Reform Party’s Kenneth Jeyaretnam who acted like a petulant child when he realised which way the wind was blowing on Polling Night.

    “All this is, is a mandate for authoritarianism and brainwashing. It shows what you do when you control everybody’s housing, you control their savings, you control their jobs because you’re the major employer, you control all the media and there’s no independent elections department.

    “So all I see is similar margins in North Korea and China, it’s just like the Chinese Communist Party and I guess Singaporeans get the government they deserve so I don’t want to hear any more complaints.”

    That was highly disrespectful of the voter. Whether a person likes or dislikes the results, the fact that cannot change is that close to 70 per cent of voters voted for the PAP. This was not a split electorate. That’s the way the cookie crumbles in a democracy with a first-past-the-post electoral system. Live with it.

    Most opposition politicians were, in fact, stinting in their remarks about bowing to the will of the people, preferring to attribute that collective will to the worry of a freak election result, the Electoral Boundary changes, the AHPETC and the propensity of the population for bribes. No one said that perhaps, their policies and programmes didn’t resonate with the people, that they had read them wrong, that they would have to recalibrate their positions to win them over. If they did, they didn’t say so in the fulsome way the PAP did after GE2011 – an expression of abject humility.

    The WP’s Daniel Goh, however, was one person who took the humble route: “The people has spoken and the collective wisdom is always right. Analysts will fall over one another in the coming weeks to discern the hearts of voters. For me, the meaning of the results is clear. It is a ringing endorsement of the PAP’s programme of going back to its centre-left roots and PM Lee’s leadership”.

    “It is also a nod to WP’s brand of rational and responsible politics, since the seats won in GE2011 were returned. But with caveats: work harder, and buck up, in both town management and Parliament; less egoism and opportunism, more depth, humility and courage, more listening and walking.” (PS. He got the bit about seats returned technically right; the one lost SMC was from a by-election).

    Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam was very polite when he said that “it was important that the opposition reflect on what happened – not just in terms of whether the electorate didn’t know better or the electorate made a mistake – but how they could have done better in their strategies”.

    You wouldn’t expect the PAP to advise the Opposition on how they could have better strategised, but one sure thing is this: Don’t always believe social media. This GE2015, social media distorted the extent of Opposition support. TNP quoted an academic based in Australia who said: “Imagine if you read the Facebook comments whacking PAP. Many PAP supporters would think it better to keep their mouths shut before they are (verbally) abused.”

    In other words, the silent majority kept silent.

    Singapore Democratic Party’s (SDP) Chee Soon Juan was quick to think of the future. He suggested a closer working relationship with the WP in preparation for the next GE. This will probably depend on, among other things, whether the WP will forget his earlier proposal that they collaborate in contesting the Punggol East by-election two years ago by having the SDP in Parliament and the WP run the town council should their candidate win.

    Let bygones be bygones?

    This seems to be the rallying cry of the PAP leaders post GE2015. DPM Tharman noted that shorn of the rhetoric, the Opposition proposals aren’t too different from what the PAP is doing. (Maybe this is a backhanded compliment: that the Opposition can’t come up with anything too different). The PAP seems keen to embrace the diversity of viewpoints and the need for alternative voices, which it probably realises it shouldn’t dismiss despite its huge mandate. You can view this cynically: it wants to co-opt opposition voices into its fold. Or you can keep an open mind and see whether it holds to its promise to engage the people more fully and, more importantly, early.

    You have the younger leaders such as Mr Heng Swee Keat and Mr Tan Chuan-Jin calling on all sides, including Opposition supporters, to find common ground.

    Given the way the (not metaphorical) wind is blowing, there’s plenty. There’s the haze above ground, for starters. We can at least close ranks against that!

     

    Source: http://themiddleground.sg

  • Mohd Khair: PAP Should Commission Independent Study Of GE Results

    Mohd Khair: PAP Should Commission Independent Study Of GE Results

    Congratulations to All Parties, Candidates and the Population of Singapore who took part in GE2015. It’s an important democratic process that affords the country to check itself periodically, whatever outcome it may be.

    On the night when results were annouced, it was evident that the outcome came as a surprise even with the ruling party PAP. The commentators on live TV were also surprised of the margins and eventual swing. The mandate was clear. Almost 70% of voters wanted PAP to be back in power. However, what drove the swing that resulted in the landslide victory was still speculative, at best.

    That night during the Press Conference, when Dr Yaacob spoke of a solid Malay support, we were not sure where the source of that information came from, given that voting was suppose to be secret. Was the swing a result of solid Malay support or was it due to other factors. The commentators on Channel 5 tentatively attributed the swing to other non-racial factors. And we can all agree with a suggestion by a TV panelist that night that a more thorough study was needed to understand the voting pattern in GE 2015.

    There were also mentions by the panelists on how the victory speeches by the PAP were different. Probably many could also observe that the victory speeches this time sounded more humble. There were relatively more humility than ever before. And there were also not a few of the victory speeches which touched on the need to appeal more to those who had not voted for the PAP. Those speeches made promises to work harder not only for those who voted for the PAP, but also to attract or appeal more to those who did not vote for the party.

    That night, while the PAP and its supporters were in for a pleasant surprise, there were quarters among the voters who were quite perplexed by the results. Leaders of the Opposition parties were also shocked with the results. Kenneth Jeyaratnam was clearly dejected. Other Opposition leaders expressed similar sentiments and said they needed time to fully understand the underlying reasons for the outcome.

    With a solid mandate for the PAP amidst strong showing of support for the Opposition at rallies as well as on social media, and the promise to work harder by the ruling PAP, probably it is not too much to ask for an independent study to be done to understand the underlying factors that contributed to the landslide victory.

    As voting is secret, we are still unsure if the landslide victory was a result of solid Malay voters’ support, as mentioned by Dr Yaacob that night, or could it be due to other reasons. Given the high decibel levels on long-standing issues like the tudung or hijab controversy, it is important for the ruling party to fully understand if there are the possibilities of a relatively larger proportion of the Malay voters actuallly voted for the Opposition.

    The question to ask and answers to uncover is, “Could there be a possibility that the slightly more than 30% who voted for the Opposition comprised a relatively larger number of Malays?”, given the fact that many Malays were unhappy with the way the tudung issue had been handled and dragged on for more than 20 years. Of course, there are other issues that Singaporeans in general have made known of their unhappiness about, and yet voted for the PAP.

    With all the humility demonstrated during the election victory speeches that night, commissioning an independent study to understand what actually happened on Sep 11, 2015 will be a noble act on the part of the PAP to not simply gloss over the victory as one resulting from its prowess to govern. This study, if conducted well and independently, will enable the PAP to better understand the polity and put to rest all the speculations that have been circulating to discredit the victory as only technical, and not substantive. But more importantly, the results of such study will help the PAP to deliver better all its promises to those who voted for it and to those who did not vote for the party. That independent study is for the PAP to keep its promises made during the victory speeches that monumentous night.

     

    Source: Mohd Khair

  • Suliyati Sufian Maryam: Lack Of Alternative Voices In Parliament, Fair Representation Of Minorities Unlikely

    Suliyati Sufian Maryam: Lack Of Alternative Voices In Parliament, Fair Representation Of Minorities Unlikely

    <suli>After the results of last night’s GE, I came back from my best friend’s wedding to witness the area around my block littered with hell notes, smoke and ashes flying into my eyes and my Chinese neighbours fervently lighting up joss sticks along almost every inch space of the grassy patches around the area. No, I wasn’t annoyed or frustrated; I thought “oh it must be the last day of the hungry ghost, that’s why they are going all out.” I didn’t feel like I should be telling anyone that they should be more considerate in their burning or that they should pick up the stray notes after they are done because I accept it as a way of living in singapore and I actually enjoy seeing this experience although it gets hot (I mean on top of the haze!) and sometimes ashes do get blown into my flat. It is part of living here and I accept it as it is.

    But then I started thinking about how I had to perform my acts of worship when I was in school or when I was still working and I felt sad. I felt sad because I always had to do it in secret, as though what I was doing was a crime. My friends and I would look for corners along dusty staircases, back alleys, helping each other keep a look out for teachers or other students who might pass by. And when I began teaching at a secondary school, I had to pray in secrecy at an area where broken chairs are kept and even then, I was warned not to let anyone see me enter that place to pray. When the boss eventually found out about the prayer place though, it was forbidden to us and all of us who have been using that dirty abandoned place to pray had to look for staircases to perform our daily obligation. Yes, for those of you who dont know, Muslims HAVE to pray five times a day abd for most of us, we&apos;ve been doing it like how I describe it above, like we are criminals.

    And then I think of the ban on music during Thaipusam and I also felt sad for my Hindu friends and I started to think what is the rationale behind the ban? If it’s the music that’s too loud, then we should also ban music during Malay weddings and Chinese funerals cos these can get very loud too. If the govt is afraid of ppl getting too carried away by the music during thaipusam, I am sure there are 1001 ways to work around that issue because they’ve been doing for years without much incident.

    When I was deciding what faculty to enrol in as I was about to enter NUS, I ruled out Nursing after Medicine (and I didnt get into Medicine) because I know nurses in Singapore cannot wear hijab but I accepted it as it is. So even though I wanted to go into healthcare, I ended up taking a basic Life Science degree instead because one option was already out for me because of what I wear on my head.

    My dear friends who are part of the majority, I want you to know that I have nothing against you and am indeed happy for you that you have every opportunity to pursue your dreams or climb that social ladder as long as you work hard for it. Or that as you are burning hell notes for youtlr ancestors, you dont have to do it like a thief and make sure no one sees you doing it. But pls pls don;t let your experience of life here be your only measurement of life for others who are not part of that majority. Don’t say “where got unfair? If you work hard sure can get it what. Govt doesnt discriminate against religion also, so what are you talking about?” because you don’t experience life here as a minority, and with an obligation that makes you stand out (im talking about the hijab). Only those of us who have been dealing with it on a daily basis know how difficult it can get at times and even then, we;ve been very tolerant about our situation for years and years and how can we know this? Despite having our basic right to practise our religion without being discrimated against violated, you dont hear of riots by Muslims do you? Instead we have been engaging the govt in diplomatic ways thru petitions and dialogue sessions. So pls dont tell us things like we need to do more to assimilate – we have been assimilating for as long as we can remember despite the restrictions placed on us.

    So back to the GE story, I was predicting PAP to win and I am happy that they have won because I do think they are strong and capable of leading singaporeans. But when you think of this country declaring itself as a democratic country and you see 83 out of 89 seats in govt occupied by one party, you must think to uourself, where is the democracy in that? Where is the chance for alternative views to be heard? 6 voices out of 89 will be drowned out, so how can issues that the incumbent party have for years dodged get addressed properly without being shot down as asking for more privileges?

    So i hope you can understand our frustrations when we see our hopes for alternative voices get voted against by ppl spreading fears of “freak elections”, or that the GE was held immediately after the ruling party has pampered its citizens with money and SG50 celebrations. It’s not that we want to see the PAP toppled; it’s that they are only going to have their policies checked against by 6 voices outof 89. There is no way that there will be fair representation for us minorities with that kind of statistics.

     

    Source: Suliyati Sufian Maryam

  • Hazrul Azhar Jamari: Why Oppositions’ Lost Is Fault Of Opposition Supporters

    Hazrul Azhar Jamari: Why Oppositions’ Lost Is Fault Of Opposition Supporters

    Why the opposition lost and why it is completely the fault of opposition supporters.

    I know many people are expecting me to give an analysis. So here it is. But be warned, you will not like it.

    In March, I made a scarily accurate prediction of how GE2015 would turn out. For reference, seehttps://www.facebook.com/abanghazrul/posts/10152894622382655

    While the dust settles and the opposition absorbs the results and reflect on it, supporters are seen angry at the majority who voted the PAP blaming them for dooming us for the next 5 years expecting a rise to cost of living, population, HDB homes and CPF minimum sum.

    The fact of the matter is that as you point a finger at the majority who gave the incumbent the overwhelming mandate, there are 4 fingers pointing back. No, I’m not going to shout “boo PAP!”.

    Here are 4 reasons why the opposition lost and why opposition supporters are ultimately responsible for it, not the majority who voted differently.

    1. Elections are emotional. There is nothing logical about how people vote.

    When the PAP tweaked the elections to include a Cooling Off Day, they claimed that it is to allow people to calm down and rationalise what was best for the country.

    But people don’t vote based on logical reasoning. The majority won’t read party manifestos. And many of us can see how much of a motherhood statement the PAP manifesto was. The SDP and WP had well thought out proposals. They did their homework.

    But people don’t grade you based on your manifesto. They vote according to how they feel about you. And while the SDP and WP candidates have very electable people, many of them even of a higher calibre than some of the PAP candidates, most people use their heart to vote. Let’s be honest. Opposition supporters also vote with their heart.

    Thus, even if citizens are able to prove that the majority of PAP town councils are not transparent enough and that the AHPETC had been more transparent to the public than the PAP TCs, the constant barrage of perceived unanswered questions, helped along by a media that doesn’t tell the whole story (and all media does that even the alternatives), the PAP had been successful at creating doubt into the hearts of the voters nearly causing Aljunied to fall and causing Punggol East to return to the PAP fold by paper thin margins.

    So please don’t blame others for voting with their hearts. They did what they felt was right, and so did you.

    2. The opposition misread the ground sentiment and were over confident (except maybe WP) due to GE2011 results.

    Many including myself had expected the opposition to earn at least one more GRC. Of course, I was expecting with my heart. My predictions which I made mostly with my head knew that there won’t be much gains.

    The opposition didn’t sieve the noise from the signal. The swing votes in 2011 do not carry on to 2015. Like football, they should take each elections game by game. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of present form.

    Had there been more feet on the ground, they would have had a clearer picture of how voters actually felt. The keywords here are sentiments and feelings, not what they think.

    3. Unreasonable expectations from voters

    The Punggol East 2013 By-Elections was a morale booster for the WP. The margin of victory was conclusive. And Lee Li Lian became probably the first MP who properly represented the majority of Singaporeans. A person who had to work really hard, so that she can get a better life. Who was from the N-levels, and took a part-time degree so that she can give her children a better life. Voters in Punggol East resonated with her because they felt she was closer to the ground than Dr Koh Poh Koon who was evidently detached to the ground.

    They thought their lives would get better under the WP. And Li Lian probably had a baptism of fire being a first-time MP.

    But after 2 and half years, many of the voters felt that life was not too much different as before. This resulted in disappointment.

    The voters wanted change yesterday. But the voters are probably expecting miracles, like a unicorn.

    The reality is, the first time MP had everything stacked against her. And perhaps, she realised very quickly that the job of an MP is extremely hard. Li Lian was still pursuing a part time degree. And if you’ve pursued one yourself, you know how difficult balancing a job, family and studies are. Let’s multiply that by 10x, because an MP’s job is not sing song shake leg.

    I’ve seen MPs sacrifice so much for citizens. Their time with their families are affected. Many still have full-time jobs. So in the day, they work. Every week, they will meet residents. On the weekends, they have to appear at functions. Sometimes, in the middle of the week, they have to attend meetings related to their grassroots work.

    The time was probably inconvenient for Li Lian to be an MP. At her age and point in life, she had many things that would prioritize ahead of the residents and I doubt it was easy for her to sacrifice so much.

    This was clearly evident in her interview with the media after her loss. She rejected to take up the NCMP, and she hinted that she will likely have a full-time job. Her tone also described how she wished she can still go to the ground. She realised that maybe, being an MP is not for her. At least not yet.

    This analysis matches what I know from Punggol East residents, that Li Lian was touch and go with resident’s needs. I can understand that, and I felt that residents had placed unicorn expectations on the first time MP.

    4. Opposition supporters are simply not contributing to the opposition parties.

    The fundamental difference between some PAP supporters and most Opposition supporters is that the PAP supporters are the feelers, the hands, and the feet of the party. Their strength in numbers allow the PAP to reach every constituent and canvas for votes. More importantly, they are crucial in organising MPS, and activities for residents on a weekly basis.

    Many who supported the opposition do not go and volunteer for the opposition. They falsely believed that making all that noise will somehow sway people towards the opposition. The problem is, people don’t care what you say online. They don’t have the time to entertain you online.

    And now that the opposition didn’t get a good result, they blame others.

    All kinds of reasons!

    Some of them include

    – New citizens swinging votes
    – The media is biased
    – The PA is politicised
    – The majority have no balls

    Amazing. They blame everything except themselves.

    Friends. Change does not happen because you marked an X in the box of the opposition. Change does not come easy and does not come without sacrifices. You cannot create change if you are sitting in your air-conditioned room debating in a Facebook thread how the PAP had utterly failed at improving your lives.

    For change to happen, you, the opposition voter, must stop lamenting that the PAP has unfair advantage in the PA and PCF. Undoubtedly, they are the reason behind the PAP’s massive result.

    You, the opposition voter must get up on your feet, and volunteer with the opposition. You don’t even have to sign up as a member. Because once you volunteer, you are your own grassroots. You are actually contributing to democracy and you are actualising the change you wanted.

    Friends. You must be the change you want to see in yourselves.

    The people of Hougang did it. In the absence of the PA, they created their own grassroots organisation in support of their elected MP. For 24 years, they remain loyal, because their own grassroots volunteers were able to help their MP feel the ground. Low Thia Kiang always knew when someone died in his ward because there were people who told him.

    When they won Aljunied, they had to cannibalise what they did in Hougang into a far larger constituency. The problem was, they were stretched thin. They do not possess the same numbers as the PAP who worked really hard to win voters back with their grassroots going around canvassing support.

    When WP won Punggol East, had the voters in Punggol East got up, went to Li Lian’s office, and helped her with the ground work, she would have probably remained as your MP today. The reality is that Punggol East did not answer the call of duty that Hougang did 24 years ago.

    Now that you have returned to the PAP, you will never have a chance to be an opposition ward again. Because you know what happens to SMCs that win by razor thin margins? Just look at Joo Chiat.

    So stop blaming the silent majority. Get up. Be the change you want to be. And trust me, you will see change happen once you do that.

     

    Source: Hazrul Azhar Jamari