Tag: PAP

  • 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

  • Roy Ngerng: Opposition Must Not Lose Touch With “Middle Ground”

    Roy Ngerng: Opposition Must Not Lose Touch With “Middle Ground”

    A college student wrote this letter and handed it to me at the last rally that I spoke at during the election. I did not have time to post it up before cooling-off day.

    Thank you for your kind words, as well as trust and confidence in me. I am grateful and honoured.

    You and your friends are the future leaders of Singapore. I spoke up because I felt that as a member of our society, it is a responsibility and duty to do so, to not only help ourselves but the people around us.

    I believe that we have to be honest and true to ourselves, and therefore I spoke up.

    This election has taught me many things. As much as I have a vision and a belief for our country’s future, it might not be something the people in our country are ready for. It might not be the vision that our countrymen want now.

    Of course, the unequal playing field played a part. But as individuals who are part of the system, how we can bring about a shared vision for our society is also a challenge that we have to look at, for the opposition as well as for Singaporeans.

    I will be honest with you. Did I make mistakes? Yes, I did. As much as I told myself that I was not angry, perhaps I was. I spent 3 years frantically pushing out writings after writings, not realising that I myself had lost touch with the “middle-ground”.

    In spite of the kind advice that was offered to me to reach out to a wider audience, I was stubborn and did not want to evolve in my writings.

    But this is the beauty of hindsight, where only after the election did I realise where I could have done better.

    You see, my awakening came about 3 years ago when I started researching on the Singapore system and my writings reflect the shock that I feel about the Singapore system. As such, my eagerness to convey my thoughts ran ahead of me.

    Was it wrong? It wasn’t. But it meant that my writings got lost among the large populace. It meant I became like any ranter. It meant that for the “middle-ground”, I became destabilising.

    From how things have panned out over the election, I have learnt that speaking up is a virtue we must hold on to. But how we listen, and adjust ourselves, so that we do not only listen to our own voices but that of others, so that all our voices are communicated across to one another, is an important learning I have made.

    For if we were to criticise the PAP for not having listened to the people, what folly we have made if we ourselves were to do the very same as the people we criticise?

    What then makes us better? It does not. And this is why the voters have spoken.

    In our anger and shock, many of us blame the new citizens, the 70%, etc. But I have decided to look at myself instead. Everyone makes mistakes. Perhaps we would first need to reflect on ourselves before we put the finger on someone else.

    Perhaps if we are to understand how it is we can improve, will we see to it another day will come.

    I thank you for your letter. It is letters like yours and many others that lets me know that at least what I have done have helped and mattered to some of you.

    It does not matter that I have lost, or even if I could have won. At the end of the day, I have tried and made a difference in the lives of some, as others have made theirs in mine.

    It is now your time to shine, as well as that of you and your friends. I am only one person and what I do can only inspire a few. Imagine the might of you and the many who let their voices be heard, the many people whose lives the many of you will touch. And how many you will inspire.

    This is not about the PAP or the opposition. This is about what matters as people and what we can do for one another.

    Sometimes, people don’t realise they have a voice, or fear to use their voice. It is up to some of us to guide the rest. I am glad that my voice has opened up yours. Thank you for your letter.

    But let us continue to open up more. Let you be the voice that others will learn from.

    I wish the PAP well, as well as the opposition. It is a learning process for all of us. The PAP played their game well and we have to respect them. Those in the opposition stood for their beliefs and we have to respect them. Singaporeans voted with their reason and we have to respect that.

    Yesterday, I inspired you. Today, you will inspire others. Tomorrow, more will inspire.

    Your journey is just beginning. I look forward to the day when you are on stage as you speak and light up the crowd, and as I stand below and tear to your words.

    There is no one hero. Because if only all of us would know, we are all heroes. If only all of us would realise.

    Be your own hero. Be my voice, as I was yours.

    Let us stand united, let us hope for a better future with the power of our voice.

    I await the day where I stand among heroes, where all of us will inspire our own future.

    I await the day when you will be my hero.

     

    Source: http://theheartruths.com

  • Masyarakat Sepakat Bekerjasama Dengan Pemerintah

    Masyarakat Sepakat Bekerjasama Dengan Pemerintah

    SAYA merujuk kepada laporan di Berita Harian semalam bertajuk: Sokongan Melayu jelas pendirian teguhkan lagi perpaduan.

    Keputusan cemerlang bagi pihak Parti Tindakan Rakyat (PAP) dan Menteri Melayu menunjukkan bahawa mereka diberi kepercayaan untuk menerajui Singapura.

    Ini juga mencerminkan kepercayaan yang kuat datang daripada masyarakat Melayu/Islam.

    Walaupun ada beberapa perkara yang masih belum dapat dihuraikan, masyarakat telah membuat keputusan, sebagaimana warga kita membuat keputusan 50 tahun yang lalu, bahawa masa depan untuk kita adalah di tempat ini yang kita panggil Singapura.

    Walaupun memang ada beberapa perkara yang harus dihuraikan, ia baik jika dilakukan dengan kebijaksanaan dan teratur.

    Masyarakat telah memilih dan menyokong PAP, yang juga menunjukkan yang ada semacam pertalian erat di antara masyarakat dan pemerintah.

    Ayuh kita bekerjasama dalam menghuraikan masalah yang ada.

    Kepercayaan yang kukuh menunjukkan bahawa masyarakat memberi isyarat yang terang bahawa ia mahu terus bekerjasama dengan pemerintah.

    ZAINUDIN HJ HAROON

     

    Source: http://beritaharian.sg

  • Mahu AP Terus Perjuangkan Isu Keprihatinan Masyarakat

    Mahu AP Terus Perjuangkan Isu Keprihatinan Masyarakat

    SAYA merujuk kepada laporan di Berita Harian semalam bertajuk: Sokongan Melayu jelas pendirian teguhkan lagi perpaduan.

    Keputusan cemerlang bagi pihak Parti Tindakan Rakyat (PAP) dan Menteri Melayu menunjukkan bahawa mereka diberi kepercayaan untuk menerajui Singapura.

    Ini juga mencerminkan kepercayaan yang kuat datang daripada masyarakat Melayu/Islam.

    Walaupun ada beberapa perkara yang masih belum dapat dihuraikan, masyarakat telah membuat keputusan, sebagaimana warga kita membuat keputusan 50 tahun yang lalu, bahawa masa depan untuk kita adalah di tempat ini yang kita panggil Singapura.

    Walaupun memang ada beberapa perkara yang harus dihuraikan, ia baik jika dilakukan dengan kebijaksanaan dan teratur.

    Masyarakat telah memilih dan menyokong PAP, yang juga menunjukkan yang ada semacam pertalian erat di antara masyarakat dan pemerintah.

    Ayuh kita bekerjasama dalam menghuraikan masalah yang ada.

    Kepercayaan yang kukuh menunjukkan bahawa masyarakat memberi isyarat yang terang bahawa ia mahu terus bekerjasama dengan pemerintah.

    ZAINUDIN HJ HAROON

     

    Source: http://beritaharian.sg

  • Behind PAP’s Victory, A Rising Star

    Behind PAP’s Victory, A Rising Star

    Singapore’s ruling party is celebrating a resounding re-election victory, thanks partly to its economic Tsar, an ethnic Tamil politician whose voter appeal poses an awkward question for its leaders: can a non-Chinese ever become prime minister?

    As the People’s Action Party (PAP) settles down to another five years in power, the guessing game of who will succeed Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has begun – and the name of Tharman Shanmugaratnam keeps coming up.

    The odds of Shanmugaratnam, who is deputy prime minister and finance minister, making it to the top job should be long.

    All three of Singapore’s prime ministers to date have been of Chinese origin and, in a country where three-quarters of the residents are ethnic Chinese, it would be hard to break that tradition. Just one in 10 Singaporeans can, like Shanmugaratnam, trace their roots back to South Asia.

    PAP officials declined to comment on the question of who will come after Lee, 63, who has hinted that he may step down by 2020, because it is a sensitive subject in a party that is in any case instinctively secretive.

    Lee has said that the chances of a non-Chinese becoming prime minister are better for the new generation of leaders but a lack of Mandarin, widely spoken here, could be a problem.

    For some Singaporeans, though, the idea is as outlandish as a non-Malay prime minister in Malaysia or an Indonesian from outside the political heartland of Java becoming president.

    In a book published two years before his death this year, Lee Kuan Yew, Lee’s father and the deeply respected first prime minister of this tropical city-state, listed four ethnic Chinese men as the new generation of up-and-coming leaders.

    Still, Shanmugaratnam’s hustings performance in the run-up to last week’s election was so impressive that even an opposition candidate, Paul Tambyah of the Singapore Democratic Party, openly longed for him to lead a grand coalition of parties.

    “People would like to see Tharman around to set the tone for a new PAP leadership,” said Catherine Lim, a long-time political commentator and critic of Lee Kuan Yew.

    “It’s time now for a completely different one, and the only person whom I can think of to set that tone convincingly and who can appeal to Singaporeans across ethnic groups would be Mr Tharman,” she said.

    Shanmugaratnam, 58, said in July he was not keen on the prime minister’s job, though he expected Singapore to have a leader from one of its minority ethnic groups at some point.

    He was not available to comment for this article.

    A TRANSITIONAL PRIME MINISTER?

    The PAP won almost 70 percent of the popular vote in the election, a stunning recovery from its record low of 60.1 percent in 2011. In his own district, Shanmugaratnam led a handful of lawmakers to a win with about 80 percent of the vote.

    Analysts say that rebound was helped by a wave of patriotism after the death of Lee Kuan Yew and independent Singapore’s 50th birthday celebrations, but also by a slight shift from unbridled capitalism to Western welfarism that was led by Shanmugaratnam.

    In his campaign speeches, Shanmugaratnam pressed the right buttons for an electorate that has in recent years begun to question the hard-nosed growth-at-all-costs policies of the PAP that left many marginalised and struggling to make ends meet.

    In a calm baritone and with his trademark avuncular style, he crunched numbers to show how social welfare is working.

    He also explained changes the PAP has embraced after 50 years of unbroken rule, but conceded still more were needed.

    “It used to be a top-down government, often quite heavy-handed,” he told one rally. “It’s no longer that way … Strong leadership is listening, engaging, moving with people.”

    Shanmugaratnam spoke some Mandarin on the campaign, and when he quoted from an ancient Chinese poem at one rally the crowd exploded with cheers.

    He was educated at the London School of Economics, Cambridge and Harvard, and spent most of his career at the Monetary Authority of Singapore, the island state’s central bank and financial regulator.

    He got into a legal tangle in the 1990s when he was fined for failing to protect the secrecy of official information after economic data was published in a newspaper ahead of its release. Shanmugaratnam had pleaded not guilty.

    He is also well known on international circuits: a darling of international investors, he was appointed chairman of the International Monetary Fund’s policy steering committee in 2011.

    Eugene Tan, a law professor at Singapore Management University and a political commentator, said one obstacle for Shanmugaratnam is that he is seen as part of the prime minister’s generation, when perhaps ideally a new generation would be coming forward.

    “However, if it is assessed that a transitional prime minister is needed while the fourth generation is ready to take over, then … Tharman is well-positioned to step up,” Tan said.

     

    Source: https://sg.news.yahoo.com

deneme bonusu