Rilek1Corner

Tag: Reform Party

  • Two Reasons Why PAP Won So Handsomely In The Recent Elections

    Two Reasons Why PAP Won So Handsomely In The Recent Elections

    Mr Goh,

    That is a very good analysis, but you missed two important points.

    The first is the external factor, namely all the things that are happening outside Singapore. Over the past year the world has gotten a whole lot more dangerous, politically and financially.

    The political paralysis in US, ISIS in the Middle East, the financial and refugees crises in Europe, the China’s economic slowdown that may lead to a world’s recession, Russia’s re-asserting itself, climate change, the gyrating stock markets, and others all add to a sense of an uncertain future. As the saying go, “you do not change horses at mid-stream”.

    Many feel that you do not want to leadership in the middle of a crisis, especially when the alternative only brings in more uncertainty.

    Which brings me to the second point, the oppositions. It is pointless to blame the ruling party to handing out goodies to get votes. That happens is every democracy, we hear it every time there is an election in the UK.

    Yet the government changes hand on a regular basis. For the opposition, it is not enough to offer candidates that are “as good as” the other side and hope that the “throw out the bastard” sentiment will carry the day.

    The opposition needs to have someone better. But honestly, are the opposition candidates in this election really significant better than their PAP counterparts? Do they really have a coherent plan of how to govern? Can they provide a compelling vision? Can they help Singapore, a small country, navigate in the choppy uncharted water?

    Let’s take your team as an example. In the last four years, how many times have the team walk through Ang Mo Kio talking to the residents and learning about their concerns? What do you really have to offer besides a distaste for the PAP?

    Singapore opposition parties need to build themselves up slowly. It may make you feel good to say that every seat is contested. But it is a warning sign to the voters. The PAP members may be a bunch of yahoos.

    But many who would cast a protest in order to have more opposition voices in the parliament voted for PAP instead just so that there would not be a fluke and a bunch of unknown and inexperienced yahoos ended up running the country.

    So the opposition parties need to reflect and come up with a better strategy. You did some analysis of the percents of swing votes that could have been the result of one action or the other by the ruling party.

    Here is another way to look at it. If those constituencies where the PAP won more than 75% (which meant they were PAP strongholds where the opposition parties have no chance) were uncontested, the PAP majority would have been only 67%, meaning that the decision of the opposition to contest every seat actually gave the PAP at least a 2% margin.

    Your own slate contributed 0.72% to that 2%. So the delusion of grandeur of the oppositions actually contributed to the PAP landslide.

    Thistoo Shallpass

     

    Source: www.transitioning.org

  • 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

  • Reform Party Unveils 12-Page Manifesto

    Reform Party Unveils 12-Page Manifesto

    The Reform Party on Monday (Sep 7) unveiled its party manifesto in Boon Lay Place, as the election period crosses the halfway mark.

    The 12-page document outlines the objectives of the party and covers a wide range of issues from healthcare and defense spending to economic policy.

    According to its manifesto, possible policy proposals include introducing a minimum wage, capping the number of foreign workers, reduce National Service (NS) to one year with a view of progressing to a professional army and introducing an old-age monthly pension of S$500 for all seniors above 65.

    On the timing of the release, Reform Party Secretary-General, Kenneth Jeyaretnam said: “We’ve had a manifesto since 2009, and an election manifesto in 2011. So we are relaunching it and bringing it up to date. Our flyers already incorporate our seven main pledges.”

    He also elaborated on the party’s NS proposal, saying it “imposes a heavy burden on male Singaporeans, particularly in comparison with foreign workers”.

    “The Government spends S$400 million on scholarships for foreigners who are then able to work here upon graduation without doing NS. This is grossly inequitable,” Mr Jeyaretnam said.

    “So what we want to do is reduce the burden on male Singaporeans and cut NS term to one year and expand a professional army. Now with modern technology, drones, robots, you don’t need so many boots on the ground.”

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • Humanising Kenneth Jeyaretnam

    Humanising Kenneth Jeyaretnam

    With a strong political pedigree as the eldest son of the late opposition figurehead, JB Jeyaretnam, one would expect Kenneth Jeyaretnam to be voted into parliament by now. Why hasn’t it happen?

    From the initial excitement when Kenneth first stepped up to takeover the Reform Party to the series of missteps he had made since GE2011, people’s perception of  Kenneth changed from a rising star to some kind of joker politician.

    I wrote a humanising piece about the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP)’s Dr Chee Soon Juan and thePeople’s Action Party (PAP)’s Chan Chun Sing earlier. Here’s the third in the series. Don’t judge a person too quickly.

    Kenneth is not an engaging public speaker, but if you follow his questionings of the PAP government’s economic policies on his blog, he would make a good MP in parliament to ask all the hard stuff. After all, he is a highly educated, experienced economist with a double first class honours from Cambridge to match Lee Hsien Loong.

    In Singapore, Kenneth attended St Andrew’s School, followed by the United World College of South East Asia. He attended Charterhouse School in England from 1975-77. From 1978-80 he returned to Singapore to serve his National Service. From 1980-83, he attended Queens’ College, the University of Cambridge, where he read economics and graduated with Double First Class Honours. Kenneth is also an alumnus of the Amsterdam Institute of Finance.

    Credentials wise, he is rock solid.

    Kenneth’s entrance into Singapore politics started with the passing of the late JB Jeyaretnam in 2008. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong sent a cryptic condolence letter to his two sons, Kenneth and Philip Jeyaretnam. Thereafter, the elder son went on to shoulder his father’s unfinished work in the fight to give Singaporeans an alternative voice in parliament.

    Do you remember names like Nicole Seah, Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss, Tony Tan and Hazel Poa? Do you know all of them first entered politics by joining the Reform Party when Kenneth stepped up?

    It was the catalyst for all the political awakening that followed, leading up to the watershed GE2011.

    In fact, Kenneth was a sought-after star catch then. Both the Workers’ Party (WP) and Chiam See Tong’s Singapore People’s Party (SPP) courted Kenneth to join them in contesting GE2011. If he did, he would probably be in parliament by now.

    Yes, there were pitfalls. Maybe Kenneth is not a strong leader; many of the strong members in the Reform Party walked out to join the National Solidarity Party (NSP) and other political parties.

    The Reform Party still managed to muster enough resources to contest in 6-members Ang Mo Kio GRC and 5-members West Coast GRC in GE2011. Not bad for a new political party. The Ang Mo Kio team was a motley crue, assembled last minute, but credits to Kenneth for at least putting up a fight there versus a walkover.

    The party lost in both GRCs, polling 33.34% of valid votes in West Coast and 30.67% in Ang Mo Kio. For GE2015, the Reform Party is back to contest in the two GRCs plus Radin Mas SMC.

    Kenneth tends to take things too seriously. We all know the phrase “don’t feed the trolls”. Not Kenneth Jeyaretnam. He was baited into a silly quarrel with Singapore’s top online troll, SMRT Ltd (Feedback), getting ridiculed as “jeyababy” among other names.

    It stemmed from Kenneth making police reports over alleged threats made to his family members after he entered politics. Other opposition politicians like Chiam See Tong had such encounters too, but chose to laugh it off or kept it out of the public’s eyes.

    Kenneth is also always quick to speak for those who are the most marginalised, like Roy Ngerng and Amos Yee. It is almost political suicide for any politicians to get themselves associated with these guys. Nonetheless, we do need someone on the far-left of the political spectrum who dare speak when others keep quiet. Imagine one day if you get wrongly arrested under the ISA; you can count on someone like Kenneth to speak for you. Probaby not WP nor the PAP.

    In the eyes of many Singaporeans, these are stupid actions, but it also tells you Kenneth sticks to his values on democracy and freedom of expression, just like his late father. Even if it means losing votes.

    The dumbest thing he did was to contest the by-election in Punggol East SMC in 2013. Kenneth obtained only 1.2% of the valid votes in a rare 4-cornered fight. The victory went to Lee Li Lian of the WP. This greatly damaged the reputation of the Reform Party as a credible opposition party which can pull votes.

    Some stuff he did right – his scrutiny on the minute details of policies, particularly in the field of economics. His favourite targets include the CPF, the GIC and Temasek. Kenneth was the one who flagged the technicality involving a US$4 billion IMF loan commitment from our government, challenging it all the way to court. He is a policy hack.

    One of his biggest folly is probably to allow all sorts of people to contest under the Reform Party. Voters view candidates as a team. If your team mates keep scoring own goals and make weird faux pas, you get dragged in the mud.

    Maybe he should have went for a SMC first before gunning for a GRC. After all, his father won his first election in the single seat of Anson which has now disappeared from the electoral map.

    Kenneth Jeyaretnam may not be the most engaging of speakers, but go listen to him, read his blog and find out more about him before writing him and the Reform Party off as a political lightweight.

     

    Source: http://alvinology.com

     

  • Calon Reform Party, Noraini Yunus, Utarakan Isu COE Mahal Dan Usahanya Untuk Lanjutkan Pengkhidmatan Pengangkutan Awam

    Calon Reform Party, Noraini Yunus, Utarakan Isu COE Mahal Dan Usahanya Untuk Lanjutkan Pengkhidmatan Pengangkutan Awam

    Calon Parti Reform (RP), Cik Noraini Yunus, mengutarakan isu harga Sijil Hak Memiliki (COE) kenderaan yang mahal, serta usahanya untuk mendapatkan lanjutan khidmat pengangkutan awam.

    Beliau, yang bertanding di GRC West Coast, berkata demikian semasa berucap di rapat pilihan raya di West Coast Walk malam ini.

    “Pengangkutan awam juga tidak beroperasi selama 24 jam. Saya pernah berusaha untuk mendapatkan lanjutan tempoh untuk dapatkan khidmat bas atau MRT, tapi dikatakan tak ada penumpang.

    “Jadi mereka menolak cadangan saya untuk dapatkan khidmat 24 jam seperti di negara-negara maju di Boston dan sebagainya, di Amerika,” ujar Cik Noraini.

    Source: http://berita.mediacorp.sg