But why is it a good thing?
to stop the MIW from bulldozing unfavorable policies at their whims and fancy
But why is it a good thing?
Wrong. Asking probing questions is about changing the behaviour of the government.
The problem is that you are still fixed in the mindset of "how are we going to get seats in parliament" and not yet the deeper question of what people in parliament are actually supposed to do.
Parliament is a lawmaking body. The other function of parliament is to decide who forms the executive, but forming the executive is so far away that we don't really care about it now. And even then, the cabinet of a government is like the rider of a horse. If the rider cannot control the horse then it's also no use.
They will be debating issues that have more impact on the kopitiam uncles than help with the parking tickets and kissing babies. Things like education policy which determines what kind of schools people go to, health policy which determines how many people get to see the doctor. Most important in the day and age we live in are housing policy, which determines our most serious problem - the supply and demand of new flats and therefore the price of housing. And the direction of the economy, such as what businesses should make up the Singapore economy. And they can also mobilise people to write letters to their PAP MPs to complain about stupid decisions.
Also, people who say that nobody really cares about government policy didn't really factor in the protests against the 6.9 million population white paper.
Opposition people are voted in because people have the perception that they have the power to change things. But you have to realise that people who take seats away from the PAP to do exactly the same thing as what the PAP would have done are actually worse than the PAP, because they take away all the time and energy and hope that you put into "the opposition" and you end up with exactly zero results. Now it's not true that the WP are not doing or saying anything in parliament, but clearly they could use a little more help in their ability to criticise PAP policy.
At the moment, it's not even about what people think about the opposition performance. The biggest factor in the polling numbers, even now, is how dissatisfied people are with the PAP. And the WP is still ahead of the other opposition parties in terms of brand name recognition. But it's a very big shame if in this interim period, when the opposition is gaining strength but still in the minority, the opposition doesn't have a voice in the running of Singapore. That means that the PAP can carry on like the good old days. They can keep on entrenching the interests of the ruling class, the elites. It will be even more difficult to reverse the policies when the time comes for the opposition to be powerful enough to do so. You're almost forgetting why we have an opposition in the first place.
Why a "world class parliament"? They've sold very well the idea that more opposition in the parliament is a good thing. But why is it a good thing?
to stop the MIW from bulldozing unfavorable policies at their whims and fancy
Since the introduction of town councils in the 1980s and the role of MPs in their running, the role of backbenchers changed significantly from parliament to that of the constituency. As such, there is no comparison with the situation elsewhere.
Voters despise those who are too full of themselves and offer purely parliamentary grandstanding.
The voters bear some responsibility for making their own lives better. If they aren't able to understand the larger issues then they deserve to get fucked anyway.
Ultimately the thing that counted against him was the prior information. The economist John Maynard Keynes, when he was trying to explain the stock market, said that it was like a beauty competition, where the judges do not vote based on how beautiful he thinks the contestants are, but rather how beautiful he thinks other people think the contestant is. So I'm sure that there are a lot of people who decided that KJ was their favourite candidate, but they read the ground sentiment and realised that LLL was going to win, or at least she was the most viable non-PAP candidate. So they voted for her instead. Which is the rational thing to do in our fucked up first past the post legacy British system.
Remember that Punggol East was two rounds. First round, everybody realised that Desmond Lim wasn't going to get voted. He still managed 5%. Second round, many of the 5% switched to LLL, and KJ + Desmond Lim was less than 5%.
Wrong. Asking probing questions is about changing the behaviour of the government.
The problem is that you are still fixed in the mindset of "how are we going to get seats in parliament" and not yet the deeper question of what people in parliament are actually supposed to do.
Parliament is a lawmaking body. The other function of parliament is to decide who forms the executive, but forming the executive is so far away that we don't really care about it now. And even then, the cabinet of a government is like the rider of a horse. If the rider cannot control the horse then it's also no use.
They will be debating issues that have more impact on the kopitiam uncles than help with the parking tickets and kissing babies. Things like education policy which determines what kind of schools people go to, health policy which determines how many people get to see the doctor. Most important in the day and age we live in are housing policy, which determines our most serious problem - the supply and demand of new flats and therefore the price of housing. And the direction of the economy, such as what businesses should make up the Singapore economy. And they can also mobilise people to write letters to their PAP MPs to complain about stupid decisions.
Also, people who say that nobody really cares about government policy didn't really factor in the protests against the 6.9 million population white paper.
Opposition people are voted in because people have the perception that they have the power to change things. But you have to realise that people who take seats away from the PAP to do exactly the same thing as what the PAP would have done are actually worse than the PAP, because they take away all the time and energy and hope that you put into "the opposition" and you end up with exactly zero results. Now it's not true that the WP are not doing or saying anything in parliament, but clearly they could use a little more help in their ability to criticise PAP policy.
At the moment, it's not even about what people think about the opposition performance. The biggest factor in the polling numbers, even now, is how dissatisfied people are with the PAP. And the WP is still ahead of the other opposition parties in terms of brand name recognition. But it's a very big shame if in this interim period, when the opposition is gaining strength but still in the minority, the opposition doesn't have a voice in the running of Singapore. That means that the PAP can carry on like the good old days. They can keep on entrenching the interests of the ruling class, the elites. It will be even more difficult to reverse the policies when the time comes for the opposition to be powerful enough to do so. You're almost forgetting why we have an opposition in the first place.
Why a "world class parliament"? They've sold very well the idea that more opposition in the parliament is a good thing. But why is it a good thing?
tanwahp said that Michelle had "migrated with her husband to some Asian country where the husband works as a lawyer. If it is true she will not be able to serve in any party."
Michelle has not emigrated. She's still a Singapore citizen. She's based in a foreign country where her husband works. I stand by this fact.
So I'm sure that there are a lot of people who decided that KJ was their favourite candidate, but they read the ground sentiment and realised that LLL was going to win, or at least she was the most viable non-PAP candidate. So they voted for her instead. Which is the rational thing to do in our fucked up first past the post legacy British system.
Your reason -- of prior information -- is not very sound. Kindly note that many people left RP at various points in time. First it lost 2 chairmen in succession, then it lost a large group of viable candidates that ultimately joined NSP weeks before GE2011, then it lost Gilbert Goh, and then just days before nomination day Alec Tok left as well despite being the RP rep at the Channel 8 pre-GE debate. (How embarrassing can that be!) Then after the GE, RP lost more people. All this was well before Punggol East. No point speculating what is left in RP after Punggol East. That would be pure speculation, or, as someone here would say, simply "conjecture". But I put it to you that all those who left saw something that repulsed them. It is significant that none who left have had a nice thing to say about their experience. And I put it to you again that that is exactly the same thing that voters saw in Punggol East. It has got nothing to do with "prior information" in the way your describe it.
If people are in denial that they are not electable at all, even if gifted a straight fight, then that is a matter for them.
Incidentally, KJ and DL secured under 2% combined, and not "less than 5%". (The combined total was 1.77%, even below the 3% I had predicted for both at the time.)
Well, there are people who always get deserted by their own party members, but still manage to get elected time after time. People like Chiam See Tong. K Jeyaretnam, at least for me, still made a lot of good points querying what happened to all the Temasek money, and feeding questions to Christopher Balding. Even though there were a whole lot of factors which made him unelectable. Like that bloody British accent.
Less than 2% is less than 5%. The 5% figure was based on what Desmond polled in GE 2011, which is my main point - the 4% of the people, the majority of the people who voted Desmond in 2011 took this information into account and voted against Desmond. And in spite of the fact that there were some people who still voted KJ, the combined total was less than 2%. This was an election that was expected to be very very tight and not the relatively comfortable margin of victory that it turned out to be. Everybody knew how three cornered fights work because of the presidential elections. Everybody knew that a vote for KJ or DL would potentially mean the difference between colorectal surgeon and LLL winning that seat. So they voted for WP. It was the tactical voting that killed KJ.
At least SDP understood tactical voting well enough to realise that they had to either win that seat or not contest at all.
Voting for the more viable party doesn't occur only in a first-past-the-post system.
Indonesia is a proportional representation system and 50% of the votes go to only 3 out of 39 contesting parties. We can't say voters of the other 36 parties decided to vote for these 3 parties because either one of the 3 was going to win.
SDP understood nothing. They played a fool with that "I enter parliament, you run the town council" joke. then they had the gall to compare it to the UK's coalition government.
They pulled out, and it was a great decision. They made horrible mistakes but they did not make the most horrible mistake of all. They turned away from the cliff. KJ on the other hand walked off that cliff.
It was nothing--they still lost face. If you think they are a great party, please join and see if you are selected
K Jeyaretnam, at least for me, still made a lot of good points querying what happened to all the Temasek money, and feeding questions to Christopher Balding. Even though there were a whole lot of factors which made him unelectable. Like that bloody British accent.
u reckon tjs will mount a coup de tete like csj ?
You do realise that if KJ had gotten 10% of the vote, they would have come out of LLL's share, and she would have lost. That is the real reason why he would not even have gotten those 10%.
Just out of curiosity: what did he say about WP at Yale?