<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Not as simple a set-up as it looks
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I HAVE doubts about some of the points raised in Mr Gilbert Goh's letter on Wednesday, 'Two-party system better'.
First, the claim that elected politicians will not want to raise divergent views on various issues, 'for fear of being branded', raises questions on the credibility of the politician rather than that of a single-party system. Past parliamentary sessions have seen Members of Parliament (MPs) from the ruling party take Cabinet ministers to task over issues that concern Singaporeans, even though they are from the same party.
Second, it is fallacious to assume that a two-party system will provide greater political transparency. If the examples of countries that practise two-party systems of government are anything to go by, a two-party system will encourage backroom politicking, and raise the potential of party politics overshadowing the pertinent needs facing the country. Unpopular, but necessary, decisions such as CPF cuts during the 1997 Asian financial crisis would likely have been delayed or worse, failed to pass, as it is easy to oppose such moves and score political brownie points.
My last point of contention is the implication that a two-party system can somehow be implanted onto the Singapore political scene. Two-party systems do not just happen. Rather, countries that practise the two-party system have political parties that have cultivated wide support among the electorate, and established themselves by offering real alternatives to pressing issues. As yet, Singapore does not have a credible voice from alternative parties that can truly provide divergent views in the policy-making process. Politicians from outside the ruling party have largely confined themselves to criticising policies without offering realistic and workable solutions. We cannot create a two-party system out of nothing.
To have one dominant party as the steward of Singapore's future may be uncomfortable to some, but it is a system that has served our country well in a fast-evolving global landscape that calls for swift and decisive executive decisions. Singapore is simply too small to afford the risk of political deadlock that so often characterises two-party systems of government. Tim Mou Hui
http://www.facebook.com/people/Tim-Mou-Hui/718515345
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I HAVE doubts about some of the points raised in Mr Gilbert Goh's letter on Wednesday, 'Two-party system better'.
First, the claim that elected politicians will not want to raise divergent views on various issues, 'for fear of being branded', raises questions on the credibility of the politician rather than that of a single-party system. Past parliamentary sessions have seen Members of Parliament (MPs) from the ruling party take Cabinet ministers to task over issues that concern Singaporeans, even though they are from the same party.
Second, it is fallacious to assume that a two-party system will provide greater political transparency. If the examples of countries that practise two-party systems of government are anything to go by, a two-party system will encourage backroom politicking, and raise the potential of party politics overshadowing the pertinent needs facing the country. Unpopular, but necessary, decisions such as CPF cuts during the 1997 Asian financial crisis would likely have been delayed or worse, failed to pass, as it is easy to oppose such moves and score political brownie points.
My last point of contention is the implication that a two-party system can somehow be implanted onto the Singapore political scene. Two-party systems do not just happen. Rather, countries that practise the two-party system have political parties that have cultivated wide support among the electorate, and established themselves by offering real alternatives to pressing issues. As yet, Singapore does not have a credible voice from alternative parties that can truly provide divergent views in the policy-making process. Politicians from outside the ruling party have largely confined themselves to criticising policies without offering realistic and workable solutions. We cannot create a two-party system out of nothing.
To have one dominant party as the steward of Singapore's future may be uncomfortable to some, but it is a system that has served our country well in a fast-evolving global landscape that calls for swift and decisive executive decisions. Singapore is simply too small to afford the risk of political deadlock that so often characterises two-party systems of government. Tim Mou Hui
http://www.facebook.com/people/Tim-Mou-Hui/718515345
