NSP to adopt “minister-specific” strategy in next elections

[scroobal]

Please do. 10% is miles away from your 80% but might as well name all you consider as professionals in order to reach at least 10%. It will be a good exercise.

2%? If I name 5 out of 47 candidates who are professionals, it's already 10% and you'll lose. Don't be your usual too quick to shoot your mouth.

I have not said that opposition or voters should hanker after candidates who are professionals. It is only to point out the invalidity of this that people try to disguise as a supposed fact. In this case I do not think the opposition intentionally wanted to field professionals, only that the fear has subsisted since LKY days and you no longer get bicycle thieves to lose and the pool has become bigger. Numbers of degrees and occupations have increased.

BTW passion is a default. You wouldn't join if you do not have it. Might as well be the 10 friends in Starbucks.

 

[jw5]

Not a single soul can can state his crime. All the PAP kept claiming was that he was a Chinese chauvinist. That turned out to be joke when he fled to JB and stayed with a very good friend who is a Malay. How many Chinese can be housed in a Malay home and this was certainly not a good occasion.

Does this then prove that Singaporean voters are "not so clever"?

 

[scroobal]

Its shows that there is a climate of fear. No one is prepared to question the authorities.

In countries where dictatorship and totalitarianism prevails such as the former Warsaw Bloc, N Korea, Iraq, etc, one does not assume that people are not clever nor intelligent.

They risk putting their families and themselves at risk. There might not be physical harm in Singapore, but ruining someone can still occur.

Does this then prove that Singaporean voters are "not so clever"?

 

[Sideswipe]

I treat this as separate but important issue to address thus a separate post. In a parliamentary system, where the checks and balances are considerably less than a presidential system, the mandate is the key platform for having checks and balances. There is an ocean of difference between holding "2 and 30" opposition seats.

The logic that 30 opposition MPs are just as effective as 2 opposition MPs are mind boggling to even figure how that is so.With PAP having lost 2 seats, they have every right to think that 98% of Singaporeans are right behind them.

I agree with what you say PAP mindset will be humbler, more welfare, listen more to the peasants if they lose 30, not 2 seats in parliament.


With PAP having lost 2 seats, they have every right to think that 98% of Singaporeans are right behind them.

Ultimately, our elections biggest problems is the Electoral System. Westminster - first past the post, winners take all methods.

Technically - PAP won 98% of seats with 66% of nationwide votes but with 1/3 of votes against them.

so how do you measure PAP mandate to rule Singapore?
95% of Parliamentary Seats or 66% votes gathered are outstanding results but are the combined Oppositions really condemned by the peasants? I don't think so - 33% of nationwide votes is not little.

If we copy Israel complete PR Parliamentary system. We can have 66 PAP MPs and 34 Oppositions MPs in a 100 seats Parliaments. Now suddenly our Oppositions are not so weak.

The election system is flawed. PAP has deceived the peasants into thinking their votes deservedly gave them 98% of seats and a strong mandate to rule when clearly it's not.

Admittedly, I don't like "first past the post system." which need some sort of PR system combined to be fairer for all.

 

[scroobal]

Agree with you. The first past the post system is flawed when it comes to a situation where the incumbent keeps raising the bar until it is no longer a levelo playing field. When they first introduced GRC, they said that it will be only 4 but after the 1991 debacle it jumped.

Australia and a number of countries have proportional representation where voices are covered.

By the way only 33% of eligible singaporeans voted for the PAP as the rest did not have chance to vote. Its poor reflection of PAP's version of democracy when only 33% of eligible voters had a say in government.;

Admittedly, I don't like "first past the post system." which need some sort of PR system combined to be fairer for all.

 

[Perspective]

Please do. 10% is miles away from your 80% but might as well name all you consider as professionals in order to reach at least 10%. It will be a good exercise.

I think singling out all names puts down the non-professions, but it is at least 3 out of 5 in every GRC.

I shall name some in case you think it's a faux pas. You would agree that Sylvia Lim is one. Others like Chiam, Ling How Doong, Tan Wui Hua, Reno Fong, Lian Chin Way, Chia Ti Lik, Tan Bin Seng, Vincent Yeo, Desmond Lim, Mohd Hamim etc. are what is generally in a profession.

If they are not, I won't reduce the 80%. Rather, I would reduce PAP's 99%.

 

[Perspective]

Honestly I think the whole argument can turn into a deadlock. Voting for an opposition of any kind takes into account the national interests because of the lack of check and balance. However, no one can argue that at your own constituency interests, voting for a better candidate doesn't make sense, ironically because the PAP made it in such a way that the MP has to take care of municipal issues and half fail here.

The fact is that with nothing to offer and even if I do not ask for qualifications or professions, many in the opposition cannot get their act together. Let me give an example.

Years back at a coffeeshop, I've encountered the former sec gen of a particular opposition party. He approached an old man and then they got into a conversation. Moments later, the sec gen was gestulating wildly, raised his voice because I could hear what he was saying from a distance and his disposition was rather unfriendly. Mind you, this is a SG. I can see the old man was offended, but just smiled. Another time I heard an opp candidate getting into a tiff with my friend's neighbour.

Like I said, I'm not expecting superior men, but it's surprising that they cannot behave like normal men. Even strangers don't do wildmen. Even men on the street knows how to show courtesy. Just learn how to carry themselves properly will do, even for PSLE graduates I will vote. They should reflect on that and not be spoiled by the argument that they are clear, absolute votables because opp is lacking, which is what I think prevents them from bucking up such as controlling their tempers, be more considerate.

 

[scroobal]

You are in trouble with the few that you have given. Doctors, Lawyers not a problem. As they have professional board registration or Engineers with PE. And those that have attained Exec mgmt status in large corporations. Typically others that require statutory regulation fall into the category as well.

It has more to do with the vocation and the responsibility. Though demanding academic qualifications are pre requisties for professional registration. Holding a few PHDs does not qualify you as a professional. Someone with Primary 6 but has become a CEO of an large corporation of influence and therefore a captain of industry is regarded as a professionals. There is a steward in SIA who holds a PHD and he is certainly not one.

Sr Lecturers in Universities yes, not polys etc. The proper term to use is Tertiary Educated for what you are looking at.

Besides the doctors and lawyers who are obviously professionals, Chee is certainly a professional. Frankly, I can't think of anyone else.

I think singling out all names puts down the non-professions, but it is at least 3 out of 5 in every GRC.

I shall name some in case you think it's a faux pas. You would agree that Sylvia Lim is one. Others like Chiam, Ling How Doong, Tan Wui Hua, Reno Fong, Lian Chin Way, Chia Ti Lik, Tan Bin Seng, Vincent Yeo, Desmond Lim, Mohd Hamim etc. are what is generally in a profession.

If they are not, I won't reduce the 80%. Rather, I would reduce PAP's 99%.

 

[kingrant]

I will put it this way. In the absence of quality or decent opposition, most people assume that they have to vote for the incumbent, in this case the PAP. And the PAP knows that very well.

So the PAP as Ngiam Tong Dong has clearly pointed out has decided to have a monopoly of those with quality. Offers have been made and conditions created where they are looked after.

The end result is that voters continue to vote in one party. As far as the PAP is concerned the votes cast is reflective of great govt. Its does not reflect the lack of quality in terms of opposition candidate.

We have been conditioned that we can't think out of the box. We will never cast spoit votes, neither will we seek to force voting of an opposition bloc without removing the government.

We spend our time worrying that "Murugan" is not good enough. We will never take the opportunity to send the PAP a signal that singaporeans are not happy. We will never send them a message that Singapore cannot afford to tie it future with only one party. We will never worry that putting all our eggs in one basket is foolish. We never ask ourselves why every 1st world country without exception has at a miinimum a 2 party system with no single party having control of a 1st world country for 50 years non stop.

When the old man refused to charge his ex-head of security branch (the body that looked after his family and that PAP cabinet and therefore custodian of secrets) for embezzlements of thousands of dollars while we charge a young girl for shoplifting a lipstick and the attendent mandatory jail term set by his ex-classmate Yong Pung How, you know that there are other things that hidden from gullible singaporeans who still look forsomeone better than "Murugan".

Did it ever occur to you that the PAP will realise that Singaporeans are fed up if bicycles thieves and "Murugans" are voted as it shows that these are protest votes. I hope you know what protest votes are?

Bravo, bro! Well said! When David has to fight Goliath, any weapon will do. Cut him down to size and eat him morsel by morsel if need be. Old man has a long dirty history of lying, cheating, framing his Opponents with crimes that he didnt want proven (cos they were trumped up), misusing info and abusing the state apparatus to preserve his own survival. Just read the book Fajar Generation borrowed from the NLB. Surprising it carried copies.

 

[kingrant]

Its shows that there is a climate of fear. No one is prepared to question the authorities.

In countries where dictatorship and totalitarianism prevails such as the former Warsaw Bloc, N Korea, Iraq, etc, one does not assume that people are not clever nor intelligent.

They risk putting their families and themselves at risk. There might not be physical harm in Singapore, but ruining someone can still occur.

Now a diffferent kind of fear from previous one of the ballot stub with the serial number - fear of a freak election! Old Man knows Singaporeans well enough and has created and played up the fear. I sensed this fear in the posts here. Manifested when even supposedly politically conscious people harp on getting good quality Opp members, etc. So they play safe and vote the incumbent and we keep asking ourselves why there is no Opposition in Parliament and why the PAP arrrogance wont go away. People dont realise that PAP has rigged the system in such a way that freak elections are no longer possible, what with the enlarged GRCs etc. so it is safe to deal them a mortal blow by casting protest votes.

 

[scroobal]

Bro, many people all over the world were critical as well as complimentary of the old man and the success of Singapore achieved. Some considered the situation as an enigma, a paradox but it was Samuel Huntington that put his finger on it.

Basically, a benevolent dictator who has built a series of government institutions that facilites excellent control, clinical efficiency and little wastage. However in the wrong hands - singaporeans will soon discover that there no adequate checks and balances, no separations of duties or powers and euphemism for nepotism is now meritoracy. Signs are already there.

By then it will be too late. Like many Indonesians over the years who hedge their bets by placing their wealth outside their own country and taking PR and citizenship elsewhere while they milk Indonesia, Singapore elite and professionals are beginning to do the same.

I think we all can agree that Singapore is great place to do business but building nationhood is a different proposition altogether.

Bravo, bro! Well said! When David has to fight Goliath, any weapon will do. Cut him down to size and eat him morsel by morsel if need be. Old man has a long dirty history of lying, cheating, framing his Opponents with crimes that he didnt want proven (cos they were trumped up), misusing info and abusing the state apparatus to preserve his own survival. Just read the book Fajar Generation borrowed from the NLB. Surprising it carried copies.

 

[scroobal]

How brilliant is that. Past 80 years of age and he still can instill fear. No longer direct but creating a climate of fear.

Now a diffferent kind of fear from previous one of the ballot stub with the serial number - fear of a freak election! Old Man knows Singaporeans well enough and has created and played up the fear. .

 

[kingrant]

Bro, many people all over the world were critical as well as complimentary of the old man and the success of Singapore achieved. Some considered the situation as an enigma, a paradox but it was Samuel Huntington that put his finger on it.

Basically, a benevolent dictator who has built a series of government institutions that facilites excellent control, clinical efficiency and little wastage. However in the wrong hands - singaporeans will soon discover that there no adequate checks and balances, no separations of duties or powers and euphemism for nepotism is now meritoracy. Signs are already there.

By then it will be too late. Like many Indonesians over the years who hedge their bets by placing their wealth outside their own country and taking PR and citizenship elsewhere while they milk Indonesia, Singapore elite and professionals are beginning to do the same.

I think we all can agree that Singapore is great place to do business but building nationhood is a different proposition altogether.

Spot on! History full of examples. Hitler was elected Chancellor, then manipulated and manoeuvred the system and indulged in scaremongering, imprisoned or eliminated enemies and blackmailed Parliament and the whole of Germany into handling him full powers as Fuhrer. The rest was history. Alan Bullock's Hitler: A study in Tyranny.

 

[scroobal]

yes, yes, great stuff bro.

And history tells us that Hitler was a nationalist who loved his country with a passion. He meant well and destroyed a nation and a generation of germans to boot.

Spot on! History full of examples. Hitler was elected Chancellor, then manipulated and manoeuvred the system and indulged in scaremongering, imprisoned or eliminated enemies and blackmailed Parliament and the whole of Germany into handling him full powers as Fuhrer. The rest was history. Alan Bullock's Hitler: A study in Tyranny.

 

[Perspective]

You are in trouble with the few that you have given. Doctors, Lawyers not a problem. As they have professional board registration or Engineers with PE. And those that have attained Exec mgmt status in large corporations. Typically others that require statutory regulation fall into the category as well.

It has more to do with the vocation and the responsibility. Though demanding academic qualifications are pre requisties for professional registration. Holding a few PHDs does not qualify you as a professional. Someone with Primary 6 but has become a CEO of an large corporation of influence and therefore a captain of industry is regarded as a professionals. There is a steward in SIA who holds a PHD and he is certainly not one.

Sr Lecturers in Universities yes, not polys etc. The proper term to use is Tertiary Educated for what you are looking at.

Besides the doctors and lawyers who are obviously professionals, Chee is certainly a professional. Frankly, I can't think of anyone else.

We can put it down to professionals being professional career that churns professional money, professional in a field or something of job profession and category.

At the end of the day, the point is that the distinguishment between the PAP and opp is not as wide as some tries to portray it. That's the point. People still have the impression that 9 out of 10 opp candidates are street peddlars selling otah or loafers without reading.

 

[scroobal]

Never attempt to compare the opposition candidates academic or vocational background with the PAP. You will lose hands down. The reason is that it is indeed very wide.

The best approach is not allowing the PAP to dictate standards, benchmark candidates or allow them to set the agenda. In 2006, WP stunned the PAP by not allowing the latter to set the agenda or hijack the manifesto debate.

We should be promoting the opposition candidates other qualifications such as commitment, fearlessness, passion, know the people and the ground, community work, etc.

SDP has fallen into this trap by being defensive and being coy about the background of their CEC. The other parties however are upfront about their CEC background and putting clear profiles. These parties therefore can concentrate on their candidates" other good attributes.

We can put it down to professionals being professional career that churns professional money, professional in a field or something of job profession and category.

At the end of the day, the point is that the distinguishment between the PAP and opp is not as wide as some tries to portray it. That's the point. People still have the impression that 9 out of 10 opp candidates are street peddlars selling otah or loafers without reading.

 

[Perspective]

Never attempt to compare the opposition candidates academic or vocational background with the PAP. You will lose hands down. The reason is that it is indeed very wide.

I agree, but is it really that wide?

Recalled that Zainuddin was a lecturer, and his minister in the same GRC (WKS) was a teacher. Irene Ng was a mere reporter, there are also 2 lawyers in the same GRC. All that's very mundane.

 

[Sideswipe]

the biggest problems is the average peasants ( that included the well educated ) don't understand our electoral system and democracy.

A parliament should represent the combined mandate of the peasants, every votes should count, no wasted votes. all political parties should be represented in a mature democracy.

Most don't understand the need for PR representation.

Even if we follow ROC parliamentary election system ( most suited for us ), PAP with 66% votes will still have 80%+ of seats, the oppositions would just win a few more seats because of PR. But I don't care which party win what. I just like to see a fairer election method.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Scroobal and Perspective

Honestly " Professional Qualifications" cannot be ignored. It is a requirement, however one should never get into an academic equivalent of a my penis is bigger then ur penis kindergarden comparison exercise with the PAP.

The other attributes matter a lot more but some educational attributes must serve as a base.




Locke

 

[scroobal]

It is bro.

There are however few places reserved for non-professionals to fend off strong PAP factions among the cadre ranks. Case in point is MP Yeo Guat Kwang who is just a chinese teacher but he is a member of the powerful Chinese Teachers faction within the PAP. In the past they people like MK Jabbar who can't even string a proper sentence or a logic argument. The other factions are the unions. SPH does not have a faction but the PAP conventional is to blood them anyway so that their hands are dirty as well. 2 seats, 1 for English and 1 for Chinese language is kept for them.

With the Malay revolt in 2000 by AMP and the discrediting of the then PAP Malay MPs, the PAP has been scrapping the bottom of barrel for their Malay MPs. There is no longer a malay factional group within the PAP that can even influence a feather to move. A Malay community cartel of Malay professionals now makes the move. Essentially as part of the 2000/1 settlement, the Malay interest caretaking role is now outsourced to this group. The deal also includes the running of MUIS.

These non professionals within the PAP MP rank are however few.

I agree, but is it really that wide?

Recalled that Zainuddin was a lecturer, and his minister in the same GRC (WKS) was a teacher. Irene Ng was a mere reporter, there are also 2 lawyers in the same GRC. All that's very mundane.