- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
Dec 12, 2009
'Cooling-off' period may shift goal posts further
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
I REFER to Wednesday's commentary, 'No need to sweat over 'cooling-off' period'.
The proposed change could be seen as shifting the goal posts further, given the fact that in past election campaigns, mainstream media did not give equal coverage to opposition parties. It is hard to define the parameters of 'ban' on political activities when the ruling party makes the rules.
These are my arguments and concerns:
If the ruling party believes that MPs should win over voters' trust during the four to five years between general elections then the 'cooling-off' period is not necessary.
On the other hand, if voters cannot judge the competence and performance of their MPs over the same period, would it make them think calmly over the electoral choice with one extra day? If new candidates of opposition parties can convince voters of their capability and integrity during the nine days of campaign, would one day to 'cool off' make any difference?
If mainstream media accords equal time to the electioneering activities of all political parties, instead of focusing more on incumbent Cabinet ministers, then the one-day cooling-off period is meaningful in terms of giving voters time to think over who to choose.
With telecommunication networks and Internet connectivity so closely linked and difficult to control, how to ensure the playing field is level during those 24 hours of 'cooling off'?
Over the past four decades, there have been no untoward incidents during Election Day. So the risk of public disorder is very low here.
Paul Chan Poh Hoi
'Cooling-off' period may shift goal posts further
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
I REFER to Wednesday's commentary, 'No need to sweat over 'cooling-off' period'.
The proposed change could be seen as shifting the goal posts further, given the fact that in past election campaigns, mainstream media did not give equal coverage to opposition parties. It is hard to define the parameters of 'ban' on political activities when the ruling party makes the rules.
These are my arguments and concerns:
If the ruling party believes that MPs should win over voters' trust during the four to five years between general elections then the 'cooling-off' period is not necessary.
On the other hand, if voters cannot judge the competence and performance of their MPs over the same period, would it make them think calmly over the electoral choice with one extra day? If new candidates of opposition parties can convince voters of their capability and integrity during the nine days of campaign, would one day to 'cool off' make any difference?
If mainstream media accords equal time to the electioneering activities of all political parties, instead of focusing more on incumbent Cabinet ministers, then the one-day cooling-off period is meaningful in terms of giving voters time to think over who to choose.
With telecommunication networks and Internet connectivity so closely linked and difficult to control, how to ensure the playing field is level during those 24 hours of 'cooling off'?
Over the past four decades, there have been no untoward incidents during Election Day. So the risk of public disorder is very low here.
Paul Chan Poh Hoi