Shd PM call his sick MP to step down and hold BE in TP GRC soon

[tanwahtiu]

son get his father chap gor cheng minister pay as inheritance. This is double dipping, what else?

 

[Summerbee]

son get his father chap gor cheng minister pay as inheritance. This is double dipping, what else?

The Pope has set a good example by stepping down gracefully. A meritocracy office holder must be able to execute his job properly, without which foreign investors will leave and economy will collapse.

 

[tanwahtiu]

no need to echo the same PAP fearmongering foreign investors leaving.

Foreign companies left Singapore a long time ago. GLCs taken over most major businesses and industries nothing for foreigners except must trade with PAP and no one else.

If PAP collapse, foreign traders still trades with Singapore and will see more competitions and prices coming down.

The Pope has set a good example by stepping down gracefully. A meritocracy office holder must be able to execute his job properly, without which foreign investors will leave and economy will collapse.

 

[songsongpunggol]

i think it is a good idea to step away from a highly stressful job like being an mp.

for god sake he is suffering from serious stroke. not some minor ailments.

 

[steffychun]

GRCs hard to call for BE.

 

[winnipegjets]

Too much a risk to take. If they lose TP GRC in a by-election, LHL will be tossed out immediately.

 

[wwabbit]

Historically, BEs have not been called whenever an MP passed away from a GRC, and there is no requirements to call for a BE.
No reason for that to change now.

 

[Kohliantye]

Too much a risk to take. If they lose TP GRC in a by-election, LHL will be tossed out immediately.

GRCs were started by the inventor so as to prevent an opposition group from "demolishing" the wall of the Parliament.

Cheng San GRC and Eunos GRC sent out some signals to the PAP that it was not Invincible. It was largely ignored.

The Battle of Aljunied GRC showed proof that the invincibility of the PAP machinery is gone.

GRCs were created and is now becoming the same Frankenstein monster that slowly destroyed the inventor.

 

[steffychun]

TP residents wont like non-PAP MPs, given their indoctrination over the years. It's like telling a stormtrooper to obey a Rebel General.

 

[andyfisher]

steffy, stormtrooper is a clone, I think we must give more credit to the tp folks, I am sure many of them got more brains than we give them credit.

TP residents wont like non-PAP MPs, given their indoctrination over the years. It's like telling a stormtrooper to obey a Rebel General.

 

[steffychun]

steffy, stormtrooper is a clone, I think we must give more credit to the tp folks, I am sure many of them got more brains than we give them credit.

Not easy to break people who haven't seen any thing else but PAP for generations

 

[eQuipment]

we were all disillusioned by pinkie's famous phrase "spend more time to fix the oppo"... his toilet paper was his stunt to "fix" sgporns, and is his 3yrs advance resignation notice letter.

seeing that his ragdoll's days r numbered, he wont make the fella resign whatsoever. the vegetable is getting paid to "rest" & busk in all the attention that see-pai-poh has to offer. the day will eventually come when the ragdoll kong-ka-kiaw, and pinkie will suddenly inherit big fat bonus from the departed. with all that moola he can swim & snorkle in, he can just sit back & leave the tap running.

come 2016, he will just turn to his lackeys, pat them on the head for luck, and he scoots out of sinkieland for good. presumeably whore-jinx will also coincidentally quit tumasick and the 2 escape sinkieland & live happily ever after.

gotta keep eyes peeled for their 1 way ticket to whatever non-repatriation nations.

 

[cleareyes]

Not easy to break people who haven't seen any thing else but PAP for generations

Think you have underestimated TP people. Most have not voted in years, in fact, alot of them have not voted at all in their lives, so how could you say they would only vote PAP?

But i do not think PAP will call a BE for TP. It would have been disasterous. I m looking at 45 - 55, PAP losing.

But if a TP BE is called, which opposition party would take part and would we see another MCBE?

Fo once, if this were reallty to take place, I would suggest that WP should sit out of this one. With 7 + 2 MPs, WP has alot on their plate. Its time to see how far the other opposition parties can grow.

 

[ah_phah]

its really sad that ppl dont know how this 超级白 modified westminister constitution functions... theres a difference between SMC & GRC.

SMC is single member constituency, therefore it must never be vacant. if 1 fella kena sack or told to leave, there's a need for the seat to be filled so that the constituents can be represented in parliament.

GRC is group representation constituency, even if half the GRC surrender IC, there's no chance that they will hold by-election, bcos the constituents r still represented by the remaining half.

so, even if oldman suddenly tong-tong-cheng, also wont have a chance to have BE.

 

[steffychun]

Think you have underestimated TP people. Most have not voted in years, in fact, alot of them have not voted at all in their lives, so how could you say they would only vote PAP?

But i do not think PAP will call a BE for TP. It would have been disasterous. I m looking at 45 - 55, PAP losing.

But if a TP BE is called, which opposition party would take part and would we see another MCBE?

Fo once, if this were reallty to take place, I would suggest that WP should sit out of this one. With 7 + 2 MPs, WP has alot on their plate. Its time to see how far the other opposition parties can grow.

You wager quite high. Even if it's a WP Team.

 

[Summerbee]

Historically, BEs have not been called whenever an MP passed away from a GRC, and there is no requirements to call for a BE.
No reason for that to change now.

Historically, there is no concept of GRCs. The people decide what they want, not a party. You want to talk about history, there is no GRCs in history.

There are very strong reasons why people of TP deserved a BE.

They did not have a chance to particpate in the GE because of a ridiculous 35 sec matter. TP residents deserved to exercise their voting rights.

They also deserved a MP that can execute his daily work properly, something LKY cannot do. When is the last time he hold a frequent MPS every week? Or house-to-house visit? The residents need a proper functioning MP not some grassroot stand in.

Not holding a BE for TP residents reflects their lack of confidence in LKY's work in TP, and again foreign investors might fled and our economy might collapse.

 

[steffychun]

Historically, there is no concept of GRCs. The people decide what they want, not a party. You want to talk about history, there is no GRCs in history.

There are very strong reasons why people of TP deserved a BE.

They did not have a chance to particpate in the GE because of a ridiculous 35 sec matter. TP residents deserved to exercise their voting rights.

They also deserved a MP that can execute his daily work properly, something LKY cannot do. When is the last time he hold a frequent MPS every week? Or house-to-house visit? The residents need a proper functioning MP not some grassroot stand in.

Not holding a BE for TP residents reflects their lack of confidence in LKY's work in TP, and again foreign investors might fled and our economy might collapse.

35 secs. All due to mechanic voice Yam.

 

[HTOLAS]

Not true. Until the Court of Appeal decides otherwise, the PM has ABSOLUTE discretion on whether to hold a by-election or not, whether it is an SMC or a GRC.

This, combined with the law that requires a member to vacate his seat if he loses his party membership, is very dangerous. This is because first, it allows the PAPzis to sack any of their own members if these members defy them. These members lose their seats.

Second, the PM does not have to fill the vacated seats. This means that the PAPzis can continue to function even when a large percentage of their members rebel against them. That in turn means that a small group of PAPzis (as long as they have more seats than the opposition) can control all affairs in Singapore. And as long as they hold more than 2/3 of filled seats (currently, they need only 28) in the house, they can do anything they want with the constitution.

This is why we must at the very least break the 2/3 majority of the PAPzis.

its really sad that ppl dont know how this 超级白 modified westminister constitution functions... theres a difference between SMC & GRC.

SMC is single member constituency, therefore it must never be vacant. if 1 fella kena sack or told to leave, there's a need for the seat to be filled so that the constituents can be represented in parliament.

GRC is group representation constituency, even if half the GRC surrender IC, there's no chance that they will hold by-election, bcos the constituents r still represented by the remaining half.

so, even if oldman suddenly tong-tong-cheng, also wont have a chance to have BE.

 

[jw5]

Not true. Until the Court of Appeal decides otherwise, the PM has ABSOLUTE discretion on whether to hold a by-election or not, whether it is an SMC or a GRC.

This, combined with the law that requires a member to vacate his seat if he loses his party membership, is very dangerous. This is because first, it allows the PAPzis to sack any of their own members if these members defy them. These members lose their seats.

Second, the PM does not have to fill the vacated seats. This means that the PAPzis can continue to function even when a large percentage of their members rebel against them. That in turn means that a small group of PAPzis (as long as they have more seats than the opposition) can control all affairs in Singapore. And as long as they hold more than 2/3 of filled seats (currently, they need only 28) in the house, they can do anything they want with the constitution.

This is why we must at the very least break the 2/3 majority of the PAPzis.

I agree with your last sentence, but why should the point about MPs having to vacate their seats if they lose their party membership, bother you?

Firstly, the MPs got elected on their party ticket, whether pap or opposition. It's not that unfair that they should lose their seats if they lose their party membership.

Secondly, why bother about someone who professed loyalty to the pappies and then later changed his mind when it didn't suit him or when he annoyed some party bigwig?

Under current political conditions, if he really wanted things to be better for the country and the people, he wouldn't have joined pap.
That's the question that I kept asking Koh PK pre Punggol East BE.

 

[HTOLAS]

When choosing MPs, the electorate looks at both their party affiliations and the candidates. So, it's not so clear-cut that losing one's party membership would lead to the loss of the seat. The law was put in place to prevent defections that led to unstable governments. But one side-effect has been to hand too much power to the party. I believe there's a middle ground - any MP resigning from his party should lose his seat, but if the party sacks him, he should be allowed to retain his seat.

Second, I would even accept this law as it is if the PM did not have such overwhelming discretion over calling by-elections. A combination of these two is a recipe for serious abuse.

I agree with your last sentence, but why should the point about MPs having to vacate their seats if they lose their party membership, bother you?

Firstly, the MPs got elected on their party ticket, whether pap or opposition. It's not that unfair that they should lose their seats if they lose their party membership.

Secondly, why bother about someone who professed loyalty to the pappies and then later changed his mind when it didn't suit him or when he annoyed some party bigwig?

Under current political conditions, if he really wanted things to be better for the country and the people, he wouldn't have joined pap.
That's the question that I kept asking Koh PK pre Punggol East BE.