• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

"What The Next GE Is About..." - A very good article by Lucky Tan

SNAblog

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
1,489
Points
0
Please help disseminate to other forums.

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2010/04/what-next-general-election-is-about.html

Sunday, April 25, 2010

What the next General Election is about....

There is plenty of speculation on the date of the coming GE. The next GE has to be held by Feb 2012 but the govt usually times it such that it is held earlier when 'the ground is sweet'. It is likely to be within the next 9 months and the 1st possible window is in Sept 2010 after the YOG. While the PAP leaders probably already have the date and backup dates in mind, the opposition parties are left with the disadvantage of having to allocate limited resources without knowing when actual date is. Many have started their walkabouts in areas where they expect the most heated election battles to be fought. Based on various accounts, the membership in opposition parties has increased and this will be the most widely contested election in recent years.

Unlike other countries, our media does not conduct opinion polls to track the support level for the govt so the electorate is an uncertainty. One thing I'm quite certain about is the support for the PAP among the younger voters has declined considerably compared with 4 years ago when the last election was held. 4 years ago, if you sit with a group of young people, you may sense some dissatisfaction among them but they were still willing to give the govt some time to bring about positive changes and 'remake' Singapore. These days, it is hard to miss the frustration and anger among this group of voters. The anger and frustration come from very real problems such as rising cost of housing, overcrowding, increased competition from foreigners and work stress. It is not the problems alone that cause this frustration but the PAP govt denials and refusal to solve them add to rising anger. When HDB prices escalated, Minister Mah's approach was to deny they are expensive insisting that they are affordable instead of fixing the problem. The PAP denied any negative impact of massive foreign influx asking Singaporeans not to be 'small minded' and blamed Singaporeans for not being able to integrate well with foreigners[Link]. It is very clear that if the PAP govt is voted in without significant opposition representation, it will be more of the same - the much need changes that many Singaporeans look forward to will not come.

The PAP and the Singapore media are very good at portraying the alternative views and opposition parties as something from the fringe. The PAP is mainstream and all else are ill considered wild ideas that are unworkable . After years of conditioning many Singaporeans find it hard to think outside the framework the PAP cleverly uses to make its ideologically driven ideas acceptable to Singaporeans. It is actually the PAP that is non-mainstream and extreme in its policy making - constantly passing the risk and financial burdens to ordinary Singaporeans to create an environment favorable for govt-linked businesses. Its policies created the highest income gap in the developed world and a growing underclass struggling within our society. I'll go through one or two examples to illustrate this and later discuss why the need for change has become urgent.

2 decades ago, Singaporeans were told there was a need to bring in foreign expertise lacking in our workforce. That was the start of the Foreign Talent policy which morphed into a totally different animal today. In the past few years, the PAP govt opened the floodgates to cheaper foreign workers mainly from China and India for all types of jobs to pander to the demand of businesses here. The large number eventually stretch our infrastructure and caused our housing market to overheat. In terms of numbers per capita no other govt in the world even come remotely close to what the PAP allowed into Singapore in the past 5 years- the only countries with such huge influx are middle eastern states where the indigenous population sits comfortably on top of imported labor not compete against them for a living. It is not enough for the PAP pursue this policy that makes life tough for Singaporeans, they have to invent justifications that put the blame on Singaporeans for large influx - Singaporeans are too fussy to take up the jobs, fertility rate is too low and so on. Most of these are bogus, for example the low fertility rate of Singaporeans today has nothing to do with the need to import adult workers today because our current workforce was born 20-40 years ago when the fertility rate was much higher. The low fertility rate today can only be fixed by importing babies or workers 20 years from now. The real reason, I believe, for the huge influx is the PAP has run out of ideas to keep our GDP growing and resorted to opening the flood gates to cheap workers as a brute force approach to growth through population expansion. Many ordinary Singaporeans are made to suffer the consequences of depressed wages and greater competition. Our already large income gap got worse and we are seeing a rising underclass among the bottom 30% of our population.

The PAP approach to transport, healthcare and education is to keep its own expediture low and get Singaporeans to shoulder as much financial burden as possible. If the income gap in Singapore in is low, the approach may actually work. However, we with our income gap, it means that much of these resources/services, say healthcare, are allocated to those who are able to pay while those need it most from the low middleclass and below have to suffer very high financial strain. The COE system means that a car ownership may be given to a multi-millionaire's son for dating while a lower middleclass father of 3 with a disabled parent cannot afford to own one. The approach to make each Singaporean shoulder his own healthcare cost might work (although not well) if the income disparity is narrower however with the huge income gap, the top 5% can drive up cost by demanding the best most exclusive care while the middleclass are finding it harder catch up with the rising cost. This cost spiral is worsened by the PAP govt's aim to increase profits of the healthcare sector by bringing in rich overseas patients - if you go to a govt restructured hospitals such as Changi[Link to advertisement to market to foreign patients], you can find international health services offering healthcare to foreigners while there are insufficient beds for Singaporeans[Link] and the high cost of treatment has forced some Singaporeans to seek treatment in developed countries such as Malaysia[Link]. The same minister responsible for this situation once suggested that Singaporeans send their aged parents to nursing homes in Malaysia because the cost of nursing homes in Singapore has escalated beyond what many can afford[Link] due to the scarcity of land....yet no PAP leader has ever suggested converting golf courses that occupy close to 1400ha of land, the equivalent of 2200 football pitches[Link] to hospitals for the sick, public housing for the poor and nursing homes for the old because our elites enjoy hitting a ball into a hole.

politicalcompass.png


We cannot continue with the current policy directions of the PAP govt because the income gap grown to the point that makes many of the PAP policies unworkable i.e. a large segment of the populace will be worse off. We cannot expect any change from the PAP to bring about more balanced policies because their interests are diversified beyond that of ordinary Singaporeans to a complex network of business interests linked to the power-elites in govt. Balance in policy making will come only when the interests of ordinary Singaporeans are more strongly represented in parliament. The opposition parties offering alternative ideas are not taking us to the fringe but towards the center from the fringe where we are now located.

15 years ago, Singaporeans accepted the semi-authoritarian govt because other asian countries were either under strongman leadership (dictators) or military rule. Singapore was ahead in terms of political progress. However, after the Asian crisis, countries like South Korea and Indonesia became full blown democracies almost overnight and Singapore's authoritarianism start to look more out of place. The PAP made very weak attempts to address this by 'opening up slowly' (read very slowly, at a pace that ensures PAP's hegemony). In the previous elections 33.3% of those who had the chance to cast their votes, voted against the govt but the GRC system resulted in this group of people being under represented in parliament. My belief is this 33.3% has probably grown to 40% given more people have felt effects of various policies first hand in recent years. The PAP will resort to its usual undemocratic pork barrel politics promising expensive estate upgrading to those who vote for them. They know that Singaporeans work for decades to pay for their homes and estate upgrading which pushes HDB prices up in upgraded estates will attract votes despite the implementation of policies unbeneficial to ordinary Singaporeans. Singaporeans have to look beyond upgrading as a carrot and understand the long term consequences of current policies to make the right choice.
 
Some of the comments left by readers in his blog:
<dl class="avatar-comment-indent" id="comments-block"><dt class="comment-author " id="c1929910994492626438">
blank.gif

Anonymous said... </dt><dd class="comment-body " id="Blog1_cmt-1929910994492626438"> Most Singaporeans are cowards at heart.

Your hp rings in the cinema, they are too terrified of a ruckus to tell the irritant to keep quiet.

Some guy eats in the train. Irate commuters only dare to snap photos in secret and post in on Stomp. They don't dare to stand up directly to tell him/her to stop eating in the train.

Many Singaporeans saw JBJ being bankrupted. Instead of rallying around him, they avoided him like the plague.

5 Singaporeans making a stand is an illegal procession. But when 100 Chinamen march down to MOM to demand their salaries, the police don't make a single arrest.

The civil servant, the church-goer, the housewife, the sole breadwinner, are all scared. They are scared that something will go wrong if they cast their vote against PAP.

Regardless of religion, they are more terrified of PAP's displeasure than of their own god.

It is just so easy to bully Singaporeans into submission. From uni student to working adult, they are all too scared to make a stand against foreigners who bully their way into our jobs and varsity places.

We Singaporeans do the hard work of NS, while the foreigners get the bulk of the varsity places, the sports scholarships, the academic scholarships, the better jobs.

Lucky, $10 says that in the coming elections, most Singaporeans will vote FOR PAP!

Angry as they are, Singaporeans are too ball-less to go against PAP.

Ho Ching probably has more balls than 10,000 Singaporean males put together.

</dd><dd class="comment-footer"> 25/4/10 21:26 </dd><dt class="comment-author " id="c6560838209769037880">
blank.gif

Anonymous said... </dt><dd class="comment-body " id="Blog1_cmt-6560838209769037880"> i have news. From what i hear from friends in the govt, the pap solution to increase productivity is to import more graduates from other countries. =)

Good luck to us. God bless Singapore

</dd><dt>
</dt><dd class="comment-footer"> 25/4/10 21:48 </dd><dt class="comment-author " id="c2551452533193823516">
blank.gif

</dt><dt class="comment-author " id="c5603668375723887884"> </dt><dt class="comment-author " id="c3001273834432365346">
blank.gif

</dt></dl>
 
In the past, I have known many singaporeans who are unhappy with PAP and yet still vote for them. The excuses that was given was very self serving. Like for example:

'I vote PAP as I want my flat price to go up'.

'I vote PAP but I hope the opposition win'

As such, Singaporeans deserve the government they vote for and PAP no longer have the welfare of SIngaporeans at heart..Just their own affairs they worry for.

Sometimes, when I read the comments by Tony Chat and negative and insulting though it seems, it does make sense that Singaporeans are one of a kind. Want this and that, but even a simple thing like voting they also vote for the party they despise,,,what more can I say?

No wonder Singapore is not a place for Singaporeans...as it is the Singaporeans that made it so...
 
In the previous elections 33.3% of those who had the chance to cast their votes, voted against the govt but the GRC system resulted in this group of people being under represented in parliament. My belief is this 33.3% has probably grown to 40% given more people have felt effects of various policies first hand in recent years.

It's not the GRC system, it is "first past the post system" that always result in seats won not proportional to votes won.

40% opposition votes will not necessary result in increased seats. You never know how the votes are distributed throughout the island. If we have 2/3 GRC that have a close fight ( around 45% ) The oppositions votes will be pushed up to 40% but they will still win 2 seats.

we need electoral system reform too.
 
yah i agree, a reform that reflect the proportion of seat with the votes percentage
 
I agree that electoral reforms are needed. However I do not agree on proportional representation in its 'purest ' form as its devisive and brings about the tyranny of the minority. Look at various countries which have such a system. Minor parties are invited to form a coalition government and such parties includes far right, far left, greens etc which do nothing but hamper policies that benefits the majority etc.

It creates more problems than it solves. I prefer the abolition of GRCs all seats are single seats and by-elections are held when an MP no longer holds the seat.

Presidential elections to be contested too.

Maybe in future, we can have a Upper house of parliament. 20 upper house seats, selected on proportional representation but those with less than 10% of the vote dont get a seat..must be strict in terms of the support numbers.
 
A very well written piece and the BEST post by far in SBF. Also replies #2 through #6 are excellent.

I will copy this thread's link and email to all my contacts. May every Singaporean do the same.


Link is below. Please copy and sent to as many friends as possible.

http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?p=451479&posted=1#post451479
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
Last edited:
Excellent article by him and thanks for bringing this up.

For many years, I use to wonder how silly the Malaysians were when drought occasionaly strikes the Klang valley and the taps run dry while Malaysian water has not let us down for 50 years.

The irony is that we now face bed shortage or beds placed along corridors while foreigners are being looked and the man responsible for this situation is an ex-Malaysian.
 
Excellent article by him and thanks for bringing this up.

For many years, I used to wonder how silly the Malaysians were when drought occasionaly strikes the Klang valley and the taps run dry while Malaysian water has not let us down for 50 years.

The irony is that we now face bed shortage or beds placed along corridors while foreigners are being looked after in our health system and the man responsible for this situation is an ex-Malaysian.
 
PAP = fascist political party!

GDP is a stupid and misleading measure of the wealth of a country's citizens especially in a country such as Singapore where MNCs and a high number of FTs abound.

Also note how foreigners come here and purchase multiple homes which again jscks up the GDP but citizens get nothing out of it.

Vote then inept PAP who are bankrupt of ideas on how to manage a country's economy and to allow its people to live a socially comfortable lifestyle.
 
I agree that electoral reforms are needed. However I do not agree on proportional representation in its 'purest ' form as its devisive and brings about the tyranny of the minority. Look at various countries which have such a system. Minor parties are invited to form a coalition government and such parties includes far right, far left, greens etc which do nothing but hamper policies that benefits the majority etc.

It creates more problems than it solves. I prefer the abolition of GRCs all seats are single seats and by-elections are held when an MP no longer holds the seat.

Presidential elections to be contested too.

Maybe in future, we can have a Upper house of parliament. 20 upper house seats, selected on proportional representation but those with less than 10% of the vote dont get a seat..must be strict in terms of the support numbers.

We should scrap the presidency. It is of no use. As long as a government is tansparent and there is a strong opposition and an open and free media and judiciary, all requirements for a real democracy, then we don't need a presidency.
 
Back
Top