Dear Friends,
Despite the all-too familiar headline in the Straits Times today “2-party system not workable here:PM”, there is no doubt in my mind that things here are a-changing.
Like a broken down gramaphone
“Nay-sayers” try to pour cold water on our brave and idealistic youths by saying that in this nation of 5 million, it is not possible to find more than 20 good men or women. They cannot even get enough men/women to join them!
To say that anything other than the present one-party system is not workable, sounds like someone reading from an old script belonging to a bygone era. Don’t they know they risk being accused of sounding like a broken gramaphone that repeats itself as the needle is stuck in a “recurring” groove. (Younger readers may not appreciate this as they may not have played any “records”). To some of us, this message is akin to trying to” fit a round peg into a square hole.” It just does not “square” with reality (pardon the pun).
Even ST is a-changing?
Even our infamous Straits Times is a-changing ( or sort of).
There is more coverage of non-PAP pre-election activities and surprise… much of it sounds rather objective too.
Most-surprising (to me) is the fact that many of ST’s journalists are writing candid articles that in the pre-new media era would have been unheard of.
ST journalists standing up to be counted
1. Lydia Lim : “Why voters play hard to get with the PAP” said “It is because they believe the odds are stacked in the ruling party's favour” alluding to the perception that the playing field is too overwhelmingly skewed towards the PAP. Click here
2. Kor Kian Beng: “Getting to know the opposition” said “After all, everyone on both sides of the fence is a Singaporean trying to improve this place we call home”
Click here
3. Chua Mui Hoong: “ We must give the PAP 48%. Wake them up” said ( quoting one resident” The People’s Action Party doesn’t take care of Singaporeans any more.”
Click here
4. Cassandra Chew:” The voter’s GRC dilemma” when comparing the GRC to buying pre-packed onions in a bag” Click here
Cassandra said: "At the supermarket, I usually go for the bag without any bad onions. To me, getting average onions is better than having to deal with the rotten onion at all.”
A netizen in my facebook half-jokingly commented “ did someone just referred to Miss T as bad onion?” I am sure that thought was furthest from Cassandra’s mind.
5. Aaron Low: “Going beyong charisma politics” said “And hopefully the other opposition parties will follow (WP)Mr Low’s lead in creating parties of substance rather than to depend on individuals to draw in votes.” Click here. I say Amen to that too.
I have always believed that even ST’s journalists are human beings like you and I. When you cut them ( not that I am encouraging you to), they will bleed. Most of the time, it is crimson red like yours and mine.
They have restraints that they need to work around. Most of them have consciences too.
Let us hope that I do not need to “stand corrected”
Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Sunday, April 03, 2011
What Tharman said or my reflections on tv forum
Dear friends,
I wrote the following letter to the forum editor(s) of MSM
(Published today here)
Dear Editor,
I am glad that in tonight’s tv political forum, Minister Tharman openly stated what had long been regarded by some PAP old guards as heresy- that a strong opposition is good for Singapore and even PAP.
Strong opposition is good for Singapore
This does not surprise me as Tharman has always been progressive and intellectually honest. In fact he is of Prime Ministerial material in many Singaporeans’ minds (notwithstanding what MM had said previously about unsuitability of non-Chinese politicians for this post).
However, the growth of a responsible and strong opposition has been thwarted by an uneven playing field. Alleged gerrymandering, opaque and mysterious functionings of the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) and the partisan abuse of publicly funded bodies such as the People’s Association quickly comes to mind and these unsavoury practices overwhelmingly favours the PAP.
Short-term measures eg better media ;unfettered access into private estates
For the short-term, especially during this pre-election period, it is vital that impediments be removed for the electorate to get to know all candidates. Although we see obvious improvements, the traditional media can do even more to level the field.
Private condominium management should be more enlightened and understand that Singaporean electorates living there are eager to meet prospective candidates from all parties. I will be writing to my MCST to voice my concerns.
Longterm rectifcations eg levelling field; funding of political parties
In the long term, besides tweaking or abolishing the GRC system , and restructuring the EBRC and rectifying PA’s anomalous relationships , we should seriously consider funding political parties who adhere to tenets that Singaporeans view as desirable eg multi-racial composition ; minimum membership numbers etc. When these parties do not meet these conditions, funding can be withdrawn.
Qualified Optimism
With enlightened ministers like Tharman and energetic politicians like Gerald, Vincent and Josephine, I do not see any reason for pessimism. I believe, as Josephine did, that no matter which party we support or vote for, we are all authors of our collective future.
Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan
I wrote the following letter to the forum editor(s) of MSM
(Published today here)
Dear Editor,
I am glad that in tonight’s tv political forum, Minister Tharman openly stated what had long been regarded by some PAP old guards as heresy- that a strong opposition is good for Singapore and even PAP.
Strong opposition is good for Singapore
This does not surprise me as Tharman has always been progressive and intellectually honest. In fact he is of Prime Ministerial material in many Singaporeans’ minds (notwithstanding what MM had said previously about unsuitability of non-Chinese politicians for this post).
However, the growth of a responsible and strong opposition has been thwarted by an uneven playing field. Alleged gerrymandering, opaque and mysterious functionings of the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) and the partisan abuse of publicly funded bodies such as the People’s Association quickly comes to mind and these unsavoury practices overwhelmingly favours the PAP.
Short-term measures eg better media ;unfettered access into private estates
For the short-term, especially during this pre-election period, it is vital that impediments be removed for the electorate to get to know all candidates. Although we see obvious improvements, the traditional media can do even more to level the field.
Private condominium management should be more enlightened and understand that Singaporean electorates living there are eager to meet prospective candidates from all parties. I will be writing to my MCST to voice my concerns.
Longterm rectifcations eg levelling field; funding of political parties
In the long term, besides tweaking or abolishing the GRC system , and restructuring the EBRC and rectifying PA’s anomalous relationships , we should seriously consider funding political parties who adhere to tenets that Singaporeans view as desirable eg multi-racial composition ; minimum membership numbers etc. When these parties do not meet these conditions, funding can be withdrawn.
Qualified Optimism
With enlightened ministers like Tharman and energetic politicians like Gerald, Vincent and Josephine, I do not see any reason for pessimism. I believe, as Josephine did, that no matter which party we support or vote for, we are all authors of our collective future.
Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan
Monday, March 21, 2011
GE 2011: I am a swing voter- try to convince me!
Dear Friends,
I am a beneficiary of the PAP rule.
I enjoy and appreciate ( taking for granted) the following:
1.Efficient and corruption-free civil service
Each time a traffic warden issues a summon (even to me), I know that he is not allowed to cancel the ticket and to try to bribe him would be just foolish. I have renewed passports at the ICA (Immigration and Checkpoint Authority) in less than 15 mins ( if one goes first thing in the morning). Making appointments for SP Power's technician is easy and yes, they turn up on the said timing.
2.Education
Any child from any of our primary schools has a chance to fulfil his/her dream of being a doctor or going to study in a world-class university overseas on a public scholarship.
3.Racial harmony
I am colour blind and enjoy working with and living amongst people of different race and creed. Hence I am upset and incensed when MM Lee casually dismisses the possibility of a non-Chinese Prime Minister or caused the ruckus when he alluded to Malays being barred from some services in the military.
4.Public Safety
It is my constant boast to foreign friends that even our children and women-folk enjoy freedoms and safety on our streets 24/7.
Having mentioned these “non-negotiables” that I presently enjoy, there are many aspects of the PAP’s rule that I find unacceptable.
A.Ministers’salaries
A ruler who only rules if he is paid millions has lost moral authority. In a past blog post (click here)
I mentioned the concept of Noblesse olige.
Literally it means nobility is an obligation. It is defined as:
1. Benevolent, honorable behavior considered to be the responsibility of persons of high birth or rank.
2. the obligation of those of high rank to be honorable and generous (often used ironically)
John D.Rockefeller Jr said,"every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty" .
B.Gerrymandering
My previous post (click here)
The Electoral Boundaries Review Committee- Must be fair and seen to be fair.
C.GRC as a coat-tail for PAP candidates (who are afraid to lose)
SM Goh ( in one of his many own goals) said in 2006: (Click here)
‘Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics,’ .
I hope the PAP fields Michael Palmer in Punggol East SMC and if he wins comfortably , this will once and for all demolish PAP’s argument for the GRC’s Raison d'être (reason for existence) that PAP minority candidates cannot win unaided.
D.Abuse of People’s Association and its grassroot organisations etc
MM Lee said in 2009 “They discover that the People’s Action Party (PAP) has only a small office in Bedok. But everywhere they go, they see the PAP – in the RCs (residents’ committees), CCCs (citizens’ consultative committees), and the CCs (community clubs).” Click here
PAP has finally admitted that grassroot organisations are partisan. This cannot be right as public money is being used.
I am not a rabid pro-PAP nor an anti-PAP voter.
I am a swing voter. Try to convince me.
Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan
I am a beneficiary of the PAP rule.
I enjoy and appreciate ( taking for granted) the following:
1.Efficient and corruption-free civil service
Each time a traffic warden issues a summon (even to me), I know that he is not allowed to cancel the ticket and to try to bribe him would be just foolish. I have renewed passports at the ICA (Immigration and Checkpoint Authority) in less than 15 mins ( if one goes first thing in the morning). Making appointments for SP Power's technician is easy and yes, they turn up on the said timing.
2.Education
Any child from any of our primary schools has a chance to fulfil his/her dream of being a doctor or going to study in a world-class university overseas on a public scholarship.
3.Racial harmony
I am colour blind and enjoy working with and living amongst people of different race and creed. Hence I am upset and incensed when MM Lee casually dismisses the possibility of a non-Chinese Prime Minister or caused the ruckus when he alluded to Malays being barred from some services in the military.
4.Public Safety
It is my constant boast to foreign friends that even our children and women-folk enjoy freedoms and safety on our streets 24/7.
Having mentioned these “non-negotiables” that I presently enjoy, there are many aspects of the PAP’s rule that I find unacceptable.
A.Ministers’salaries
A ruler who only rules if he is paid millions has lost moral authority. In a past blog post (click here)
I mentioned the concept of Noblesse olige.
Literally it means nobility is an obligation. It is defined as:
1. Benevolent, honorable behavior considered to be the responsibility of persons of high birth or rank.
2. the obligation of those of high rank to be honorable and generous (often used ironically)
John D.Rockefeller Jr said,"every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty" .
B.Gerrymandering
My previous post (click here)
The Electoral Boundaries Review Committee- Must be fair and seen to be fair.
C.GRC as a coat-tail for PAP candidates (who are afraid to lose)
SM Goh ( in one of his many own goals) said in 2006: (Click here)
‘Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics,’ .
I hope the PAP fields Michael Palmer in Punggol East SMC and if he wins comfortably , this will once and for all demolish PAP’s argument for the GRC’s Raison d'être (reason for existence) that PAP minority candidates cannot win unaided.
D.Abuse of People’s Association and its grassroot organisations etc
MM Lee said in 2009 “They discover that the People’s Action Party (PAP) has only a small office in Bedok. But everywhere they go, they see the PAP – in the RCs (residents’ committees), CCCs (citizens’ consultative committees), and the CCs (community clubs).” Click here
PAP has finally admitted that grassroot organisations are partisan. This cannot be right as public money is being used.
I am not a rabid pro-PAP nor an anti-PAP voter.
I am a swing voter. Try to convince me.
Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)