A rebuttal to MND: Why Mah Bow Tan is wrong on upgrading
October 14th, 2009 | 
Author: OPINION
In a letter published in the Straits Times Forum on 13 October 2009, the press secretary to National Development Minister Mr Mah Bow Tan, Mr Lim Yuin Chien tried to explain why the LUP in Hougang was implemented by the PAP grassroots adviser Mr Eric Low instead of its elected MP Mr Low Thia Kiang. (read letter here)
Let us dissect and rebut the reasons given by him one by one:
1. “These programmes have to be implemented through government channels. In the case of HDB upgrading, this channel is the advisers to grassroots organisations, who are appointed by the Government.”
LUP has to implemented through official and not party channels. The grassroots organizations should be non-partisan, apolitical organizations staffed by civil servants or civilians with no party affiliations.
Mr Eric Low is neither an elected MP or a member of the government. He was appointed as a grassroots adviser by the PAP who is rejected by the residents of Hougang in the last general elections.
A clear demarcation must be drawn between the party and the state. The government of Singapore is not the PAP. Only the cabinet is made up of PAP leaders while the bureaucracy as well as grassroots organizations are supposed to remain politically neutral.
2. Opposition MPs are not answerable to the Government, nor are they obliged to carry out and explain the Government’s policies.
Opposition MPs are answerable to the residents who voted for them to be their representatives in Parliament. Therefore, the opposition MPs are obliged to carry out and explain the government’s policies to their constituents.
In all the PAP wards, the MPs automatically become the grassroots advisers. Why is there a discrimination here in non-PAP wards?
The question we should ask here is whether one needs to be a PAP member in order to explain government’s policies to the people.
Mr Low Thia Kiang has already indicated his desire to liaise with the government to serve the people of Hougang and so HDB should implement LUP through him instead of adding one additional layer of bureaucracy through the PAP grassroots leader.
3. Funding for LUP is possible only because of the Government and the Budget surpluses it has generated through prudent policies.
It is not right for the PAP government to claim credit for the budget surpluses.
While their policies do play a contributory role, it is ultimately the hardworking and thrify people of Singapore who is responsible for our budget surpluses.
The residents of Hougang and Potong Pasir pay taxes like the rest of Singapore. They should be given equal access to LUP too.
It is the duty of the incumbent government of the day to ensure that all Singaporeans have a pleasant and comfortable place to live in regardless of their political affiliations.
4. Opposition MPs are not responsible for generating budget surpluses. There is therefore no basis for opposition MPs to lead the LUP – a national programme funded mainly by the Government.
If opposition MPs are not responsible for generating budget surpluses, then in what ways are the two losing PAP candidates responsible?
Hence, there is no basis for Mr Eric Low to lead the LUP too. Again, who is responsible for generating the budget surpluses? It is the people of Singapore and not the government who only plays a regulatory role in the process.
The residents of Hougang have chosen to lend their support to Mr Low Thia Kiang not only to represent them in Parliament, but to manage their estate for them and therefore it is only right and legitimate for Mr Low Thia Kiang to lead the LUP.
5. The will of the people expressed in general elections is to elect a government for the country as a whole; and not to elect separate local governments for each constituency.
Singapore MPs serve two roles – one, to be a voice for their constituents in Parliament and two, to manage the town councils which is a form of local government for each constituency.
If the will of the people expressed in general elections is not to elect a local government at all, then Town Councils can be outsourced to private firms to run with no inkling at all to any political parties.
Likewise in the PAP wards, the Town Councils are usually headed by the grassroots advisers which are the MPs.
It is strange that HDB choose to liaise with PAP MPs while ignoring the presence of opposition MPs altogether. Has HDB been instructed to do so by the government?
Since Mr Low is in charge of Hougang Town Council, isn’t it easier for HDB work together with him directly instead of an outsider with no business in it?
What if the opposition were to form the government one day? Will HDB reverse the process and opt to work with government-appointed grassroots advisers and not the PAP MPs?
This LUP fiasco is only part of a systemic flaw which has grown to afflict our nation after decades of one-party rule: the blurring of the boundary between the party and the state.
The PAP has used its incumbency to entrench itself in all levers of the state from the bureaucracy, police to grassroots organizations.
As it control the purse-strings, it is in a position to curb the growth of the opposition by hampering its work at the grassroots level and punish Singaporeans who voted for them.
The folly of such a “practice” whereby PAP losers are entrusted to explain and implement the government’s policies on the ground is easily shown up in the unlikely event that the PAP is reduced to a minority government or voted out of power altogether.
We will end up in a situation where the non-PAP MPs are mere figureheads in their constituencies while PAP losers continue to call the shots in running the estates. Is this the way the will of the people is being respected by the PAP?
It is time that the government defined clearly the roles of the elected MPs vis-a-vis the appointed grassroots advisers.
Since the MPs have won the support of the majority of the constituents, it follows naturally that they should be the grassroots advisers and not non-elected personnel being parachuted from outside by a political party.
It is clear by now that unless the incumbent is voted out of office, it will be almost impossible for any alternative political parties to serve the people who voted for them without impediment or harrassment even in such a simple and straightforward task like explaining and implementing the LUP in a small constituency.
Related articles:
>> LUP has to be implemented through government channels
>> Low Thia Kiang strikes back at HDB and PA
>> Lame reply by HDB and PA on why LUP are announced by PAP losers
>> Mah Bow Tan:” I don’t expect non-PAP MPs to explain LUP”
>> Eric Low rapped for stealing limelight of Low Thia Kiang
>> Eric Low claimed credit for bringing LUP to Hougang
Posted in Opinion
41 Responses to “A rebuttal to MND: Why Mah Bow Tan is wrong on upgrading”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
Before we talk about voting PAP out of office, we have to vote in a substantial number of opposition MPs in the first place. Not the lone one or two voices in parliament now who gets drown out by 82 others.
Vote in more opposition MPs by helping all opposition parties capture at least one GRC, If each opposition party captures at least one GRC, each party will have at least 5 members and voices in parliament. Total, we will have 20 over opposition voices. Eventually, it will depend on the performance of opposition members and that of PAP to see who is the better one to form the government.
Hence, we have to take the first step first. Without opposition members in parliament, we can’t even smell about voting out the incumbent.
Its true….Its high time that our government agencies stop playing slave to a single party and its high time the national day stop having PAP contigents(what the hell is up with that?)
might be easy to say that we vote for the opposition, but are there enough good opposition candidates of Low Thia Khiang, Chiam See Tong and Sylvia Lim calibre around?
can we be certain that if any opposition party comes into power, they won’t end up playing dirty tricks like the PAP?
“The opposition members are not answerable to the Government”..
If these two opposition MP wards had lost money heavily in the Town council’s investment similar to the so called well run pap town councils, it would be highlighted in Parliament and the 2 MPs chided or even accused of misusing the State’s fund! The Shitty Times would run atleast 3 days on this to reflect the incompetencies of the two opposition MPs.
Ironically, this did not happened. No wonder they say heaven has got eyes!
@btan – opposition without acumen being ushered into parliament based solely on displeasure votes is going to have a backlash on the voters themselves. please vote wisely and hope that a new Obama is born among our midst.
@rc:
So let me ask you this question, which came first? The Chicken or the Egg?
And yes I’d be happier if a monkey screwed up while being paid peanuts.
@randomnessinmind:
sorry, i don’t understand your question. but yes. i do agree that having a monkey that is paid peanuts screwing up is better than having someone who is paid millions of dollars screwing up…
but we are talking about the country we live in, a place i call home. and while i might not agree with the PAP, i do love Singapore. so. i’d rather that no one screws up (or at least not too badly).
so i agree with silenceisgolden. i suppose if the opposition can come up with good, solid ideas on how to resolve some of the issues being discussed (e.g. the shortage of public housing), then there might really be a case to vote them in.
besides, how would we know that opposition members won’t end up like PAP (i.e. screwing up and still being paid millions)? power corrupts.
To RC
Are the representative from PAP the calibre of Low, Chiam and Sylvia?
Maybe the question is
Is having Lee Bee (sack the coach) Wah, Wee Siew (elite uncaring) Kim, Mah Bow (HDB) Tan, Charles (Lesser Mortal)Chong, Seng Han (punching bag) Tong or Lui Tuck Yew better than having Dr Chee (who make the Ministers work harder for their million dollar salaries)?
We need an opposition TEAM to represent us. There’s no point having all of them being nice thoughtful gentleman. We need a firebrand (Chee or JBJ) mold to press hard against the GSTs and public transport, a questioner (Steve Chia or Siew Kum Hong) to ask the questions, and an Intellectual (KJ) to cross swords with the men of substance in the parliament like Tharman.
Remember. The goal is not to piss PAP off, but to make everyone’s (singaporean) — including PAP’s supporter and members — life better.
A football team with 11 Buffons, 11 Kakas or Messi will not make a good team.
@randomnessinmind – What an old classic replay: chicken and the egg. Please please the chicken is already out. So many political parties out there but are they laying any golden eggs? Hopefully some will pop up. Sorry even monkey are not paid peanuts unless you say $11k ++ per month and looking after the tc’s fund is peanut. Not to mention if they hold the post of minister, will they say they want a pay cut?
@silenceisgolden on Wed, 14th Oct 2009 2:33 pm
Please lah. This kind of argument has been used by PAP ad nauseam liao.
Besides, I am not voting out of displeasure. I am voting out of pure logic. We need a two party system. Voting more opposition MPs create a two party system.
It is those who keep voting for PAP after all the bad things they have done who are blind. And they have already created backlash. What more backlash do we have?
If you see a ship heading towards an iceberg, and the people who control the ship is deaf to your warning, don’t you want to get people who will listen to you to control the ship?
@rc
[[so i agree with silenceisgolden. i suppose if the opposition can come up with good, solid ideas on how to resolve some of the issues being discussed (e.g. the shortage of public housing), then there might really be a case to vote them in.]]
So did you read their good solid ideas in the first place? The opposition have been coming up with good solid ideas for decades, some have been secretly adopted by PAP without giving them due credentials. But do you even know? If you don’t even bother to read their idea, then how are they ever going to get voted in? It’s basically a catch-22 situation.
[[besides, how would we know that opposition members won’t end up like PAP (i.e. screwing up and still being paid millions)? power corrupts.]]
Very simple. By maintain a 2 party or multi party system. Never let anyone be a monopoly ever again. But first, we need to get rid of this monopoly, hence we need to vote in the numbers first.
This is not being blind. This is strategy.
When they present a GRC instead of a single ward constitutency, just vote in the opposition – no complicated thinking required.
Anyone not good enough to stand on their own feet is NOT GOOD ENOUGH for this country – VERY SIMPLE LOGIC AND COMPELLING TRUTH.
When they present us with a GRC instead of a single ward constituency, just vote in the opposition. No complicated thinking required.
Anyone not competent enough to stand on their own feet is NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR THIS COUNTRY – VERY SIMPLE LOGIC AND COMPELLING TRUTH.
mr rajaratnam must have thought very carefully when he penned the singapore national pledge.
in the pledge,it says…” based on justice and equality…so as to build…and progress for nation…”
i think in fact for the convenience,all MPs,regardless of their affiliation,should be assigned an office,paid from taxpayers’ monies as the office is not for the sole use of the MP but for use by the citizens to consult with their elected MP.I see it as “every singaporean counts”…whichever ward they happen to live in.
Based on justice and equality,i would humbly and sincerely opine as a true born and bred LOCAL singaporean that all HDB upgrading,particularly the lift upgrading should be premised on the concentration of aged residents in a particular ward.
It really doesn’t matter if that ward is older or newer,a lOW
THIA KIANG’S ward or mah bow tan’s,so long as there are truly more older residents living there,that ward-blocks- should be given priority…then,we cam truly say we live by OUR PLEDGE.
Let us be truly singaporeans who care .
my requirement for the future government, or opposition, is very simple.
willing to listen. willing to learn. good judgement of people. has vision. technocrats can be employed, no problem.
as long as they don’t be as elitist as the pap can already. besides, the case study of pap ruling is there for all to see to ensure that obsolete mindset not be repeated.
i am willing to take a chance with the current opposition because the ruling party confirm no more juice liao.
as long as the government and the people are one, no more lesser mortal and higher mortal, singapore will grow as an entity and in growing, falling down is okay, as long as we have the strength to pick ourselves up.
no need to score gdp like on ecstasy. love is the next step, believing and trust, so people, just vote for the opposition , because pap does not believe in love, they only know how to rule by fear, very obsolete liao. pap(a) forever want to control you, you take bus he also want to follow, and you cannot go play arcade with ah beng, so must tell him ‘ no more holding hand, i grow up liao leh.’
also, the opposition also know from the current pap example, how not to treat people like kids, so they already ahead of pap, because pap cannot see themselves behaving like idiots. we all can, they cannot. hahaha.
no need to think already, just vote for opposition. trust , remember , trust. don’t fear. trust. don’t let pap(a) get into your head, trust, not fear. yes.
@btan:
[So did you read their good solid ideas in the first place? The opposition have been coming up with good solid ideas for decades, some have been secretly adopted by PAP without giving them due credentials. But do you even know?]
i actually haven’t read these good solid ideas from the opposition. not because i don’t want to, but i haven’t come across any, maybe cos i’ve not been looking at the right places. would it be possible for you to let me know where i can find these, please? interested to read them.
i suppose now with the internet, which is truly a verdant marketplace of ideas where all sorts of ideas can be hawked to the masses, it would be a lot easier for the opposition to put up their ideas without the MSM censoring them and much more difficult for the PAP to ’steal’ these ideas without acknowledging whoever contributed them…
agree that we need instituationalised checks and balances on the power held be any single individual entity, be it a company or a political party. as i said, power corrupts, more power = more corrupted. however, not sure whether a two-party system is the best way to do it. while a two-party system does indeed provide some instituational checks on power, it does bring with it its own attendant set of problems.
@for singapore:
i think we need more people like you. people who might disagree with the PAP but are nonetheless willing to do their part for the good of Singapore and Singaporeans, rather than condemn Singapore along with the PAP.
two thumbs up!
It is of no use, even if 51% oppositions are voted into Parliament, the PAP machine will still use hidden agents (like non-voted-in Eric Low) to run the country or Town councils, bypassing the opposition members who are legally voted in.
The president will invoke special rights to back the non-voted PAP people, just remember this prediction la.
That is the message.
if the pap no longer ruling, majority of those on their side will start coming out. you will be surprised how much their supporters actually fear them more than love them, so much they can’t differentiate between the two.
heheheheh
“The government of Singapore is not the PAP”
I really think this statement is backwards…who are we kidding? i think from the looks of things..the PAP is the govt of Singapore!!!
“This LUP fiasco is only part of a systemic flaw which has grown to afflict our nation after decades of one-party rule: the blurring of the boundary between the party and the state.”
The blurring of the boundary is purposely planned, so that, certain group of people can manipulate the system to serve their personal interests.
Is this the way the will of the people is being respected by the PAP?
They are BIG people. Do you think they will show respect to you and me?
Singapore government is not quite legal. People did not give those walk-over MP any mandate, thus these walk-over MPs have no power to represent the people. 33% of the populations is substantial amount of voters enough to honour alternative party the respect they deserve. Mah Bao Tan is a loser in Potong Pasir, thus he has no right to criticise the opposition parties who have their coutrymen support. The whole system is a scam, it should be voiced against strongly. Those who continue to strongly support MBT statement are PAP stooges and pest of taxpayers money.
Who are the paymasters anyway? Is it not the taxpayers or have ‘They’ forgot who paid them their salaries? Is this what we called ‘political tolerance’ and respecting the electorate?
Vote in the opposition. They have become too arrogant. They are taking the voters for granted. It is beyond me how anyone could still vote for them. Well, maybe, the elites.
I can’t wait for the elections. Change is coming our way. Change for the better. No more arrogant politicians with multi-million dollar salaries. With the opposition we will have genuine and sincere leaders. Ones that listen and are responsive to the needs of the people. But more important, leaders who will put a stop, and even reverse, this ridiculous influx of foreign trash.
Amen.
Sylvia Lim, Chairman of WP, responded to the MND’s letter.
See here:
http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_442338.html
Hi rc and anyone who keep asking for opposition to come up with good ideas. Here are the manifesto of WP, SDP and SPP.
http://www.wp.sg/wordpress/our-beliefs/manifest-2006/
http://yoursdp.org/index.php/the-party/our-manifesto
http://www.spp.org.sg/manifesto.php
If you want some more, you can always google for the following:
National Solidarity Party
Reform Party
If still not enough, they have party newsletters and publications that you can purchase and read.
It is really up to you to go dig out their ideas. Of course at the end of the day, you still have to vote them in really know their ideas. You cannot forever “test drive” a car without purchasing it to truly know its performance.
@KAM on Wed, 14th Oct 2009 7:14 pm
[[It is of no use, even if 51% oppositions are voted into Parliament, the PAP machine will still use hidden agents (like non-voted-in Eric Low) to run the country or Town councils, bypassing the opposition members who are legally voted in.
The president will invoke special rights to back the non-voted PAP people, just remember this prediction la.]]
It’s just a scare tactic. Don’t fall for it.
In poker, we call it a bluff. This discourages voters from voting for opposition.
Once we get 35% and above of opposition MPs in parliament, you will already see significant change liao.
All the obstacles that opposition MPs see is simply because there are only 2 MPs. Easy to bully with majority numbers.
We need quantity now, not quality. Quality can come later.
Don’t worry too much about opposition fielding “credible” candidates.. Because most of the policies and ideas don’t come from mps and ministers, but civil servants.
Of course, the ministers will need to approve of them, and these also need to be passed by parliament before the policies are adopted (becomes legal).
So, even if pap loses all the seats (which is very unlikely), do you think the entire civil service will resign because the pap has lost?
By all means, vote 30-40% opposition into parliament, at least this will make the pap work much harder (otherwise why the high pay) and take your concerns much more seriously…
Why punish the residents of Hougang and Potong Pasir who voted for PAP just because more residents voted for opposition???
The govt had done the wrong thing by punishing their own supporters.
@btan:
took a brief look at some of the manifestos that you have suggested. there were indeed some good ideas to be found in the manifestoes. however, not sure whether the opposition members can really claim to be first off the blocks on the ideas(e.g. WP on further refinements and research into membrane technology in their 2006 manifesto. the Newater study was started in 1998, 8 years earlier than the WP manifesto. and i am sure they are continuing research into this in PUB/Hyflux).
also, some of the ideas in the manifestoes are rather motherhood statements that are too general to be useful. e.g. SDP’s proposals on the education to stop training students for the economy does not actually propose how they propose to educate our children. besides, there has been much debate about the purpose of education, and i am not sure that anyone can be absolutely certain that education should not, at least in parts, be utilitarian.
it is also interesting to note that the WP’s manifesto in 2006 actually suggested that:
There should be an incentive scheme to attract international talents to Singapore who are able to create or entrench a specific business / sector /industry.
but, judging by comments on this website, quite a lot of people aren’t too happy with this ‘international talents’. so it seems that some of the ideas of the opposition can also be just as unpopular with the public as those of the PAP’s (the PAP does give quite a lot of incentives for specifically this sort of individuals. started since EDB was set up in 1981…)
perhaps manifestoes aren’t the best place to look for good ideas by the opposition. nvm. will trawl the Net for more.
nonetheless, thanks btan.
“besides, how would we know that opposition members won’t end up like ??? (i.e. screwing up and still being paid millions)? power corrupts.”
Hey, is there a slip on your part. On one former part, you seem to know it already and do you want this thing to continue even after knowing it. On another latter part, it is yet to be tested and have a chance to be better.
Even assuming what you said is going to happen, at least the expensive peanuts get distributed among a wider audience.
Power corrupts and with your good logical mind, how are you going to limit it even though you are not at the top of the value chain.
What will you do if a 5 year old boy robs by a young man? What will you do if an old lady is robbed by a young man? Singaporean will turn a blind eye as long as it is not their problems. Some Singaporean might even help the young man rob if given some benefits. Where are you dear Singaporean when the old and weak in Hougang are deprived of lift for the past donkey years? Where are you when the people of Hougang and Potong Pasir is not receiving their fair share development? Love your neighbor as yourself. If the young man cannot behave, get him out of your area by voting. Singapore did not fall during Raffles time, British colony, japanese occupation and cut off from Malaysia. PAP not around. The survival of Singapore dosen’t depend on PAP but GOD.
susah lah… no upgrade also complain, now give upgrade also complaint. bising here and goreng there wait they cancel upgrading everyone wiil be diam…
@rc
There is ideas and there is concrete plan. At this moment, I am content with just ideas. After all, they are not voted in yet and honestly, who would want to reveal their concrete plan when it could be easily stolen?
Let’s take a commercial example. If two companies are selling slimming services, company A is the market leader but have a lot of unhappy customers because there are no comparable services. Company B is up and coming and promised slimming results but does not need to do the method of company A. At this point in time, you have to decide if you want to try out company B. Given that company A is terrible and there are no other alternatives, why not? Company B cannot reveal all their trade secrets simply because company A can easily copy their secrets and sell it as their own.
Back to politics, concrete plan not revealed is understandable and itself is a trick use by PAP government and their mouth pieces to challenge opposition for not coming up with good ideas. And when they really did come up with some good ideas, these are implemented by government and the credit stolen.
Relating to new ideas, no idea is completely new. Each idea is built on the last few ideas. Originality is not important but the effect is. The idea of two party system or true democracy is nothing new. Democracy itself is 2500 years old, yet it does not stop it to become the pre-eminent form of government in this world.
At the end of the day, the devil’s in the detail and execution. There is no concrete way to be sure unless we vote in opposition as government.
Anyway, I see this kind of discussion academic and to be honest, a red herring. Basically a trick by PAP to smoke people out.
The purpose of opposition is not to give ideas. Their purpose is to check on the government. The government, with their million dollar salaries should be the ones who come up with ideas. If they cannot, then they should resign or reduce their salaries and offer one million dollar reward for the best ideas to be submitted.
To close this, your sojourn into the world of opposition information is already a great step. I only wish more people like you will do so instead of just echoing the government’s stale arguments again and again. I almost feel like a broken record trying to rebut these people again and again.
A well argued piece of article and I agree with most of what’s said. However, in reference to the below point, I do not understand your point. All citizens in their countries pay taxes, etc, but not all countries have budget surpluses. Therefore, isn’t it a weak point to say that budget surpluses is not generated govt policies? Could you explain on this point?
But I truly agree that it isn’t fair for residents of Hougang and Potong Pasir to be ignored just being opposition wards.
[3. Funding for LUP is possible only because of the Government and the Budget surpluses it has generated through prudent policies.
It is not right for the PAP government to claim credit for the budget surpluses.
While their policies do play a contributory role, it is ultimately the hardworking and thrify people of Singapore who is responsible for our budget surpluses. ]
//MTan
The way the Budget surplus is collected requires the public to obey or accept certain abnormal rules from PAP: such as reduced education subsidy in comparison with other countries of the same level of development.
SO, it actually came from you and me.
And we are paying them to collect those fees.
Imagine they created budget surpluses by selling land as and when they want. IS there not a cost to that?
Unless, they can achieve budget surplus at the same level of public expenditure in all the domain like in other countries of similar development, the surpluses is just extra taxes collected from us.
they would just be numbers that look good again to glorify their existence much like a push up bra to a pair of breast but if you take it again, you will be disappointed.
OR if you want, … like an insurance agent who tries to cheat the shareholders by churning policies over the 2 years periods where he receives a larger commission than what he pays for.
//silenceisgolden
//even monkeys are not paid peanuts
That depends on where the monkeys are.
Our pigs in white for example are paid millions to get other people to do the work and when the projects fail, they don’t take responsibility.
Losing millions in investments doesn’t take even need a degree. The thick skinned pigs of course need some intelligence to wiggle their way out and that is not to our interest.
We are the only supposedly developed country where an MP is set fire upon by a resident.
Goes to show the level of our pigs in white.
//rc
I can bet with you if WP is in place to execute what you claimed is their point of attracting international talent, there won’t be that many complaints because of their execution.
And execution is key.
The crap that pap attracts are not talent.
For one, they need our monies to integrate them.
I have never heard of that in any other country and the amount is not small… 10 million.
//rc
There are more good candidates from the opposition than there are good candidates from PAP.
The proportion of crap from PAP mps is so much higher than the proportion of crap from opposition.
Factor in the fact that even if we bring in a slightly below standard opposition MP, we will end up a lot more goodies from PAP than what they are sucking from us, the ordinary people.
The scenario where PAP is completely overturn in the next election is not a likely scenario. It would meant that they must have screwed up big big time… bigger than the TH and GIC failures combined.
When that happens, opposition is the last group you should blame. PAP is at fault by 1st degree.
How does budget surplus arises? Collect more taxes – COE, ERP, sell HDB at phenomenal profits marked to inflated and manipulated market resale price and refusing to show books on accounting of land and contruction (and denying the same to finality) etc etc AND SPEND LESS ON MEDICAL, EDUCATION, COMMUNITY WELFARE ETC.
Give any money to any monkey in white dressed up with a tuxedo, he or she will know how to spend less on your needs and tells you that he or she should be credited with the surplus generation. A robber might as well tells me I woes him his loot.
And then bait you with a peanut threatening further that if you are not grateful, the privilege will be withdrawn.
LUP doing Singaporean a favour? Or is it selective bribery and corrupt conduct of privilege handout for votes???
Nobody believes this mob of creeps anymore.
Allow me to quote someone close to the famiLEE who claims that he heard someone in the famiLEE preach:
Maybe thats the reason why Sinkapore Gahment and Millisters always make ‘honest mistakes’ and NEVER apologise!