-
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.
Blame the WP and not the PAP for this election result
- Thread starter Papsmearer
- Start date
I couldn't have said it better.
These useless WP fucks even chose to remain silent on their very own local Hougang by-election issue (see below). It took one 42-year old part-time cleaner, Vellama D/O Marie Muthu, to raise the issue. If this does not prove their utter uselessness and spinelessness, I don't know what will.
http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread....World-Parliament-or-WP-s-Deaf-Mute-Parliament
WP's First World Parliament or WP's Deaf-Mute Parliament
Despite the $16,041/month each and every of the WP MP earns or the one million dollars each and every of them would earn after a five year term, the WP MPs have clearly shown they are incredibly useless and hopeless.
If they are unable to stand up for their very own AIM issue and instead, conveniently rely on their Vellama Marie Muthu doctrine in getting non-elected politicians, netizens, bloggers, their very own supporters and the ordinary men in the street do that hard work and take the risks of raising issues, you can forget about them being your "voices".
It is not a WP's First World Parliament. It is a WP's deaf-mute Parliament.
http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread....World-Parliament-or-WP-s-Deaf-Mute-Parliament
WP's First World Parliament or WP's Deaf-Mute Parliament
Despite the $16,041/month each and every of the WP MP earns or the one million dollars each and every of them would earn after a five year term, the WP MPs have clearly shown they are incredibly useless and hopeless.
If they are unable to stand up for their very own AIM issue and instead, conveniently rely on their Vellama Marie Muthu doctrine in getting non-elected politicians, netizens, bloggers, their very own supporters and the ordinary men in the street do that hard work and take the risks of raising issues, you can forget about them being your "voices".
It is not a WP's First World Parliament. It is a WP's deaf-mute Parliament.
The way I see it, the break down is like this.
In every SMC and GRC, 30%-40% are hardcore PAP supporters and they will vote PAP come hell or high water.
30% are hardcore oppo supporters and will vote any oppo members regardless of which party they belong to.
the remaining 30% are fence sitters. These are people who are civil servants, teachers, etc They are beholden to the govt. for a job, and may be afraid of reprisals in their work place. Some teacher friends of mind are afraid to reveal that they voted oppo in case their colleagues leak the information to their principal and they kenna tekan. These 30% need to be really pursuaded and convinced. they feel that they have something to lose if they vote oppo. And judging by the WP performance in PArliament, they are not convinced. WP is a bad reflection and a bad example set to all oppo parties. To them its better to vote for the devil you know then the devil you don't.
Do we need another Workers’ Party MP?
By Calvin Cheng | SingaporeScene
In the run-up to the by-election of Punggol East, it is clear, that final fight comes down to the two largest parties in Parliament: The People’s Action Party (PAP) and The Worker’s Party (WP).
The Worker’s Party chairman Sylvia Lim stated very early that this by-election was going to be a report-card on the PAP. Some political observers have commented that this is even more so than in Hougang, a Worker’s Party stronghold. And although the WP’s party candidate Lee Li Lian has recently admitted that the by-election would also be a barometer of the WP’s record, it seems that more questions are still being asked about the PAP rather than the WP.
This is natural. Being the incumbent, the PAP has much to prove after a water-shed election that saw an entire GRC falling for the first time to the opposition. It is also natural and obvious that this election, like all elections, would be a barometer of a ruling party’s record.
However, as even the leader of the WP Low Thia Kiang has admitted, time needs to be given to PAP to see whether it can solve the problems of Singaporeans, and to see the effects of its policy changes. Thus, contrary to the battle-cry of the opposition, I believe that this by-election is not so much a report-card on the PAP, but rather on the WP.
When one draws up a report card for a political party, nothing does better as a guide than their own campaign promises. The most striking thing about the WP’s campaign in GE 2011 was its overarching rhetoric of a “First World Parliament”.
It is also arguable that it was this promise, and its alluring pitch of a ‘co-driver’ elected to ‘slap’ the ruling party when it veers off-course, the seductive promise of check-and-balance, and the ideological insistence that an opposition in Singapore was necessary, that toppled George Yeo’s team in Aljunied.
But has it delivered on its promise working towards of a First World Parliament? Has it been the effective check-and-balance it promised the voters it would be? Has the co-driver performed?
The strangest thing that struck me during the GE campaign of 2011 was the WP’s strident rhetoric that electing it to Parliament would foster more debate, and thus help Singapore progress towards a ‘First World Parliament’.
No motions by WP
What was strange and extremely disturbing to me was that for a party that values debate so highly, in the 21 months that I served as Nominated Member of Parliament, the WP was curiously passive on the debating front. One has to understand that in Parliament, asking parliamentary questions is de riguer and does little to contribute to ‘debate’.
Any parliamentarian who has a burning issue to debate must surely know that the best and only way to force such a debate is to file a full motion, which compels the whole of parliament to put aside all other business and really debate the issue, concluding with a vote by all present Parliamentarians.
In the 21 months that I was NMP the WP filed precisely ZERO motions.
They did not even file any adjournment motions that would have given them a chance to speak at length, rather than just ask a question. In the first 21 months since GE 2011, the Workers Party has filed merely one adjournment motion (by NCMP Yee Jenn Jong), and another by Sylvia Lim just to withdraw it again.
In contrast, my former parliamentary colleague Viswa Sadasivan filed a full motion during his very first parliamentary sitting, which not only made Cabinet Ministers rise to rebut him, but even caused then Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew to speak in Parliament for the first time in years, and in the process teaching a nation the meaning of the word `hifalutin’.
The question then to ask of the WP is then this: For a party that campaigned on the promise of more debate as part of their march towards a ‘First World Parliament’, whither the debate? Surely if you have an alternate vision for Singapore, a vision burning to be articulated in full, asking questions would not suffice? Surely if even a Nominated Member of Parliament can force the whole of government, including its most senior statesman, to focus their attention on a ‘hifalutin’ issue and engage in robust debate, then a party with six elected members of Parliament, two NCMPs , and an alternate vision for Singapore can do so much more?
The oft-heard refrain that because the WP has no chance of winning a debate there is no point in starting one, is a massive cop-out. The House in any Westminster Parliament is not only a legislative chamber, but also a debating chamber. Not being able to win a debate, does not mean an issue is not worth debating, especially if one is a politician elected on a promise of more debate.
This is not about politicking as Low Thia Kiang has recently said. This is not about being an irrational or unreasonable opposition. This is about keeping one’s election promise – if one sells the electorate a vision, and if they elected one on this vision, then one had better live up to it.
The Worker’s Party thus has far bigger questions to answer than the PAP. When the Prime Minister asked where its policy alternatives were, the answer is obvious: they lay hidden in the depths of its Manifesto. The more crucial question is why a party which campaigned forcefully for more debate and a ‘First World Parliament’ has allowed these alternative policies to remain there, rather than forcing a fundamental rethink from the government by requiring them to stoutly defend its policies in the House.
At the end of the day, the Worker’s Party did not promise to run Singapore’s town councils better. The Worker’s Party did not even promise to solve bread-and-butter issues that Singaporeans face . Instead, the Worker’s Party promised that it would be a check-and-balance, that it would be a co-driver, and that more debate would lead Singapore to a ‘First World Parliament’. It is this, this that the voters of Punggol East, and perhaps Singaporeans at large, must ultimately judge them.
If it hasn’t even delivered the one thing it promised, then the question voters need to ask is not the one WP is asking them - whether Singapore needs another PAP MP. Rather, the right question would be the exact opposite: whether Singapore needs another Worker’s Party MP, or indeed any at all.
Calvin Cheng, 37, was a Nominated Member of Parliament from July 2009 to May 2011.
By Calvin Cheng | SingaporeScene
In the run-up to the by-election of Punggol East, it is clear, that final fight comes down to the two largest parties in Parliament: The People’s Action Party (PAP) and The Worker’s Party (WP).
The Worker’s Party chairman Sylvia Lim stated very early that this by-election was going to be a report-card on the PAP. Some political observers have commented that this is even more so than in Hougang, a Worker’s Party stronghold. And although the WP’s party candidate Lee Li Lian has recently admitted that the by-election would also be a barometer of the WP’s record, it seems that more questions are still being asked about the PAP rather than the WP.
This is natural. Being the incumbent, the PAP has much to prove after a water-shed election that saw an entire GRC falling for the first time to the opposition. It is also natural and obvious that this election, like all elections, would be a barometer of a ruling party’s record.
However, as even the leader of the WP Low Thia Kiang has admitted, time needs to be given to PAP to see whether it can solve the problems of Singaporeans, and to see the effects of its policy changes. Thus, contrary to the battle-cry of the opposition, I believe that this by-election is not so much a report-card on the PAP, but rather on the WP.
When one draws up a report card for a political party, nothing does better as a guide than their own campaign promises. The most striking thing about the WP’s campaign in GE 2011 was its overarching rhetoric of a “First World Parliament”.
It is also arguable that it was this promise, and its alluring pitch of a ‘co-driver’ elected to ‘slap’ the ruling party when it veers off-course, the seductive promise of check-and-balance, and the ideological insistence that an opposition in Singapore was necessary, that toppled George Yeo’s team in Aljunied.
But has it delivered on its promise working towards of a First World Parliament? Has it been the effective check-and-balance it promised the voters it would be? Has the co-driver performed?
The strangest thing that struck me during the GE campaign of 2011 was the WP’s strident rhetoric that electing it to Parliament would foster more debate, and thus help Singapore progress towards a ‘First World Parliament’.
No motions by WP
What was strange and extremely disturbing to me was that for a party that values debate so highly, in the 21 months that I served as Nominated Member of Parliament, the WP was curiously passive on the debating front. One has to understand that in Parliament, asking parliamentary questions is de riguer and does little to contribute to ‘debate’.
Any parliamentarian who has a burning issue to debate must surely know that the best and only way to force such a debate is to file a full motion, which compels the whole of parliament to put aside all other business and really debate the issue, concluding with a vote by all present Parliamentarians.
In the 21 months that I was NMP the WP filed precisely ZERO motions.
They did not even file any adjournment motions that would have given them a chance to speak at length, rather than just ask a question. In the first 21 months since GE 2011, the Workers Party has filed merely one adjournment motion (by NCMP Yee Jenn Jong), and another by Sylvia Lim just to withdraw it again.
In contrast, my former parliamentary colleague Viswa Sadasivan filed a full motion during his very first parliamentary sitting, which not only made Cabinet Ministers rise to rebut him, but even caused then Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew to speak in Parliament for the first time in years, and in the process teaching a nation the meaning of the word `hifalutin’.
The question then to ask of the WP is then this: For a party that campaigned on the promise of more debate as part of their march towards a ‘First World Parliament’, whither the debate? Surely if you have an alternate vision for Singapore, a vision burning to be articulated in full, asking questions would not suffice? Surely if even a Nominated Member of Parliament can force the whole of government, including its most senior statesman, to focus their attention on a ‘hifalutin’ issue and engage in robust debate, then a party with six elected members of Parliament, two NCMPs , and an alternate vision for Singapore can do so much more?
The oft-heard refrain that because the WP has no chance of winning a debate there is no point in starting one, is a massive cop-out. The House in any Westminster Parliament is not only a legislative chamber, but also a debating chamber. Not being able to win a debate, does not mean an issue is not worth debating, especially if one is a politician elected on a promise of more debate.
This is not about politicking as Low Thia Kiang has recently said. This is not about being an irrational or unreasonable opposition. This is about keeping one’s election promise – if one sells the electorate a vision, and if they elected one on this vision, then one had better live up to it.
The Worker’s Party thus has far bigger questions to answer than the PAP. When the Prime Minister asked where its policy alternatives were, the answer is obvious: they lay hidden in the depths of its Manifesto. The more crucial question is why a party which campaigned forcefully for more debate and a ‘First World Parliament’ has allowed these alternative policies to remain there, rather than forcing a fundamental rethink from the government by requiring them to stoutly defend its policies in the House.
At the end of the day, the Worker’s Party did not promise to run Singapore’s town councils better. The Worker’s Party did not even promise to solve bread-and-butter issues that Singaporeans face . Instead, the Worker’s Party promised that it would be a check-and-balance, that it would be a co-driver, and that more debate would lead Singapore to a ‘First World Parliament’. It is this, this that the voters of Punggol East, and perhaps Singaporeans at large, must ultimately judge them.
If it hasn’t even delivered the one thing it promised, then the question voters need to ask is not the one WP is asking them - whether Singapore needs another PAP MP. Rather, the right question would be the exact opposite: whether Singapore needs another Worker’s Party MP, or indeed any at all.
Calvin Cheng, 37, was a Nominated Member of Parliament from July 2009 to May 2011.
I am anti PAP and that includes PAP Lite WP. Any other questions Asshole?
All these while I do not like WP simply WP is completely a Silent Party inside parliament.
None of any WP MPs got balls to confront PAP
In GE2015 I have no choice just wanted more oppositions to be voted in and appeal voters to support WP.
You see WP has 28 contestants in GE2015 and always hold one rally simply many of WP members are not up to the mark to speak. LTK always read from script in his speech. LTK is a no ball MP inside parliament and support PAP to have our CPF min sum withdrawal.
I hope next GE all WP MPs to be kicked out.
Singaporeans, please don't complain lah.
None of any WP MPs got balls to confront PAP
In GE2015 I have no choice just wanted more oppositions to be voted in and appeal voters to support WP.
You see WP has 28 contestants in GE2015 and always hold one rally simply many of WP members are not up to the mark to speak. LTK always read from script in his speech. LTK is a no ball MP inside parliament and support PAP to have our CPF min sum withdrawal.
I hope next GE all WP MPs to be kicked out.
Singaporeans, please don't complain lah.
Don't forget. In an election, the voters not only judge the performance of the PAP, they also judge the performance of the WP. The performance of the PAP in many people's mind is a big fail based on their FT immigration policy, housing and transportation issues, etc. The WP is not judged on these issues. But they are judged on how they called the PAP to account for their performance and how they clarify and enlighten the issues for the voters. In this aspect, the WP performance was also a fail. And by reflection other oppo parties were painted with the same WP brush.
Correct. People also see this. Do you vote for more balless oppo MPs or do you vote for the evil empire? Its a poor option for voters. Caught between a rock and a hard place. Also. remember that the WP voted for every single annual budget tabled by the PAP. In the budget are such items as million dollar salaries for Ministers. This one item alone should have made them vote against it.
And not to forget the way the NCMP spat was played out was unfortunate. We are still a conservative society, and respect for elders is a virtue. What we saw as outsiders was betrayal of a young upstart of his mentor. Yes, i dislike Gerald Giam immensely. He reminds me of Brendan Rodgers. No trophy but thinks he is Alex Ferguson and acts like he is.
What SDP did in the 90s set opposition back 10 years. WP is not too far behind this time round. I suspect many who voted for them the last election are PAP-leaning supporters who were willing to give them a chance. These people will turn back to PAP at the slightest misstep.
As a matter of fact, one CSJ would be able to replace ALL of these useless WP MPs.
It is HOW useless these WP oppo really are.. Teochew con man LTK and his cronies , conning Hougang for so many years.
Hougang and Aljunied have another 5 years to repent!
Consider this. Roy, a poor social worker from the heartlands in a working class family terrorized the PAP more then $192,000 a year all expenses paid oppo MPs.
Fucking WP could not even stand up in Parliament and ask why Lam Par Min can bring 2 busloads of Grassloot supporters to Taipeh for a free holiday aka "retreat" out of PA funds.
Thy do ask, but it's as good as not asking.
"Minister, HDB has value at the end of the lease?"
"No value."
"Thank you minister for your clarification. No more question from me on this issue."
"(hahaha, i thought i gonna kena a grilling!)"
Ultimately, this is true. sinkies were to blame in the end. But the ground was ripe for a big PAP fall, given all the miscues in the last 4 years. The failure was that the WP did not exploit the govt cock ups. there were so many of them and so much ammo to fire the govt.
Why can't the WP stand up in Parliament and demand the firing of Desmond Quack after the last big MRT outage? The WP also represent singaporeans, right? And many sinkies were calling for Dessie to be sacked. Just because they stand up in Parliament and call for Dessie Quack to be fired does not mean that he will. In fact, you can be assured that he will not. But it would have forced the PAP to come out with a song and dance about why Dessie is so great and why he has to stay. People will remember the fucking lie that PAP perpetuated to justify Quack staying. It damages their reputation. It weakens people confidence in them. Anything the WP can do to whack down the PAP this way should have been done. But they did not.
Hahahah. Yeah, the Minister was shitting in his pants. But gay Loong forgot to tell him that the WP is also in their pocket. LOL.
Just reply you vote for it.
KJ last night said Singaporean made the choice, so no more complain.
KJ last night said Singaporean made the choice, so no more complain.
Similar threads
