Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Elections?

[GOD IS MY DOG]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Let's say there are 100 seats being contested and PAP wins 45 seats, WP wins 20, SDP wins 20 and NSP wins 15.

And then, let's say President Tony Tan re-appoints Lee Hsien Loong (even though he'll be in his mid-60s by then) as Prime Minister because:

"in his judgment, is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the MPs"
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Singapore#Appointment_of_Cabinet)

After that, "acting in accordance with the Prime Minister's advice", President Tony Tan "also appoints other Ministers to the Cabinet from among the MPs".

My point is, if PM Lee Hsien Loong "advises" President Tony Tan to appoint Ministers to the Cabinet from among the PAP MPs only, is the President allowed to do that by the so-called "Constitution"?

If the answer is yes, then it seems that there's no hope for any opposition party to ever gain control of the government simply because of inability/impossibility to gain control of the Cabinet, right?

Of course, if let's say the WP or SDP ever ends up winning more than half of the parliamentary seats, then it's possible for the Cabinet to consist of not even one PAP MP... but that seems highly unlikely, doesn't it?

since PAP controls the media...............who knows if they really won or lost the elections.............they just declare themselves winners lor..............who dare to make noise anyway ?


virtually everyone i know of hates PAP................i'm sure everyone here also like this ..............

 

[thisalsocan]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

since PAP controls the media...............who knows if they really won or lost the elections.............they just declare themselves winners lor..............who dare to make noise anyway ?


virtually everyone i know of hates PAP................i'm sure everyone here also like this ..............

I believed you are also aware that during counting of the votes all Political party involved will have their agents at the counting stations? Are you saying that these agents will keep quiet if PAP were to declare they are the winners?

 

[Ramseth]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

since PAP controls the media...............who knows if they really won or lost the elections.............they just declare themselves winners lor..............who dare to make noise anyway ?
........

I dare to make noise. We dare to make noise. You should volunteer yourself as Counting Agent to see the process for yourself. The media doesn't decide or announce the results. The Counting Agents and Returning Officer do. It's a fair process. A win is a win and loss is a loss. A fair count is the word. Losing is alright but don't be losing and crying foul when all is fair. The Counting Agents aren't there to make unnecessary noise too, only to make noise when there're disputable votes.

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

The beauty of this thread is in exposing some of the misconception of the political naivety of Sinkies.

Many simply assume that any one political party must cross the 50% barrier in order to form the government.What if it's a 45% slim minority or majority occurs?That whether a 45% is actually a minority or a majority than becomes highly subjective.

Actually, under the westminster model, need not have any party or coalition of parties to have absolute majority to form gahmen.
Gahmen can be formed by party or coalition of parties with the most seat as long as no other party or coalition of parties can muster more seats than the former.
So in a case of 50%-50%, its a hung parliament, and in cases of 45%-20%-35% (as example), the 45% can form a minority gahmen. In the history of parliamentary democracy, gahmen formed under such scenarios never lasts long as virtually nothing ever gets done. There is simply no incentive for the opposition to help the gahmen succeed. So its gonna be just gahmen change after gahmen change.
As you say, it is not an impossibility for pappies to go down when the oppies adopt a divide and conquer policy avoiding 3 corner fights. Imagine someone like Lina Chiam almost becoming an MP, missing by a mere 100+ votes.

 

[Ramseth]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Under the Westminster model, a hung parliament is a hung parliament, i.e. with no party crossing 50% of the seats. There's no such thing as a party can form government with 45% as the other parties got 35% or 20% only. A coalition above 50% must be formed. Otherwise, re-election.

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

since PAP controls the media...............who knows if they really won or lost the elections.............they just declare themselves winners lor..............who dare to make noise anyway ?


virtually everyone i know of hates PAP................i'm sure everyone here also like this ..............

Wah lau.... obviously u dunno wat goes on at the counting centres. Even the oppy parties oso say vote is secret and the counting is fair liao. You still anyhow bark like mad dog. :*: Dun think you're doing your own credibility any favours.

 

[Zatoichi]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Under the westminster model of parliamentary democracy, a coalition of parties with more than 50% of the seats can form the gahmen.

The opposition in its current form is unable to take over the government.....My prediction, sometime in 2030 before they are ready to fully kick out PAP.

That is why i say many times, we cannot have an alliance, but a 2 party system.....

property prices wil fall ... there wil b no mor jobs ... ft's wil all balek kampung ... in turn, sinkies wil bcum ft's ... sinkie men wil bcum wash big biscuit ft's ... sinkie women wil bcum ft maids ...

Either the PAP forms a coalition with either WP or SDP or .NSP or WP,SDP and NSP forms a coalition.In both circumstances,both coalitions must show to the president that they have a majority in the parliament to form the next government.

then we have truly arrived at ESM Goh's vision of a Swiss Standard of Living with a Swiss Standard of Coalition Government

yup, not necc the opposition would all band together. at least one party would leap at the chance to be part of the coalition govt.

If the PAPzis (in this example) choose to form a coalition, it is likely to have to offer cabinet positions to its coalition partners. These often turns out to be deputies of important positions, e.g. DPM, deputy defence minister, etc.

I hope to see the day PAP loses control of the government, and witness the new government mothball a few agencies that have long outlived its usefulness.

virtually everyone i know of hates PAP................i'm sure everyone here also like this ..............

A fair count is the word. Losing is alright but don't be losing and crying foul when all is fair.

Once again, many thanks to all of you who have replied and helped to answer my question!
I read every single word of all your posts and understood everything!

There is another possibility.Presidential rule.
Where the parliament is suspended and executives are appointed by presidential degree.Usually the incumbent PM is appointed as the caretaker.It is last resort measure like martial rule.

But I thought you said:

2.The president does not control who becomes the PM or ministers.

And isn't an "executive" the same as a "minister", only having a different "job title", so to speak?

Also, in Singapore's case, wouldn't "Presidential Rule" be the same as "PAP rule"?
Because President Tony Tan is obviously pro-PAP (even though he is "officially" not a member of any political party), right?

So if what PAP calls a "freak" Election (i.e. PAP winning less than half of the parliamentary seats) happens in 2016, and President Tony Tan imposes his "Presidential rule" and just leaves the existing PAP Cabinet of Ministers unchanged (if they are all still alive, of course), and then PAP holds another Presidential Election in 2017 and deviously makes sure Singapore gets yet another pro-PAP President until 2023, and keeps repeating this cycle every few years, doesn't that virutally guarantee perpetual power to the PAP?

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Under the Westminster model, a hung parliament is a hung parliament, i.e. with no party crossing 50% of the seats. There's no such thing as a party can form government with 45% as the other parties got 35% or 20% only. A coalition above 50% must be formed. Otherwise, re-election.

That's not true. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_system

"The head of government, usually called the prime minister or premier, will ideally have the support of a majority in the responsible house, and must in any case be able to ensure the existence of no absolute majority against the government. If the parliament passes a resolution of no confidence, or refuses to pass an important bill such as the budget, then the government must either resign so that a different government can be appointed or seek a parliamentary dissolution so that new general elections may be held in order to re-confirm or deny the government's mandate."

Read the part in bold. As long as no party or coalition of parties opposes it, the party can form a gahmen even if it does not have absolute majority. This can happen when the other minority oppies are too fractious to band together, ie. the 35% and 20% decline to form a coalition gahmen.

 

[Ramseth]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

You've already answered your own question, the part not in bold. No political party can survive a hung parliament under the Westminster model without a committed coalition.

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Once again, many thanks to all of you who have replied and helped to answer my question!
I read every single word of all your posts and understood everything!

You do???? Amazing! There's as much truths as half-truths and outright lies in the quotes you highlighted.

And isn't an "executive" the same as a "minister", only having a different "job title", so to speak?

Also, in Singapore's case, wouldn't "Presidential Rule" be the same as "PAP rule"?
Because President Tony Tan is obviously pro-PAP (even though he is "officially" not a member of any political party), right?

So if what PAP calls a "freak" Election (i.e. PAP winning less than half of the parliamentary seats) happens in 2016, and President Tony Tan imposes his "Presidential rule" and just leaves the existing PAP Cabinet of Ministers unchanged (if they are all still alive, of course), and then PAP holds another Presidential Election in 2017 and deviously makes sure Singapore gets yet another pro-PAP President until 2023, and keeps repeating this cycle every few years, doesn't that virutally guarantee perpetual power to the PAP?

No same. The "executive" in political speak refers to the highest office of power. In the US system, it is the executive president. In the westminster system, it is the prime minister. The minister is but a supporting staff of the prime minister's cabinet, much like the secretaries of state/defence etc in the US system. They hold no executive power as they have to carry out what the executive decides, though most decisions are made as a collective, thus reducing the friction. If they really buay song the executive, the minister/secretary can always resign.

Again, no same. Had TCB or TJS won the PE, would presidential rule still be the same as pappy rule? Understand the system, dun look at the personality.

The president, at best, is only temporarily in charge when there is boh cheng hoo (no gahmen). The powers of the EP is silent on this part, so i'm guessing. No gahmen only happens when the incumbent gahmen resigns. So if the incumbent gahmen already resign and the president accepted, thus putting him in temporary charge, then how he leaves the incumbent gahmen in power since he already accepted their resignation? So again, understand how the system works and the powers that reside within each of the legislative, executive and judical arm of the gahmen, and the EP. There are already too many mad dogs barking in this forum, not in the trying to learn manner, but in the barking to influence manner. Such types can only do harm to the country.

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

You've already answered your own question, the part not in bold. No political party can survive a hung parliament under the Westminster model without a committed coalition.

Dun prata. Your assertion was not about survival, but rather whether there was such as thing as a minority gahmen. The fact is that it is a possiblity, and it is allowable. Whether or not it can survive, i already said previously that in the history of parliamentary democracy, gahmen formed under such scenarios never lasts long as virtually nothing ever gets done.

 

[Ramseth]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Dun prata. Your assertion was not about survival, but rather whether there was such as thing as a minority gahmen. The fact is that it is a possiblity, and it is allowable. Whether or not it can survive, i already said previously that in the history of parliamentary democracy, gahmen formed under such scenarios never lasts long as virtually nothing ever gets done.

OK you're right. Happy?

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

OK you're right. Happy?

Thank u. Nothing to be happy about. Just fortunate that there's no need to go round and round in circles with someone who keeps flipping prata. Lucky for me you aren't like that in this instance.

 

[Zatoichi]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

I read every single word of all your posts and understood everything!

You do???? Amazing! There's as much truths as half-truths and outright lies in the quotes you highlighted.

Yes, I dare say that I understood everything, or at least most of it.
But I did not say that I agreed with everything!

So if the incumbent gahmen already resign and the president accepted, thus putting him in temporary charge, then how he leaves the incumbent gahmen in power since he already accepted their resignation?

Because I was trying to logically deduce the consequence of this possibility:

Where the parliament is suspended and executives are appointed by presidential degree.Usually the incumbent PM is appointed as the caretaker.It is last resort measure like martial rule.

So in Singapore's case, since President Tony Tan is pro-PAP and will remain President until at least a year after the next Parliamentary Elections in 2016, he can simply re-appoint the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers if the PAP wins less than half the Parliamentary seats, since if Parliament is "suspended" or "dissolved" due to it being "hung", President Tony Tan would have the power or some kind of "right" to just re-appoint the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers as "Executives" by "Presidential Decree", right?

I doubt the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers would want to resign in 2016... do you think they would?

 

[HTOLAS]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

The 2010 Australian GE resulted in a hung parliament with both the Australian Labor Party and the Liberal-led coalition winning 72 seats, four short of 50%+1 needed for a majority. The deadlock was broken when one Green MP and four independents pledge their support for the ALP, allowing it to form a minority government.

It is a minority government because the ALP did not go into coalition with the 5 MPs, but just got their pledge that they would not vote to vote against the ALP in any no-confidence motion. Why then did the 5 agree when they were not offered any posts in return? I think they felt that the ALP was the lesser of two evils.

Given that the ALP government has lasted almost 18 months and that the Australian parliamentary term is 36 months, this minority government has been quite stable. It has even managed to pass unpopular legislation like the carbon tax.

You've already answered your own question, the part not in bold. No political party can survive a hung parliament under the Westminster model without a committed coalition.

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Yes, I dare say that I understood everything, or at least most of it.
But I did not say that I agreed with everything!

I see. Good for you then.

Because I was trying to logically deduce the consequence of this possibility:

So in Singapore's case, since President Tony Tan is pro-PAP and will remain President until at least a year after the next Parliamentary Elections in 2016, he can simply re-appoint the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers if the PAP wins less than half the Parliamentary seats, since if Parliament is "suspended" or "dissolved" due to it being "hung", President Tony Tan would have the power or some kind of "right" to just re-appoint the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers as "Executives" by "Presidential Decree", right?

I doubt the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers would want to resign in 2016... do you think they would?

He can't. Under his powers, "He also appoints as Prime Minister a Member of Parliament (MP) who, in his personal judgment, is likely to command the confidence of a majority of MPs." So if pappy fails to secure majority of the seats, it is not logical for EP to appoint a pappy to be prime minister, unless, as i mentioned earlier, it is a case of minority gahmen, or a coalition gahmen with pappy as the leader.

Oh, and by the way, under our political system, the PM and ministers remain in place after parliament is dissolved, until the next gahmen is formed by the party or parties with the most number of seats in parliament. So we should not have a situation of boh cheng hoo unless the PM and his cabinet resigns en masse.

 

[Zatoichi]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

So if pappy fails to secure majority of the seats, it is not logical for EP to appoint a pappy to be prime minister

But what if there's "chaos" as mentioned here:

Hence presidential rule is a short term measure to bring order to chaos.

 

[Alladin]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

But what if there's "chaos" as mentioned here:

If there's chaos, and there's boh cheng hoo, then the president is technically the commander in chief that the uniformed services swear allegience to.

 

[Zatoichi]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

If there's chaos, and there's boh cheng hoo, then the president is technically the commander in chief that the uniformed services swear allegience to.

And he, especially Tony Tan (who would be an old man of 76 years in 2016), can just "command" the incumbent Cabinet of PAP Ministers to "serve" him, right?
If yes, it's still PAP rule in reality and not "Presidential rule" (on paper), right?

 

[Nice-Gook]

Re: Just curious, what if PAP really wins less than half the seats at the next Electi

Yes, I dare say that I understood everything, or at least most of it.
But I did not say that I agreed with everything!



Because I was trying to logically deduce the consequence of this possibility:

So in Singapore's case, since President Tony Tan is pro-PAP and will remain President until at least a year after the next Parliamentary Elections in 2016, he can simply re-appoint the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers if the PAP wins less than half the Parliamentary seats, since if Parliament is "suspended" or "dissolved" due to it being "hung", President Tony Tan would have the power or some kind of "right" to just re-appoint the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers as "Executives" by "Presidential Decree", right?

I doubt the existing Cabinet of PAP Ministers would want to resign in 2016... do you think they would?

Ok.Let us be very clear.

First and foremost I am not sure whether our constitution provides for presidential rule.

Second..presidential rule is an emergency measure.Like martial rule but better since our civil liberties are not suspended.

Third a presidential rule is not expected to last more than 1 year or 2.After which an election must be held.

Hope that helps.



Just one thing.Under normal circumstances a president does not select the PM..it's left to the political party which won the majority seats in the parliament....but the president selects the PM only under the presidential rule.