RP and SDA supporters forgot SPP Lina Chiam

There's a Mrs Lina Chiam in Parliament.

So why do they keep saying things like, opposition perform poorly because of WP so it's good to have one opposition member from another opposition party. Or there's room for 2 opposition.

tanwahp said:

There's a Mrs Lina Chiam in Parliament.

So why do they keep saying things like, opposition perform poorly because of WP so it's good to have one opposition member from another opposition party. Or there's room for 2 opposition.

Click to expand...

Everyone who keep track of Parliament sessions knows Lina Chiam is just reading from script. She was expose several times when someone post questions about her speech she could not even answer. Only retards support SPP continual existence in Parliament. The sooner she gets voted out, the better for the country

if ncmp allowance reduced to 20 bucks per month ...

three jokers are there just to cari makan...

Lina Chiam is a good-hearted lady. Please don't critcise this well-intentioned lady.

wMulew said:

Everyone who keep track of Parliament sessions knows Lina Chiam is just reading from script. She was expose several times when someone post questions about her speech she could not even answer. Only retards support SPP continual existence in Parliament. The sooner she gets voted out, the better for the country

Click to expand...

You are against all opposition. Why single her out.

tanwahp said:

You are against all opposition. Why single her out.

Click to expand...

I find that Lina Chiam actually exceed expectation ... she bring out a lot more alternative proposal than all the WP MPs combined....

and I find that some NMP also outperform WP themselves..

the truth is not just Lina Chiam is reading from script, most likely Li Lian herself will be reading from script if elected...

most of the officers in WP have been elected, Li Lian is a sgt, she just take order and do work...

expecting her to contribute to policy debate is a bridge too far...

not just her, Hong Boon, Frieda and glenda are sgt material.... they are all social and grassroot activist at most, they have no burning pet issue or any policy solution..

ANgela has better credential but not in econ and public policy, she is also bleeding liberal, she can at least do her own research and write her own speech to push her liberal agenda, but i do not think she can be in position of governance...
those sgt above cant, they will likely need to read scripts..

angela is in marriage of convenience with WP, i suspect she rather be in SDP

I consider Png, John Yam and Choon Yong to be Warrent officer, they could have been officer material meaning they can contribute to parliament debate but once elected they will just focus on glassloot and TC because of the need to be seen more garang than their volunteers...

Faisal is definitely a sgt, he will push for more help for the poor and needy, like most PAP MPs....

Pritam is like a cadet, all sound and thunder only, have not seen anything constructive yet...

only the GG and JJ are acting like officers material but you can see that GG is too timid too scared or maybe just too comfortable with PAP policy...

as for SHow Mao, he is CDF material but right now he is acting like an OOC cadet in parliament...
MIA, massive underachievement from Show Mao....

unlike SDP, SPP, NSP and even DPP, its seem that WP has no policy committee, everything in parliament seem very personality and opinon driven, they seem to think
"I am the MP, my pet topic is this, so i will talk about this in parliament, regardless of whether it s a hot button issue or not."



WP cannot never form the government if all they are contented with is to make the PAP work harder without working harder themselves

in the long run, it can be said that PAP natural shelf life is extended by WP, they do not want to take over from PAP, and they suck all the air from those that are more ambitious

Most people have the wrong idea of policy making or the creation of a master plan. There is always the misconception that the plan or policy is created by the person who presents it. This is furthest from the truth. Even for the PAP.

Anybody here truly believe that Ms Chiam's proposals to parliament are all her handiwork? A properly thought out plan must take several seemingly unrelated factors into consideration and may involve the inputs from several departments. Without that, it is just a microscopic plan with major problem of getting it implemented.

I find laughable that people are easily impressed by the quotation of the scholastic credentials of the authors. I am not because I know these proposals are just tunnel vision glimpses into some very complicated issues and if presented formally will be fair fodder for target practice. Anyway scholastic achievements, even PhDs mean nothing if past experience is not directly related to the plan and even that changed planning parameters mean that it can finally end up as a matter of personal judgment which can be debated upon. Many people are mistaken that the end result of the plan is something I like, so it must be good or workable.

The best thing that someone without full access to all relevant data can do is to suggest an idea or concept and leave it to people who have deep appreciation of such data to generate the detailed plans. A good example is what Prof LCY tried to propose with balancing the income inequality, just a broad concept, no implementation details. Will the PAP do this for an idea proposed by an opposition member? Fat hope under the present political environment.

Until such a time when a party has grown so large that it can have its own research team and can actually do studies based not only from secondary data (which are highly condensed in the publicly available sources) but also primary data from their own research, I doubt any party can come out with any viable plan. I doubt even the PAP has such a unit within its own party organisation to be able to do something like that.

SPP.............still exist meh ?

Fook Seng said:

Most people have the wrong idea of policy making or the creation of a master plan. There is always the misconception that the plan or policy is created by the person who presents it. This is furthest from the truth. Even for the PAP.

Anybody here truly believe that Ms Chiam's proposals to parliament are all her handiwork? A properly thought out plan must take several seemingly unrelated factors into consideration and may involve the inputs from several departments. Without that, it is just a microscopic plan with major problem of getting it implemented.

I find laughable that people are easily impressed by the quotation of the scholastic credentials of the authors. I am not because I know these proposals are just tunnel vision glimpses into some very complicated issues and if presented formally will be fair fodder for target practice. Anyway scholastic achievements, even PhDs mean nothing if past experience is not directly related to the plan and even that changed planning parameters mean that it can finally end up as a matter of personal judgment which can be debated upon. Many people are mistaken that the end result of the plan is something I like, so it must be good or workable.

The best thing that someone without full access to all relevant data can do is to suggest an idea or concept and leave it to people who have deep appreciation of such data to generate the detailed plans. A good example is what Prof LCY tried to propose with balancing the income inequality, just a broad concept, no implementation details. Will the PAP do this for an idea proposed by an opposition member? Fat hope under the present political environment.

Until such a time when a party has grown so large that it can have its own research team and can actually do studies based not only from secondary data (which are highly condensed in the publicly available sources) but also primary data from their own research, I doubt any party can come out with any viable plan. I doubt even the PAP has such a unit within its own party organisation to be able to do something like that.

Click to expand...

you just reinforce my point that WP has no policy committee... thats why they are not able to repsent any coherant on so many hot button issue...

what they should do and GMS also suggested it before. you have a policy committee. you do some diagnosis brainstorm and try to come out with an idea

but so far most of the stuff that come out from WP is hit and miss...

the starting point is to have an idea , before you can talk ... WP have no idea ... let be honest...

Li Lian has no fuckin clue as well... for WP, parliament is a destination, not the start...

they it as the start of commencing grassroot activity to consolidate power...

power for power sake..

even Hazel alone have come out with pretty orignal proposals in her press release...

brocoli said:

you just reinforce my point that WP has no policy committee... thats why they are not able to repsent any coherant on so many hot button issue...

Click to expand...

What is a policy? And what is a plan that can be implemented? These are two different things. A policy defines what we want to achieve, the key objective, the sub-objectives and the constraints. A plan follows the stipulation of the policy, put in the relevant data, apply the constraints, do the iteration and the optimisation. If you go straight down into some micro-engineering study without having first a policy on the mega state of things, the end result can be tangentially opposed to what you intended to achieve in the first place.

Those proposals put up by some parties which some of you people admired so much fell short of being workable solutions simply because the main goals were not too clear, the database inadequate, the sub-objectives and constraints not thoroughly defined. The reason why it is so is because of the lack of available data.

The more sub-objectives and constraints you include in the plan and the more people you want to cover, the more data you need. As a result the goals in these proposals were more like sub-objectives or wishes only. By proposing something that benefits a single group of people you totally ignore the relative and even absolute injustice done to all others. The worst hit are those who just missed the cut.

People are not a homogenous group. Their needs are very varied. There are those where cost is of the most concern, don't care whether they can make money or not. While for others, making or growing the money is of greater importance. Yet for others, the greatest enjoyment of a need is paramount. Taking a narrow objective in the planning study benefits only a small group but worst is that it will disadvantage the rest. If you look at the single objective of what the plan is trying to do, if it is just to do that, there are far, far simpler solutions and possibly one that is already in existence. That is why I have said such plans can be torn apart quite easily. If that is the case, what is the point of building one?

Another thing, it is quite easy to take a large sum of money and find a way to spend it as some past proposals tried to do. Give this problem to 10 individuals. Each will be able to share with you some very good way to use the money. Less easy is to have a constraint that requires you to find a way to give a payback in quantitative terms. What is so good a plan if the money simply disappears without some measure of what concrete benefits it actually brings?

We can agree to disagree but I don't believe WP has no policy or has not presented these in parliament. What people are saying is that they did not present alternative plans of Government. But why should they? They are far from being an alternative government unlike some other parties who think they are closer to it. But is it true or is it just grandiose self delusion?

I agree with LTK that at this time, opposition members can only serve to tekan the government for their policy flaws and not to offer alternative governments.

Even if they can do a really good one unlike those half past six proposals offered by some, we all know these will not be accepted by the large majority ruling party. Doing one now is a pure academic exercise, of course, well loved by academics. But to me it only serves an one-upmanship purpose, nothing more. And when such a plan for an alternative government is really needed, say 20 years down the road, the ground conditions would have been changed and a new plan would be needed.

I do not know whether forummers here realise that there is such a thing as external consultants and they are the true experts with real working life experience, not any ordinary academic. In fact when the PAP first started, they engaged a guy by the name of Dr Albert Winsemius. These things you really don't have to DIY. Just have broad policy ideas, no need to have detailed plans now and use consultants when you really need them. Anyway a good government certainly cannot equate itself with being a good consultant.

As I have said, now is the time to tekan the government and tekan them harder than before, imperatively. Please don't pull punches. They will have to answer to policy flaws that are part of their form of government.

wMulew said:

Everyone who keep track of Parliament sessions knows Lina Chiam is just reading from script. She was expose several times when someone post questions about her speech she could not even answer. Only retards support SPP continual existence in Parliament. The sooner she gets voted out, the better for the country

Click to expand...

I believe the underlined word aptly describes a person who states that an NCMP can get voted out..how can it be so, when an NCMP is appointed and not voted for by the electorate...

Ever since Lina entered parl, she has looked like a deer caught in the headlights.

she is out of depth and its painful to watch her teetering and tottering.

nt sure how long she can trade on CST's name. pity her.

Kinana said:

Thats right. Lina alone is actually more constructive and productive that the entire WP team in parliament.

Click to expand...

Tell that to the RP and SDA leaders who want to be the alternative to WP, thereby dissing Lina.