Inderjit Singh: PAP should lift party whip

He also says that he cannot be blamed for not voting against the White Paper, since the party whip was not lifted. Hence he simply didn't vote.

However he wanted the whip to be lifted for the current Budget debate (fat hope!)

Is he a dissident from within? How long before LHL finds him troublesome and retires him?

http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/lift-party-whip-major-policies-mp-inderjit-singh

CPT (NS) BRANDON said:

He also says that he cannot be blamed for not voting against the White Paper, since the party whip was not lifted. Hence he simply didn't vote.

However he wanted the whip to be lifted for the current Budget debate (fat hope!)

Is he a dissident from within? How long before LHL finds him troublesome and retires him?

http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/lift-party-whip-major-policies-mp-inderjit-singh

Click to expand...

LHL will use him as a sympathy card saying, "see, there's no heard mentality in the PAP. MPs can voice their own views".

CPT (NS) BRANDON said:

He also says that he cannot be blamed for not voting against the White Paper, since the party whip was not lifted. Hence he simply didn't vote ...

Click to expand...

tis burger tokcok betta dan sing-song ... never even ask ah loon 2 lift party whip, now tok until he's so gr8 lidat ...

y dun he go n demand ah loon 2 lift whip 4 budget debate? ...

bwahahahahahahaa...

Lifting the whip for the budget doesn't do much good. Even the WP will approve the budget.

He is doing a Tan Cheng Bock move to prepare him to be a candidate in the next PE. First time that Singapore will have a Sikh president.

Post 1 - Infotainment on Whips in the Grandmother of Westminster models

From Wikipedia (underlinings are mine):

In the UK Parliament the importance of a vote is indicated by underlining of items on the "whip", which is the name of the letter the Chief Whip sends to all the MPs in their party at the start of the week. This letter informs them of the schedule for the days ahead, and includes the sentence, "Your attendance is absolutely essential" next to each debate in which there will be a vote. This sentence is underlined one, two or three times depending on the consequences that will be suffered if they do not turn up, hence the origin of the terms one-line whip, two-line whip and three-line whip. The actual direction of their vote is communicated to them in the chamber by hand signals during the division when the time comes (usually after the division bell has been rung). Even though it determines the outcome of the votes crucially far more than the debate, neither these instructions, which are visible to everyone in the chamber, nor the "whip" letter at the start of the week, are recorded in Hansard, as they are considered an internal matter of the political party; indeed, the system exists because any explicit direction to an MP as to how they should vote would technically be a Breach of Parliamentary Privilege.

The consequences for defying the party whip depend on the circumstances and are usually negotiated with the party whip in advance. The party whip's job is to ensure the outcome of the vote, so the situation is different and more important for a party which holds the majority, because if their members obey the whip they can always win. They can make allowances for MPs who are away on important business, whose political circumstances require them to take a particular single issue very seriously, or if there is a mass revolt. Theoretically at least, expulsion from the party is automatically consequent from defying a three-line whip.

An example of this is in the case of John Major’s government. Nine conservative Members of Parliament had their whips removed after voting against the government on its stance to the Maastricht Treaty. It was also the only time when MPs who are being whipped were co-operating with the opposite side's whips.

There are some cases in which whips are removed because an issue is a matter of conscience. These include adoption, religion and equal opportunities. The impact of a whip being imposed on a matter of conscience can be damaging for a party leader. One such case was that of Iain Duncan-Smith, who imposed a three-line whip against adoption of children by gay couples. Several Conservative MPs voted against the official party line, and Duncan-Smith's authority was weakened.

Whips can often be brutal to backbenchers to secure their vote, and will resort to a mixture of promises, threats, blackmail and extortion to force an unpopular vote. A good whip will know secrets and incriminating information about Members of Parliament. A whip should know major figures in an MP's local constituency party and the MP's agent. There have been cases where Members of Parliament were wheeled from far afield to vote for the government on a crucial vote.

………….

For a minister, the consequences for defying the party whip are absolute: they are dismissed from their job immediately, if they have not already resigned, and return to being a backbencher. Sometimes their votes in Parliament are called the "payroll vote", because they can be taken for granted. The consequences for a back-bencher can include the lack of future promotion to a government post, a reduction of party campaigning effort in his or her constituency during the next election, deselection by his or her local party activists, or, in extreme circumstances, "withdrawal of the whip" and expulsion from the party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Whip#United_Kingdom

Post 2 - No Bollywood Song and Dance PREASE

Oh Mister Bayi, please prease don’t give Sinkie peasants that insincere song and dance. They are not that daft anymore.

The power of the Whip depends on some things like:

- The balls, if any, of MPs of the majority party. No balls, just say no balls, don’t claim it is because the Whip not lifted.

- Political environment of the day. In the 80s or 90s, PAP can expel a few MPs and ze Old Fart will refuse to call a by-election even if the expulsions occurred 3 years before a GE is due. MPs expelled from their political parties in the UK can continue to sit as independents. That is not the case in Sinkieland. Witness the case of Yaw Shin Leong. Expulsion from party equals expulsion from Parliament. In today's environment when the Shit Times is being challenged by the Internet, by-elections WILL be called, even if Ass Loon continues to indulge in his fiction of an absolute discretion to hold one or not, because the political cost of not holding them is too great.

- The ambition versus the conscience of MPs in question. If you wanna be a minister, GLC contracts too lucrative to lose, etc just obey the Whip. They have dirt on you, just obey the Whip. Should you have a conscience and the issue is big enough, just tell the Whip to go and fly a kite and to hell with the consequences. Better if they expel you from the party, call a by-election, you stand as an independent or a member of an Opposition Party, and win. If there are 4 or 5 who defied the Whip, do you think Ass Loon will have the guts to expel all of them from the PAP and call by-elections in the affected constituencies or face the consequences of not doing so in GE2016? However, it certainly will mean that these 4 or 5 defiant MPs can say goodbye to any sweet heart deals with GLCs or any entity controlled directing or indirectly by the Scums in White.

So, mister Bayi, defy the Whip if your conscience tells you to do so. If you have too much to lose and have no balls, just say so. Don’t be insincere. Cheers.

It would be wrong to lift the party whip because the PWP represents the core beliefs of the PAP. The PAP needs to be fair to the voters who chose their party candidate. This is the voice of the majority. They asked for it.

If he got guts, he should resign and join WP.

mojito said:

It would be wrong to lift the party whip because the PWP represents the core beliefs of the PAP. The PAP needs to be fair to the voters who chose their party candidate. This is the voice of the majority. They asked for it.

Click to expand...

Bwahahaha. 'allo, 'allo Uncle, your Ingereesh comprehension got problem izzit?

"Even though it determines the outcome of the votes crucially far more than the debate, neither these instructions, which are visible to everyone in the chamber, nor the "whip" letter at the start of the week, are recorded in Hansard, as they are considered an internal matter of the political party; indeed, the system exists because any explicit direction to an MP as to how they should vote would technically be a Breach of Parliamentary Privilege."

The Whip is NOT recognised in the Constitution or any statute. In fact, its existence goes against the principle of Parliamentary Privilege and representative democracy. He-Is-A-Cheat Sink was elected by eligible voters of Turban constituency to represent them. He is entitled to tell the Whip to go and fark spider if obeying his instructions goes against the interests of the voters of Turban constituency. If he doesn't dare to do so because of threats, extortion, etc by the Whip, then he should just say so.

You need to take Ingereesh comprehension lessons, unless of course, what you said in another thread and quoted below is TRUE, in which case you must be getting some good kickbacks from your masters, the Scums in White.

mojito said:

You got me bro. I admit it. I am a paid PAP IB but I do it to put my 12 kids into college. Have a heart!

Click to expand...

Oh, the Wiki article says instructions to vote are communicated by the Whip through hand signals, so here's mine :oIo:

Bwahahaha.

Prof THH have you been dipping your willy into too many fannies? A by-election will never be called for Inderjit's seat as the PM will himself have to resign to facilitate the by-election.

Rumpole said:

In today's environment when the Shit Times is being challenged by the Internet, by-elections WILL be called, even if Ass Loon continues to indulge in his fiction of an absolute discretion to hold one or not, because the political cost of not holding them is too great.

Click to expand...

I understand that the lifting of the whip is recorded in Hansard.

Rumpole said:

Post 1 - Infotainment on Whips in the Grandmother of Westminster models

From Wikipedia (underlinings are mine):

Even though it determines the outcome of the votes crucially far more than the debate, neither these instructions, which are visible to everyone in the chamber, nor the "whip" letter at the start of the week, are recorded in Hansard, as they are considered an internal matter of the political party; indeed, the system exists because any explicit direction to an MP as to how they should vote would technically be a Breach of Parliamentary Privilege.

rl]

Click to expand...

By the way, leaving the chambers just before the bell rings and the vote begins is a time honoured West Minister tradition. The Aussies, the British etc all do it when the whip is not lifted. The party closes an eye when they have sufficient majority. This is allow members who have string views and those in sensitive seats not to carry the burden. Occasionally you will come across news when the speaker calls for the chamber to be closed and one or two characters running for the door and not making it.

cass888 said:

Prof THH have you been dipping your willy into too many fannies? A by-election will never be called for Inderjit's seat as the PM will himself have to resign to facilitate the by-election.

Click to expand...

Aiyoh auntie cass, please lah, leave this Rumpole Fatso to me. He sure go IMH one. Was very sure some Prof will go to prison. Different strokes for different people. That's what master always said. Now, this Fat Thing deputy director of CPIB is so clumsy. Screw up all master's great plans. Simple directions to FIX also don't know how to carry out.

Plus now ah, all these judges also not obedient any more. Siva let Boon Gay go, also this Fat Thing screw up. Whisper "Michael Khoo", but judges not scared any more. Heh, auntie cass, let's consider changing sides lah. No money, no honey.

You, like this Mojito, Rodyk, etc are my teammates ah. Banzai!

scroobal said:

By the way, leaving the chambers just before the bell rings and the vote begins is a time honoured West Minister tradition. The Aussies, the British etc all do it when the whip is not lifted. The party closes an eye when they have sufficient majority. This is allow members who have string views and those in sensitive seats not to carry the burden. Occasionally you will come across news when the speaker calls for the chamber to be closed and one or two characters running for the door and not making it.

Click to expand...

Bro...u sure u not pulling our leg!! What if the doors are closed and u need to use the bathroom or something....cannot also!!

jubilee1919 said:

He is doing a Tan Cheng Bock move to prepare him to be a candidate in the next PE. First time that Singapore will have a Sikh president.

Click to expand...

We already had a Indian guy.

Not kidding, have attached a link to a news video where the leader of the Australian Opposition heading for the door and missing it and getting scolded by the speaker.

http://www.news.com.au/national-new...ons-tainted-vote/story-e6frfkvr-1226373622489

Singapore cabinet ministers in private session tend to reveal a lot including their views on some issues which are quite startling. These private sessions are run along Chatham House rules. Business leaders and student leaders are invited for these session.

Not many people are aware the purpose of the whip.

enterprise2 said:

Bro...u sure u not pulling our leg!! What if the doors are closed and u need to use the bathroom or something....cannot also!!

Click to expand...

enterprise2 said:

Bro...u sure u not pulling our leg!! What if the doors are closed and u need to use the bathroom or something....cannot also!!

Click to expand...

Issue adult diapers.