The GE was 7th May 2011 and we're practically 2-1/2 years plus 3 weeks through the 5 year term. The parties would have identified their next mission, but this is what I think they should really do.
PAP
They will tell you that their aim in every election is to win all seats but deep down they know that's impossible. Many of the problems today were policy misjudgements planted decades ago and reversing them now can only bear fruit decades later. Hence they are expected to only lose more seats rather than the opposite.
Even if they can regain the old level of support it will come after they lose more support and by the time they might not actually gain back that support when the opposition prove itself capable.
Whatever the case their aim should be to stop worrying about that, just stay as the ruling party with a simple majority, get back to the drawing board to solve these problems and not play too much politics simply to re-dominate. Maybe this will pay off better.
WP
Nab a second or even third GRC. Let's not kid ourselves that any opposition(s) can form the government in 2016. At the same time, WP's conservative self tells me that they don't appear very keen to win a second GRC for one election for fear of bungling and losing everything. But it might be given rather than wanted that they will grab a second GRC, as they have another A team in place made up of the 2 NCMPs.
SDP
Examine how they can attract, retain and use talents. They have a queer situation where a group of hardcore loyal hands who aren't vote-getters sit in the leadership, and highly qualified entrants who either join last-minute and do not stay long, or do not commit much. This is unlike other parties whose core group has people of both qualities and their best sit on top of the hierarchy. Any wins and gains may not be sustainable if an organization does not have the fundamentals right. Remember 1993.
SPP, NSP and DPP
Form an A team to nab their first GRC. NSP and DPP can achieve this. It might be more helpful if both came together since they are the most similar but looks like it is unlikely. SPP does not have a first team but by virtue of the Chiams, they can find some good last minute entrants. Unlike SDP, party structure is not an issue as they are not dominated by one person (or for SPP case the person won't stay long). One important thing for DPP: roping in GMS will dash that hope.
RP and SDA
Honestly I don't have much to say for them because there is too much to say. The areas they fall short and need to improve are too many. They need a CEC, proper website, activities and newspapers and haven't got the basics. With no more than 3 core members with them, KJ and DL might be better off closing shop and doing something more constructive with their lives.
PAP
They will tell you that their aim in every election is to win all seats but deep down they know that's impossible. Many of the problems today were policy misjudgements planted decades ago and reversing them now can only bear fruit decades later. Hence they are expected to only lose more seats rather than the opposite.
Even if they can regain the old level of support it will come after they lose more support and by the time they might not actually gain back that support when the opposition prove itself capable.
Whatever the case their aim should be to stop worrying about that, just stay as the ruling party with a simple majority, get back to the drawing board to solve these problems and not play too much politics simply to re-dominate. Maybe this will pay off better.
WP
Nab a second or even third GRC. Let's not kid ourselves that any opposition(s) can form the government in 2016. At the same time, WP's conservative self tells me that they don't appear very keen to win a second GRC for one election for fear of bungling and losing everything. But it might be given rather than wanted that they will grab a second GRC, as they have another A team in place made up of the 2 NCMPs.
SDP
Examine how they can attract, retain and use talents. They have a queer situation where a group of hardcore loyal hands who aren't vote-getters sit in the leadership, and highly qualified entrants who either join last-minute and do not stay long, or do not commit much. This is unlike other parties whose core group has people of both qualities and their best sit on top of the hierarchy. Any wins and gains may not be sustainable if an organization does not have the fundamentals right. Remember 1993.
SPP, NSP and DPP
Form an A team to nab their first GRC. NSP and DPP can achieve this. It might be more helpful if both came together since they are the most similar but looks like it is unlikely. SPP does not have a first team but by virtue of the Chiams, they can find some good last minute entrants. Unlike SDP, party structure is not an issue as they are not dominated by one person (or for SPP case the person won't stay long). One important thing for DPP: roping in GMS will dash that hope.
RP and SDA
Honestly I don't have much to say for them because there is too much to say. The areas they fall short and need to improve are too many. They need a CEC, proper website, activities and newspapers and haven't got the basics. With no more than 3 core members with them, KJ and DL might be better off closing shop and doing something more constructive with their lives.
Last edited:
