- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
May 1, 2010
ELECTION CHANGES
Are they well thought out?
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
THE changes to the Non-Constituency MP and Nominated MP schemes, the average size of group representation constituencies and the number of single-seat wards appear too utilitarian in intent and approach.
The Government must be commended for its courage to implement novel - though unconventional - means of providing Singaporeans with both a strong majority government and an alternative voice in Parliament.
Many trust the Government has the longer-term interest of Singaporeans at heart and that the changes are made for the overall good of Singapore.
It appears we can have our cake and eat it too.
However, the idea that the political process can be changed so easily according to the prevailing political climate discomforts me. Surely the ruling People's Action Party will be foolhardy to consider these changes if, some day in the future, the opposition gets to control close to half of Parliament.
What if these adjustments to the political system prove 'too' successful for the incumbent's liking? What if more opposition candidates win seats in Parliament in future elections?
Will the PAP then feel its political survival is under threat? Will it then respond by reversing these changes?
What will this say about our democratic process? Is it a national ideal we consciously strive to improve and uphold, or a lowly tool to achieve a higher good?
Han Tau Kwang
=> If this goondu trusts the FAPee TRAITORS to be aboveboard like what he wrote in the earlier paragraphs, why is he worried that the they will backpedal and do sneaky things if they are about to voted out of power? What a confused dog! Is he representative of the 66%?
ELECTION CHANGES
Are they well thought out?
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
THE changes to the Non-Constituency MP and Nominated MP schemes, the average size of group representation constituencies and the number of single-seat wards appear too utilitarian in intent and approach.
The Government must be commended for its courage to implement novel - though unconventional - means of providing Singaporeans with both a strong majority government and an alternative voice in Parliament.
Many trust the Government has the longer-term interest of Singaporeans at heart and that the changes are made for the overall good of Singapore.
It appears we can have our cake and eat it too.
However, the idea that the political process can be changed so easily according to the prevailing political climate discomforts me. Surely the ruling People's Action Party will be foolhardy to consider these changes if, some day in the future, the opposition gets to control close to half of Parliament.
What if these adjustments to the political system prove 'too' successful for the incumbent's liking? What if more opposition candidates win seats in Parliament in future elections?
Will the PAP then feel its political survival is under threat? Will it then respond by reversing these changes?
What will this say about our democratic process? Is it a national ideal we consciously strive to improve and uphold, or a lowly tool to achieve a higher good?
Han Tau Kwang
=> If this goondu trusts the FAPee TRAITORS to be aboveboard like what he wrote in the earlier paragraphs, why is he worried that the they will backpedal and do sneaky things if they are about to voted out of power? What a confused dog! Is he representative of the 66%?
