NSP to adopt “minister-specific” strategy in next elections

[IR123]

well funnyz, i just want to say that you echoed my views quite soundly; i too want an opposition that can stand on its own merits instead of engaging in why PAP is so bad.

Today's opposition is like one salesman badmouthing another so that you will buy from him.

But what makes you so sure that he will be any better?



Impartiality is extremely important to me and i truly believe that NSP leaders will not put their wives, nephews or nieces on the town council and bemoan the lack of talent which neccessitates that. This is in line with the better practices in politically mature countries.

What the oppositions do not realized to-date is that they are as much under the microscope as MBT and his team.

Recently i came across an article that says that Chiam See Tong has been in power in Potong Pasir for 25 years. I believe Low Thia Kiang is around that time too. The question is then: what had they done? Had they advanced the cause of opposition politics within these 25 years?

A quarter of a century is a long time. On their capability shown in these 25 years, had their entry into Parliament benefitted the Opposition cause or did it benefitted the PAP cause?



It is precisely because of this question that i no longer believe that those who encourage the opposition to stand and win MUST belong to the Opposition camp.

Their encouragement sustains the myth that there is hope for the Opposition - a myth that the Opposition leaders and their supporters embrace.

When they see no results, they blame the voters - not themselves, never themselves.

An agent provocateur will naturally want to continue their myth so that they will continue in their fruitless struggle.

A struggle that helps to sustain an argument that Singapore is a democracy.



The opposition needs to wake up. Get rid of the ineffective wood. Bring in the new and younger leaders within their midst. Create value for the voters.

Many Singaporeans, in my opinion, are ready to vote for them.

All they need to do is to show that they are better than the PAP - stronger moral values, more concern about people's welfare, more involved in people's lives, out to serve and not believe that their appointment as MP is well deserved and not serve as a means of telling others to get out of their uncaring face which has a 5-year cycle attached.



Don't be like the salesman who badmouths another.

Be one who talk about why his product is superior.

And let the customer decide.

 

[funnyz]

Hmmm... Scroobal... I will try to address the points raised by you. Apologies if I fail to express myself correctly. I will try to use examples to further illustrate my views.

1.In the absence of quality oppositions, people do not assume, but they simply choose the better candidate. For example, if I'm at NTUC buying oranges, I would naturally choose bigger and more juicy oranges. Nevermind the inside taste sweet or sour. But at that time of comparison, I will choose what appeals to me most.

2. Ngiam's monopoly. Sorry did not read too much into this policy. However PAP's renewal policy is utilising overseas/merits/scholars blah blah blah..(Think about the Airforce Change of Command reported in the Straits Times today). Oppositions Parties should offer scholarships to poor students in the wards they are going to contest (in this case, Tampines). Alot of scholarships are being offered to foreigners now, read FOC. Why not ride on this and gain political mileage points? Me for 1, a strong believer of the 'Jobs for Foreigners, NS for Singaporeans' slogan. Voters cannot think out of the box? I think it takes two hands to clap. You might dispute, "Funnyz, Alternative / Opposition Parties do not have enough resources/manpower/other misc reasons".. but, think of it as an investment for future party leaders. The key phase is "If we cannot beat them, we join them".

3. We spend time worrying about 'Murugan'. We are living in the real world. Compare and contrast is part of the process you have to accept. As pointed out by IR in another post, value of flats head south, MPs not as effective PAP MPs ones... etc.. blah... Yes, I do not deny some of those concerns do not have any basis for comparison. But that is the reality on the ground now. I'm not being rude to the TS/GMS and I sincerely apologise to him if he is offended. Politics is not about one hit wonder or party hopping. Just like in any job interviews, what is the first impression you give to interviewer when you are a serial job hopper? Not very impressive isn't it? However as I'm not in the political arena, my views are not the gospel truth.

4. Old man refuse to charge his ex-head ISD. Sorry, did not follow on this.

5. Protest votes. Oh yes, of course I know what is that. But you should understand the differences between wants and needs. Now, tell me, how is shouting at SM Goh (then PM) 'Where's the money' by Dr Chee going to win him votes? I want what you want (Elected Oppositions MPs), but what I need (MPs who are going to make a difference in my life) is different from you need (Any Ah Pig or Ah Cat on an opposition ticket).

To sum it up, no, I'm not convinced by Minister Policies Specific or Minister Specific Policies. See the difference now? I can't even remember what is NSP's stragegy. I hope I will be singing 'I gotta feeling, that tonight gonna be a good night' by Black Eyed Peas on cooling day instead of ' 忘情水' by Andy Lau.

 

[funnyz]

Many Singaporeans, in my opinion, are ready to vote for them.

All they need to do is to show that they are better than the PAP - stronger moral values, more concern about people's welfare, more involved in people's lives, out to serve and not believe that their appointment as MP is well deserved and not serve as a means of telling others to get out of their uncaring face which has a 5-year cycle attached.

IR123, I can't agree more with you. If Alternative/Opposition parties can come out with candidates as what you have described above, I think I'm more than willing to vote them in.

There's actually alot of chinks in PAP's armour. However, oppositions need to capitalise on that. Sentiments are strong on the ground, but that does not necessarily translate into votes. Malaysia's Political Tsunami bring alot of false confidence to local oppositions' camps. However to have a political tsunami (on second thoughts, maybe a GRC victory is a better description) takes more than just Minister Specific Policies. In the first place, a good image/impression is already half a battle won. That was why I keep stressing on the quality of opposition candidates to Scroobal.

For people to believe in you, there must be a common cause or causes that is dear to their hearts. I quote from the movie Braveheart "The commoners know you, they respect you, but if you would just lead them to freedom, they follow you.. and so would I". - William Wallace to Robert the Bruce.


It's up to the oppositions to find the chinks in PAP's armour and charismatic persons to drive the messages through and not any prima donna (in our lingo, it's call Ah Pig or Ah Cat) to do the job. Good Luck NSP

 

[longbow]

"The NSP’s president, Mr Sebastian Teo, explains why high flats prices do not benefit flat owners. “If they sell it and buy it again, [they’re] going to incur heavy financial costs.” Higher HDB prices is not going to benefit the 80 per cent of Singaporeans who do not own more than one flat or house"

I disagree. Who doesn't want their property to go up in price. New buyers usually go for 4 to 5 rm flats as they are starting family. 30 years down the road, they can sell their units, downgrade to a 2rm or even step up to a small 1 rm pte condo or rent out a room or two.

Go ask 80% of Singaporeans - do they want their property values to go down?

The problem is with sudden ramp up of pricing because of demand. But most would prefer to have their property appreciate in prices. Of course bubbles are another matter.

]“If they sell it and buy it again, [they’re] going to incur heavy financial costs.”

No idea what Teo is talking about. What heavy financial cost?

 

[longbow]

" (in our lingo, it's call Ah Pig or Ah Cat) to do the job. Good Luck NSP"

Always thot it was Ah Pig or Ah Dog or Ah Cow. Never met someone called Ah Cat. A mai hum moment?

 

[scroobal]

Firstly to both IR123 and funnyz, a big thank you for engaging in this discussion. Its important enough to air this sufficiently for others to consider. Either way, it will be good for all. Something like this will never appear in the state controlled press.

I will try to approach my argument from the point of Samuel Huntington who I felt made a valid and strong case not to allow a monopoly of this nature. His point was first raised from an angle that is seldom looked as there are no 1st world democracies and even most 3rd world democracies don't have the singopore single party model.

As you know, because of PAP holding more than 2/3rd of parliament and being unicameral and thus the lack of an upper house which traditionally acts as a control on things like sovereignity, constitution and statehood, the PAP can literally enact legislation where parliament can be dissolved overnight, the country turned into a monarchy and a succession plan installed along a desired line. In simple terms, whoever is in charge of the PAP, can set the rules for the country. There are 5 members of the same family that hold finance, sovereign wealth, Internal Security and Home Affairs under their wing. The entire grassroots mechanism or for want of a better term, the local structure for militia also comes under the same few.

In short, the current institutions of government are heavily controlled and under a benevolent soul, allows for effective and efficient management of the country. Those exact same institutions will be a ready made nightmare for the whole country if a tyrant takes seat. Basic Principles that even commercial enterprise employ such as avoiding conflict of interest, separation of duties are missing. When Samuel Huntington made those points, old man was upset enough to shoot back but by then the wool had truly being removed.

The issue is not overthrowing the PAP. Thats obvious as there are no other party or entity that can run the country. PAP has also made sure of that by making themselves close to indispensible. The idea is to
1) signal to the PAP that all is not well
2) we can't afford to put all our eggs with PAP
3) a monopoly does not allow for good and healthy competition
4) the need to quickly build a truly democratic model that can sustain the country over a longer period.
5) Singaporeans would like to contribute to and partake in good government.
6) climate must exist to allow good people to contest elections and offer decent options to the country as candidates.

One cannot be myopic and pick a "Sam Tan" or a "Michael Palmer" because they are better qualified. A more important question is not the candidate per se but is that the desired composition for a rigorous parliament.

The PAP knew that most people cannot clear the hurdle over qualification of candidates and pursued the smart by raising the salary scale. Our Civil servants are the worlds best. Not because of contributions, part of the salary component is what the corporate world calls a " non-competition clause" You are paid not get into the "game". The game of politics that is.

In early 1990, a brilliant but contrarian of a scholar started to comment about the govt in the Internet. They could not handle him. They found a solution. They provided him seed funding for his venture via a 3rd vehicle. He was happy and they were no longer in his sight. He is now introduced as rising star in enterprise circles. Nothing like keeping a good man occupied. Look at Ho Kwon Ping and Tharman, both critical of the Govt but now beneficiaries of its largess. Some years ago, the No.2 man of State Foriegn Intelligence Service was charged in court for masturbating in front of a private clinic female doctor. At his trial, a sealed letter was given and he got away with the lightest of sentence that half blur singporean in a similar boat would be counting bars by now.

Only in Singapore can the custodian of the state sovereign funds sleep in the same bed as the CEO of the one of the 2 funds. While the father runs the other fund. Even Communist China and Corruption ridden India does not allow such a cosy relationship.

The State controlled press is there for a purpose. Contrary to what people think, they are not there to write pro-govt articles (thought some overeager journalists think so). They are there to omit what is important to the nation but detrimental to the PAP cause. Thats a big difference.

What I found really interesting is that even when Singaporeans are stuck with the basic issue of quality of opposition candidates, the PAP is realising that the lack of opposition candidates in Singapore parliament makes them look silly. I am sure you have heard about the scions of PAP Ministers and MPs, being ridiculed while attending western institutions about the state of Singapore Politics. To make life more bearable for their kids in the West, the PAP for the next elections will reserve 18 seats that cannot be taken by the PAP. I found it interesting that the PAP can buy the argument (in their own interesting way) to have some level of opposition for checks and balannces while Singaporeans are struggling to look for quality from Hobson's Choice.

The question is how many are proxies? Willing or Unwilling. God knows.

Hmmm... Scroobal... I will try to address the points raised by you. Apologies if I fail to express myself correctly. I will try to use examples to further illustrate my views.

well funnyz, i just want to say that you echoed my views quite soundly; i too want an opposition that can stand on its own merits instead of engaging in why PAP is so bad.

 

[Perspective]

A lot of people think support improves with quality but do not realise it is half the time and the other half is quality improves with support.

We all know people if tend to think that Nokia was ground-breaking invention and made a better brand, people would surely buy it.

However, how many would still remember that Nokia lost its monopoly because people bought the less user-friendly Motorola which was of course cheaper. Today both phones, along with Samsung and other newer ones like Ipod, made the market diversified.

If the Singapore opposition needs a little more support to get out of the poor quality rut, then that is the only way you can get the quality you want in the first place.

The rut would be "no support = no resource = no quality = in turn leading to no support = no resource = no quality = infinity...". Anyone who knows how to do their mathematics knows that this would lead to the status quo of PAP dominance and poor quality opposition whether it is 5, 50 or 500 years down the road.

Few realise the opposition actually suffers from the "Singapore army syndrome". In a new platoon, when a sergeant asks for volunteers to do stuff before they can book out, the whole lot of "greenhorns" would end up stuck in camp until the sergeant loses patience. Closer to ORD, you will find the same platoon, more seasoned, having a group of people volunteering to save time and given up on their platoon mates and just do it. Those who do not do the work see that as "cool" and a "victory" of having "idiots" in the same platform to shield them. However, by the time everyone is out, no one has lost an extra arm or leg doing extra work. In fact the volunteers tend to cut better careers when they go out to society because they learnt to show more initiative.

Like I wrote in another post, even a good President like Ma Ying Jeou gets his margin cut for balance purposes and this overwhelming endorsement came about because people were desperate to vote out the DPP in the first place.

 

[normalsingaporean]

Outstanding post! An example says a thousand words. Simplifying it further and more people will begin to understand it better.

A lot of people think support improves with quality but do not realise it is half the time and the other half is quality improves with support.

We all know people if tend to think that Nokia was ground-breaking invention and made a better brand, people would surely buy it.

However, how many would still remember that Nokia lost its monopoly because people bought the less user-friendly Motorola which was of course cheaper. Today both phones, along with Samsung and other newer ones like Ipod, made the market diversified.

If the Singapore opposition needs a little more support to get out of the poor quality rut, then that is the only way you can get the quality you want in the first place.

The rut would be "no support = no resource = no quality = in turn leading to no support = no resource = no quality = infinity...". Anyone who knows how to do their mathematics knows that this would lead to the status quo of PAP dominance and poor quality opposition whether it is 5, 50 or 500 years down the road.

Few realise the opposition actually suffers from the "Singapore army syndrome". In a new platoon, when a sergeant asks for volunteers to do stuff before they can book out, the whole lot of "greenhorns" would end up stuck in camp until the sergeant loses patience. Closer to ORD, you will find the same platoon, more seasoned, having a group of people volunteering to save time and given up on their platoon mates and just do it. Those who do not do the work see that as "cool" and a "victory" of having "idiots" in the same platform to shield them. However, by the time everyone is out, no one has lost an extra arm or leg doing extra work. In fact the volunteers tend to cut better careers when they go out to society because they learnt to show more initiative.

Like I wrote in another post, even a good President like Ma Ying Jeou gets his margin cut for balance purposes and this overwhelming endorsement came about because people were desperate to vote out the DPP in the first place.

 

[funnyz]

The issue is not overthrowing the PAP. Thats obvious as there are no other party or entity that can run the country. PAP has also made sure of that by making themselves close to indispensible. The idea is to
1) signal to the PAP that all is not well
2) we can't afford to put all our eggs with PAP
3) a monopoly does not allow for good and healthy competition
4) the need to quickly build a truly democratic model that can sustain the country over a longer period.
5) Singaporeans would like to contribute to and partake in good government.
6) climate must exist to allow good people to contest elections and offer decent options to the country as candidates.

One cannot be myopic and pick a "Sam Tan" or a "Michael Palmer" because they are better qualified. A more important question is not the candidate per se but is that the desired composition for a rigorous parliament.

No doubts about what you have said and the illustrated points. However to swing more votes to oppositions camp takes more than that. I can't reiterate more that Uncle and Ah Sohs and yes, a certain percentage of youngsters do not have a slightest clue on what you are talking about. But be very careful about the 'no alternative party can take over the current' because didn't they just say they increase the number of 'best losers'?

Maybe we can do an analysis of the voters (do add on to the list):
1. Hard Core Oppositions Voters - I think it's enough for oppositions to keep their deposits - 13k still?

2. Morderate Voters - I feel if oppositions can win this group over to them, then we can talk about winning a GRC.

3. Apathy Voters - This voting pattern basically follows what their parents/spouse/friends votes. Could swing both ways.

4. Hard Core PAP Voters - They are basically those who have subscribe to PAP's train of thought in one way or another.

5. Miscellanous - Spoilt votes.

If given the above electorate, don't you think oppositions should be trying to win over #2 and hopefully swing some #3 to your side too. All the points raised by your good self have been used over and over again in previous campaigns. What makes you think it would be any different this time round? Are we talking about majority of people living in the streets or begging for a living? I think not man. The way I look at it, the forthcoming results for Tampines GRC will be status quo.

You keep stressing, we should not simply vote for better qualifications people in order to deny them absolute power. Instead of that piece of meat (which is not wrong of course, but not very successful in winning over voters), why not: We should raise our own quality to match them instead if that is the expectations of electorate?

I do not see how by putting lesser qualified people to contest a GRC will helps because the media will come down hard on them and we all know what is the media propaganda (still 154th?). Good qualities of candidates are very subjective, depending on what the persons are looking at. Qualifications is only one such criteria among others. Let the Wee's (brutal truth) father stand in Tampines and I think people like me would have no qualms in voting for the other reasonably eloquent/educated candidate.

 

[funnyz]

" (in our lingo, it's call Ah Pig or Ah Cat) to do the job. Good Luck NSP"

Always thot it was Ah Pig or Ah Dog or Ah Cow. Never met someone called Ah Cat. A mai hum moment?

Hee.. Ah Dei (Ah Pig) and Ah Niao (Ah Cat) also got mah?

 

[Perspective]

You keep stressing, we should not simply vote for better qualifications people in order to deny them absolute power. Instead of that piece of meat (which is not wrong of course, but not very successful in winning over voters), why not: We should raise our own quality to match them instead if that is the expectations of electorate?

I do not see how by putting lesser qualified people to contest a GRC will helps because the media will come down hard on them and we all know what is the media propaganda (still 154th?). Good qualities of candidates are very subjective, depending on what the persons are looking at. Qualifications is only one such criteria among others. Let the Wee's (brutal truth) father stand in Tampines and I think people like me would have no qualms in voting for the other reasonably eloquent/educated candidate.

Actually, in the last 2 elections, probably about 99% of PAP candidates were professionals armed with degrees and about 80% of opposition candidates were the same.

 

[Perspective]

Don't be like the salesman who badmouths another.

Be one who talk about why his product is superior.

And let the customer decide.

I have one more point to add. Abilities also have to be measured on what the base mark is. Most of the opposition candidates are not elected. Effectively, that makes them volunteers. All of them would hold full time jobs.

For example, you are a manager. You have 9 other close friends who are chef, nurse, engineer, clerk, insurance agent, trader, designer, army regular, accountant - none of them running the country. You guys hang out at Starbucks every Friday. The rest of the time you do your own things, like working and feeding your families or bringing them for outings.

Don't tell me that by having 10 of you sitting at Starbucks every Friday, roads can suddenly appear, CPF interest rates go up, more MRTs can emerge, criminals can be caught or policies can change. That would not be ability but magic. If you can pull off such magic, then there is something to compare to the govt's track record.

The opposition's base mark would be any activity once a week. Anything else is extra. Yet they can pull off websites, manifestoes, publications and several events. For that extra produced, they have proven their ability.

When you compare that to 14 ministers all working for the state and drawing salary from the state full time, the base mark cannot be that low anymore. I expect the above to be done (roads built, criminals apprehended) and anything else is extra, such as the SPUR programme that no other government in the world has produced.

If the AYE collapses and the government fails to repair it in 20 years, it falls below the base mark. Similarly, a totally inactive opposition for 5 years falls below the base mark. Neither cases have happened. You can't expect the opposition to repair AYE and if the government is only active once a week, that would not only fall below base mark but below ridicule level.

Which is why Scroobal is right. You can't measure abilities like that. Might as well have balanced and robust Parliament. Alot of things can come from there.

That is how people fail to understand what is comparing apples and oranges.

 

[scroobal]

Typically across the world in a democratic system and Singapore appears to follow it ironically are how the votes fall

30% to the incumbent that cannot be shaken
30% against the incumbent not matter what
40% who are swing voters.

Its the swing voters (40%) that tend to do the analysis. And they are the ones that can decide an outcome. Swing voters tend to cut across the demograhic profile. In singapore, 30% of those committed to the PAP form the older cohort, the SMEs,the businessmen who prefer the status quo.

Your moderate would fall into the swing category. I have no doubt that the opposition need to do a lot. What I am trying to say all this while is that its not a playing field. One of the Scholars that we educated from A levels, Oxbridge etc, found the field stacked that he went back is now an elected MP in Malaysia. You are asumming that standing for politics in Singapore is easy compared to other democratic countries. That is not the case. If it is indeed a level playing field, we would have got a more quality opposition candidates.

I bet you , that you are unable to state why the PAP regard lawyer Tang who stood in Cheng San a threat to the coutnry. Do you know what he did wrong?

No doubts about what you have said and the illustrated points. However to swing more votes to oppositions camp takes more than that..

 

[scroobal]

You are using the word professional in the extreme and I am being polite. I doubt even 2% of opposition candidates can even qualify as a professional.

The former kachang Putih Seller in Cathay is a degree holder and he took over his father's concession with Cathay group as it was lucrative. In no shape or form can he be considered a professional.

One issue with opposition is to be hung over by the term professional. Oppositon should focus on experience, passion, ability to represent the people etc. You will fall into the PAP's trap if you come out statements as such as 80% are professionals.

Actually, in the last 2 elections, probably about 99% of PAP candidates were professionals armed with degrees and about 80% of opposition candidates were the same.

 

[Perspective]

You are using the word professional in the extreme and I am being polite. I doubt even 2% of opposition candidates can even qualify as a professional.

The former kachang Putih Seller in Cathay is a degree holder and he took over his father's concession with Cathay group as it was lucrative. In no shape or form can he be considered a professional.

One issue with opposition is to be hung over by the term professional. Oppositon should focus on experience, passion, ability to represent the people etc. You will fall into the PAP's trap if you come out statements as such as 80% are professionals.

I'm talking only about the last 2 elections. Am quite sure that my estimates are not too far off.

 

[jw5]

I bet you , that you are unable to state why the PAP regard lawyer Tang who stood in Cheng San a threat to the coutnry. Do you know what he did wrong?[/QUOTE]

He became a threat, but it's arguable whether it was to the country or not.

 

[jw5]

You are using the word professional in the extreme and I am being polite. I doubt even 2% of opposition candidates can even qualify as a professional.

The former kachang Putih Seller in Cathay is a degree holder and he took over his father's concession with Cathay group as it was lucrative. In no shape or form can he be considered a professional.

One issue with opposition is to be hung over by the term professional. Oppositon should focus on experience, passion, ability to represent the people etc. You will fall into the PAP's trap if you come out statements as such as 80% are professionals.

He was a "professional kachang putih seller".

 

[scroobal]

Yes, the same.

I'm talking only about the last 2 elections. Am quite sure that my estimates are not too far off.

 

[scroobal]

Not a single soul can can state his crime. All the PAP kept claiming was that he was a Chinese chauvinist. That turned out to be joke when he fled to JB and stayed with a very good friend who is a Malay. How many Chinese can be housed in a Malay home and this was certainly not a good occasion.

He became a threat, but it's arguable whether it was to the country or not.

 

[Perspective]

Yes, the same.

2%? If I name 5 out of 47 candidates who are professionals, it's already 10% and you'll lose. Don't be your usual too quick to shoot your mouth.

I have not said that opposition or voters should hanker after candidates who are professionals. It is only to point out the invalidity of this that people try to disguise as a supposed fact. In this case I do not think the opposition intentionally wanted to field professionals, only that the fear has subsisted since LKY days and you no longer get bicycle thieves to lose and the pool has become bigger. Numbers of degrees and occupations have increased.

BTW passion is a default. You wouldn't join if you do not have it. Might as well be the 10 friends in Starbucks.