- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
<TBODY>[TR]
[TD="class: msgtxt"][h=1]PAP MPs' knee-jerk rebuttals unproductive[/h]
Published on Oct 22, 2011
PARLIAMENTARY debate should have been different now after the watershed general election in May. But if this week's session is any indication, it appears to be business as usual.
If People's Action Party (PAP) Members of Parliament routinely rose one by one in rebutting the opposition in the past, the electorate, unfortunately, received more of the same this week.
So is it any surprise to find parliamentary reports describing an opposition MP's speech drawing the same, virtually automatic chorus of PAP rebuttals, such as the ones where PAP MPs 'rose to rebut', or the ones where the opposition MP's remarks 'drew quick fire'?
If the PAP government admits to not having a monopoly on knowledge and ideas, why do the party's MPs react as if their opposition colleagues have nothing of value to offer in Parliament?
Is the sole task of PAP MPs aimed at making the job of opposition MPs unpleasant in the House?
Will we inadvertently cast aside good ideas and valid concerns simply because they originate from the opposition?
I hope all political parties will set aside such politicking in the House, or weak attempts at wit such as Pioneer MP Cedric Foo's rebuttal of the opposition on Bhutan's gross national happiness concept when hesaid: 'So maybe (since) they only have two opposition MPs, the people are very happy' ('MPs push for change in Govt-citizen ties'; Tuesday).
Joseph Khoo
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
</TBODY>[/TABLE]
<TBODY>[TR]
[TD="class: msgtxt"][h=1]PAP MPs' knee-jerk rebuttals unproductive[/h]
Published on Oct 22, 2011
PARLIAMENTARY debate should have been different now after the watershed general election in May. But if this week's session is any indication, it appears to be business as usual.
If People's Action Party (PAP) Members of Parliament routinely rose one by one in rebutting the opposition in the past, the electorate, unfortunately, received more of the same this week.
So is it any surprise to find parliamentary reports describing an opposition MP's speech drawing the same, virtually automatic chorus of PAP rebuttals, such as the ones where PAP MPs 'rose to rebut', or the ones where the opposition MP's remarks 'drew quick fire'?
If the PAP government admits to not having a monopoly on knowledge and ideas, why do the party's MPs react as if their opposition colleagues have nothing of value to offer in Parliament?
Is the sole task of PAP MPs aimed at making the job of opposition MPs unpleasant in the House?
Will we inadvertently cast aside good ideas and valid concerns simply because they originate from the opposition?
I hope all political parties will set aside such politicking in the House, or weak attempts at wit such as Pioneer MP Cedric Foo's rebuttal of the opposition on Bhutan's gross national happiness concept when hesaid: 'So maybe (since) they only have two opposition MPs, the people are very happy' ('MPs push for change in Govt-citizen ties'; Tuesday).
Joseph Khoo
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
</TBODY>[/TABLE]
