• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

SDP back to old pattern

methink

Alfrescian
Loyal

yellowarse

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
The SDP never lost their cojones lah. But they've added a new dimension to their politics: policy-making on bread-and-butter issues.

X X X

<tbody>
</tbody>
Added on: Monday Yesterday
Singapore Democrats

Singapore-real-estate1.jpg

<tbody>
</tbody>

A slew of news reports in recent weeks tells us that Singapore's housing market has reached new and dangerous heights. The irrational exuberance that has gripped our nation's housing prices spells trouble for our future.

Recent prices of flats being sold for $1 million and more has fueled a market that is spiraling out of control. Piecemeal cooling measures taken by the Ministry of National Development has failed to bring prices under control.

In fact, analysts project that home prices are set to rise even higher by as much as 10 percent in the coming months.

All this is fueled by easy credit, low interest rates and the influx of foreigners into our housing market.

The combination of these policies put in place by the PAP Government has inflicted much damage on public housing in Singapore. The aspirations of a younger generation of Singaporeans of owning their own homes have been all but dashed.

This, in turn, has caused our birthrate to plummet to alarming levels. At a Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of 0.78 births per woman, we are the least fertile country in the world. (A TFR of at least two children per woman of child-bearing age is needed for us to maintain present levels and to reduce the population's median age.)

This alarming trend will have great ramifications for our economy in the future as we see our local population plummet.

In addition, those who bought their flats at the high prices that the Government has forced upon Singaporeans risk getting caught in a property bubble that when burst will wreak havoc to their equity and, together with it, pull down the entire economy.

The PAP is, however, still in denial mode and refusing to see that its policies have over the decades built a housing system that is unsustainable.

The SDP cannot make it any clearer: Our housing problems are big and set to get worse. If we blindly continue down the PAP's road and do nothing, we will suffer tragic consequences.

The SDP has drawn up an alternative housing plan called Housing A Nation: Holistic Policies For Affordable Homes. Our plan will reduce the negative impact of the current system and help Singapore overcome the dangers that confront our nation's public housing.

We have developed proposals that will diffuse the PAP's housing time bomb. These alternative policies are simple as they are innovative. They address the problems of

  • younger Singaporeans unable to buy their flats because they have become too expensive.
  • people stuck with high monthly mortgage payments taken from their CPF savings so that by the time they finish paying off their homes, they have nothing left for their retirement.
  • the PAP's rent-seeking policies that benefit the rich few, leaving the masses struggling and living precariously.
The SDP plan will lead our country to a more wholesome and sustainable housing system, help boost our population growth and bring about a productive economy. We are confident that Singaporeans will find our Plan meaningful and worthy of consideration.

The paper will be launched in November 2012. Details of the launch will be announced in the coming days.

This policy paper comes on the heels of The SDP National Healthcare Plan: Caring For All Singaporeans which has been warmly received by Singaporeans.

The Singapore Democrats continue to endeavour to be a competent, constructive and compassionate party worthy of the support of the people as the alternative ruling party.

<tbody>
</tbody>
 
Last edited:

Leepotism

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Which opposition dare to question PAP without fear and persecution by PAP? Is it not SDP. Don't expect WP to fight for your rights and well being.
 
Last edited:

Fook Seng

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Just remember this: the Singapore electorate rewards success. That is why PAP remained in power for so long. To make a gain on PAP, you need to score success over the PAP. If it results in failure, no matter how when intended, it will not give you credit.
 

tanwahp

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Which opposition dare to question PAP without fear and persecution by PAP? Is it not SDP. Don't expect WP to fight for your rights and well being.

You will have to ask despite what they did, did SDP make any changes to your life or their existence had benefitted you in any way.
 

yellowarse

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
You will have to ask despite what they did, did SDP make any changes to your life or their existence had benefitted you in any way.

Speakers' Corner, for one.

Many other PAP policy initiatives were borrowed from SDP's suggestions and shadow policies without giving due credit. Just check out some of the recent changes in healthcare, housing, education and even 'minimum wage'.

Ultimately, SDP can only make a substantial difference if YOU vote it into parliament. In the meantime it will continue to speak up, offer alternative ideas, and just bear and grin it when those ideas are plagiarised by the ruling party and sometimes implemented without due acknowledgement

BTW, how has WP made any changes to your life or existence despite having 6 members in parliament?
 

SgParent

Alfrescian
Loyal
Speakers' Corner, for one.

How often do you go there for picnic I mean listen/give talk?


Many other PAP policy initiatives were borrowed from SDP's suggestions and shadow policies without giving due credit. ...

Stop. Please stop. You are making SDP like a White Scum think tank unit


Ultimately, SDP can only make a substantial difference if YOU vote it into parliament. In the meantime

Sure sure. Shall we resume this discussion in that eventuality?


BTW, how has WP made any changes to your life or existence despite having 6 members in parliament?

Well, not much I supposed. My Hougang area has always been well managed. My friend in Kaki Bukit could not tell a difference

Ok, denying 6 White Scums (Ministar included), for one

Striking fear into the White Scums, for two.

Should I continue?
 

methink

Alfrescian
Loyal
You will have to ask despite what they did, did SDP make any changes to your life or their existence had benefitted you in any way.

Bro tanWP, why do you ask such a boliao question? Is this how you measure a person's contributions? SDP may not have any seats in parleement now, but they are nevertheless fighting for the ppl.

In contrast to the Wayang Party, with their six MPs... what have they done for the ppl?

I do not doubt the commitments of the SDP when they do get into parleement, they will blow the papzis away! Even now where they have no reps in the house, they are making the PAP pee in their pants! WP? Shall we say they wayang only...?

Wait for GE 2016. Even the WP will fade away with their miserable contribution(s) when we can then compare the output of both. As for the PAP, their death is near... not bcos of WP, but the true opposition, the SDP!
 
Last edited:

tanwahp

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Speakers' Corner, for one.

Many other PAP policy initiatives were borrowed from SDP's suggestions and shadow policies without giving due credit. Just check out some of the recent changes in healthcare, housing, education and even 'minimum wage'.

Ultimately, SDP can only make a substantial difference if YOU vote it into parliament. In the meantime it will continue to speak up, offer alternative ideas, and just bear and grin it when those ideas are plagiarised by the ruling party and sometimes implemented without due acknowledgement

BTW, how has WP made any changes to your life or existence despite having 6 members in parliament?

I beg to differ mostly but not totally. The recent changes came about because WP won 6 seats. You can say SDP had the biggest improvement in margin, but that was because they followed WP's and NSP's way in avoiding civil disobedience 3 years before the GE.

You also haven't been specific in what areas PAP copied SDP in healthcare, housing and education. The SDP I have watched for many years is known for being duly fond of claiming credit and every time I hear it, I go fact check and most of the time is not true. There was even once when SDP claimed a PAP idea was from them which WP had spoken about years earlier, but I cannot remember what policy it was.

I do give credit to SDP on being first or led to Speakers' Corner and minimum wage. I am not for those ideas or think they benefit me, but at least I can admit they are original. I think I have been fair to as much as I can.

If you are saying being copied is doing something, then there were also stuff PAP copied from WP, hence WP has done something by your logic. One example was Medishield, which was a variation of WP's health insurance idea. But WP topped it to win more seats in parliament and winning over 40% in all constituencies, and PAP is feeling the pressure.

My point in my post is that SDP and Chee should not return to their old ways to disqualify themselves from elections, then talking about them winning seats in parliament won't even be relevant anymore. Moreover, to end up in that state because of something that doesn't affect my life.
 

tanwahp

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Bro tanWP, why do you ask such a boliao question? Is this how you measure a person's contributions? SDP may not have any seats in parleement now, but they are nevertheless fighting for the ppl.

In contrast to the Wayang Party, with their six MPs... what have they done for the ppl?

I didn't ask SDP to fight for me in a way that they lose the rights to contest an election. But the issues that got an airing was the edusave, social welfare, energy, foreign scholars, concessions for disabled, hospital constraints. Just these 6 examples are more than what SDP can cite, and they are all from WP in parliament and WP has brought up 10 times more than these 6.

I do not doubt the commitments of the SDP when they do get into parleement, they will blow the papzis away!

Exactly my point. SDP should get into parliament. But they can't do so when they can't contest elections. Unless they want to apply NMP, which they will not get.

Even now where they have no reps in the house, they are making the PAP pee in their pants! WP? Shall we say they wayang only...?

If you have lived in Singapore, you would know that more changes came about recently, and the difference on the opposition side was WP winning more seats. SDP hasn't changed for the last 18 years, so why did PAP change?
 

OverTheCounter

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Which opposition dare to question PAP without fear and persecution by PAP? Is it not SDP. Don't expect WP to fight for your rights and well being.


Yes, the SDP is the only opposition party that does not believe in just making token changes. They are the only party that addresses the root of the problem and challenges the PAP at the fundamental level.

However, it is clear their civil disobedience has not worked. A failed strategy should not be continued. We are not the USA in the 1960s where blacks cannot sit at the front of the buses or use public restrooms at hotel lobbies.
 

tanwahp

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Yes, the SDP is the only opposition party that does not believe in just making token changes. They are the only party that addresses the root of the problem and challenges the PAP at the fundamental level.

I find it hard to agree, though I may draw flak. In the most recent, compare SDP housing policy and current HDB policies. SDP had rather grandiose words to describe its paper and credentials of talented people behind it. But the policy basically says, give priority to couples who have 2 or more children, then one child. The PAP housing policy gives priority to more children under the Third-Child Priority scheme (TCP).

(HDB has 4 other priority schemes that the SDP didn't cover, such as elderly scheme, but priority over different sized flats.)

Next, SDP says, booking of flats should go to young families in SBF and BTO. The question is, who came up with SBF and BTO? PAP. Secondly, it is already happening. Younger families tend to be first timers than older families and the SBF and BTO gives priority to first timers.

So, I don't think these are radical changes, merely tweaks. As Sgparent said, if PAP copies your ideas, then your ideas may not be so radical after all. Moreover, they are rather brief and incomplete. The links are below.

http://www.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10321p.nsf/w/BuyingNewFlatPriority?OpenDocument
http://yoursdp.org/publ/sdp_39_s_al...icy_to_address_declining_birthrate/32-1-0-993
 
Last edited:

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
After 2 decades, SDP declining performances over the years came to a halt in the 2011 GE. As the most improved opposition party it brought hope.

SDP cannot afford to slide back.it cannot take umbrage from using the same well worn excuses such as thefollowing which many that follow Singapore politics know;
1. Singaporeans are not ready for SDP
2. SDP is ahead of its time

Lets face it. WP's inroads in the recent GE surely cannot be related to their parliamentary performance. It is a mixture of shrewd tactics, hard work on the ground and the capitalising on the rising adverse sentiments that has enveloped the PAP.

That resentment is a rich vein for the taking. But Singaporean voters have stopped short of voting anyone including the bicycle thief when it comes to the PAP.

Lets hope that SDP does not go back to previous approach of martyrdom politics which has little appeal here. They need to build on the GE 2011 successes. If they do, WP will have to move quickly from their model of not-rocking-the-boat politics.
 

TracyTan866

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
After 2 decades, SDP declining performances over the years came to a halt in the 2011 GE. As the most improved opposition party it brought hope.

SDP cannot afford to slide back.it cannot take umbrage from using the same well worn excuses such as thefollowing which many that follow Singapore politics know;
1. Singaporeans are not ready for SDP
2. SDP is ahead of its time

Lets face it. WP's inroads in the recent GE surely cannot be related to their parliamentary performance. It is a mixture of shrewd tactics, hard work on the ground and the capitalising on the rising adverse sentiments that has enveloped the PAP.

That resentment is a rich vein for the taking. But Singaporean voters have stopped short of voting anyone including the bicycle thief when it comes to the PAP.

Lets hope that SDP does not go back to previous approach of martyrdom politics which has little appeal here. They need to build on the GE 2011 successes. If they do, WP will have to move quickly from their model of not-rocking-the-boat politics.

Excellent points. SDP looks very credible now. The SDP has changed tactics and is seen as a real threat and pain to the PAP. Will the PAP go all out to deny a SDP win in the next GE?
 

mojito

Alfrescian
Loyal
Excellent points. SDP looks very credible now. The SDP has changed tactics and is seen as a real threat and pain to the PAP. Will the PAP go all out to deny a SDP win in the next GE?

Not before they get more candidates who look the part as MPs. Yuppies and bookish types simply don't scream "leader of men" to me. Maybe you liberal types are more forgiving on appearances.
 

Leepotism

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
SDP is questioning the right to peaceful assembly. Why one law for one and another law for the other. It is not about civil disobedience.

Public assembly: How will High Court decide?


<TBODY>
</TBODY>
Added on: Tuesday Yesterday
Total comments<!--</s>-->: 4


Singapore Democrats

highcourtjudges2.jpg
The High Court will hear arguments tomorrow on whether the questions on the right of Singaporeans to peaceful assembly may be canvassed before the Court of Appeals, the highest court in Singapore.

Mr Louis Joseph, counsel for Ms Chee Siok Chin, Dr Chee Soon Juan, Mr Seelan Palay and Mr John Tan, will present arguments before High Court Judge Quentin Loh on the question of whether the Executive has the right to ban outright political public gatherings in Singapore.

The matter arose from the convictions of the appellants over gathering on National Day in 2008 where a group of SDP members and supporters distributed pamphlets and sold Tak Boleh Tahan (cannot take it) T-shirts at Toa Payoh Central.

The group was convicted for assembly without a permit. The above-mentioned members appealed the conviction which was dismissed by Judge Quentin Loh. Citing the issue of public interest, the appellants applied to the Judge for leave to take the matter to the Court of Appeals.

The issue at hand is whether the Executive has the constitutional authority to ban outright outdoor political activities. The Ministry of Home Affairs and the police have repeatedly stated that political activities conducted in public would not be given permits.

The Singapore constitution does not provide for the Government to do this except in situations where national security is threatened. The right of Singaporeans to gather peacefully is guaranteed under Article 14.

The second question that the appellants are seeking to address is whether the Government can discriminate against political activity. Licensing officers from the police have testified in the various trials of illegal assembly that, unlike political activity, gatherings of five or more persons for a commercial activity do not require a permit.

Again, there is no provision in the constitution that allows the Executive to make such a distinction. In fact, it explicitly forbids such a practice in Article 12 to prevent ruling parties from conducting public activity while preventing opposition groups from doing the same. In other words, everyone must be treated equally under the law - PAP or not.

Unfortunately, the PAP has relied on such an unconstitutional practice to advance its agenda. It allows organisations and groups affiliated to it to openly conduct public protests while it enforces a strict ban on those it opposes.

A good case in point is the Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE) which conducts regular protests and processions outside Parliament House while the Tak Boleh Tahan protest was
stopped (see photos below).

assembly.jpg


Singapore is in the state that it is - high influx of foreigners, unaffordable HDB prices, wide income gap, etc - because the people have been shorn of the rights to peaceful public assembly. This has allowed the PAP to control the media and the electoral process leading to the skewed representation in Parliament.

Singaporeans must realise that without political rights, there can be no economic rights. The longer our rights are deprived, the more dangerous our economic state becomes.

Authorities in other countries realise that in this era it is foolish to deny their peoples of the basic freedoms of speech and assembly. Burma has reformed its outdated political system by freeing political prisoners and allowing public assembly.

The High Court in Malaysia has, in recent years, repeatedly ruled against the undemocratic practices of the Barisan Nasional government, returning to the Malaysian people what has been theirs all along - their freedom.

A similar problem is before the High Court in Singapore. How will it decide?

If Mr Quentin Loh allows the application, the matter will go to the Court of Appeal where the Chief Justice and two other Justices will rule on whether the PAP Government has been acting unconstitutionally in banning public assembly.

<TBODY>
</TBODY>
 
Top