ge round 35: my nightmare is beginning

LKY is absolutely right to comment that opposition candidates are not up to par. Well, not all. But it seems that some need to take political lessons and understand what politics is all about and how the system works, at least. Being honest and commited to serve the people is one thing. But being honest, simple minded and naive have no place for anyone who aspire to be a leader of the people. We all understand why nominated MPs were introduced. PAP has explained this many times over. It would be so ridiculous for PAP to nominate their defeated candidates as a NMP. Doing that will immediately make PAP's position so slippery. Suggesting that will be too much to stomach even as a joke. And to suggest that ministers who lost their elections can be nominated as a minister...my gosh! I do not know how to react to such a plain stupid idea. Why don't people propose that if Hsien Loong loses his election the PAP can nominate him as a nominated Prime Minister? I have sleepless night and a nightmare after what I have heard.


whiplash said...

Hi redbean. The idea of a nominated minister is no more stupid than the idea that the PAP can exempt Eric and Sitoh from the Whip if they get elected. It is the practive in countries with two houses of Parliament, where a Minister can be appointed from among the ranks of non-MPs provided they are a member of the other House.

redbean said...

i agree with you whiplash.

one comedy after another.

i think the usa also allows many senior positions to be appointed. but if this is done in our context, including the amendment of the constitution, it will reflect very badly on the ruling party and even the minister being nominated. it will definitely become a laughing stock.

nice to hear your views. you are also welcome to post at www.redbeanforum.com

whiplash said...

why will it reflect badly ? A minister's capability and effectiveness to perform a job doesn't disappear just because he lost his seat. In fact it would be a loss to the country especially if the opposition candidate elected in his place in of a lesser calibre than he was, like a certain 'don't talk cock' MP ?

redbean said...

our system is based on an elected govt, not an appointed govt. that is why a nmp does not have voting rights in many issues. neither does he represent the people.

how could a nominated minister claims any credibility if he is already rejected by the people. it would be better to appoint him as a civil servant if he is useful.

hypothetically, if hsien loong loses his election and got nominated as a prime minister. how is he to claim that he represents the people and speak for the people?

first the opposition is already sneering at mps getting into parliament through the backdoor of grc. now if minister is to get into parliament after losing an election by being nominated... i can't speak for others, but i will lose all faith in the system of elected representatives.

our mps are elected by the people. it is the people's choice. how good a minister is, is a very subjective question. looking at their performances, everyone has his own take on which minister is good and which is bad. if we are not going to call the voters stupid because they voted for the wrong person, we should believe in the system and that the voters don't vote blindly.

a minister, with so much stature, if he loses an election, then it speaks for itself how good he is.

our system is based on people or voter supremacy. not the supremacy of one person or a group of individuals. let the people decide who they want to serve them.