10/08/2010

Do we need more MPs and Ministers?

My answer to this is an unequivocal yes. Look, our population has almost doubled, land size increased by at least 20%, economy tripled, oldies quadrupled, foreigners almost half of the population, and many more. With all the big developments, we could easily need double the current MPs. We can start off in the next election by having 100 MPs. And with more MPs, we should increase the number of mayors and town council CEOS as well. That will make our constituencies better managed and with better facilities. My other consideration for this is to separate the roles so that more people can enjoy such quality jobs with quality pay. Also, we do not want to over work our MPs to death do we? With more MPs, there should be more ministers too. I can see the need for a minister for the islands and islanders when they are occupied, a minister for public housing and one for private housing. With hospitals doubling, and the bill size unimaginable, we can afford to have a minister just to take charge of hospitals and manage the revenue. We need a minister for foreigners and foreign workers for sure, in view of their size and importance. The job of looking after the oldies shall be formalized with a minister for the oldies as this is becoming a bigger issue over time. The ministry of Home Affairs will need a minister to take care of terrorism. Transportation too needs another minister as the job is getting too big for one minister to handle. So does education with more universities coming up. With more ministers and ministries, we will need to have more coordinating ministers to prevent the same problem happening again, when one ministry is doing something while other ministries are sleeping or have no clue of what is going on and ended with big uncoordinated problems. We deserve to have the best govt. And big is good.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

"With more MPs, there should be more ministers too"

With more ministers of every description, portfolio and caliber or rank, there will be a need for more civil servants, weightlifters, apple-polishers, etc such that in time to come, just the total number of votes from these 'kar kee nan' will be enough to see them consolidate their power with bigger majorities.

Maybe they will justify this with the argument that these measures help to create jobs and lower unemployment.

What else can you say, when the PM's office is already one perfect example of more is better.

Explanations, if they are needed hardly resemble explanations at all, and always comes after the decisions have been made.

Matilah_Singapura said...

There is little doubt in my mind that the govt will grow, as will the power and influence of the state.

It has nothing to do with whether it is "needed" or not. No group of people -- referred to as a "country" or "nation" ever needed a govt or a state. States and govt evolved out of a will to power and a mistaken belief that "without govt, there will be a war of all against all".

Govt tends to grow larger and larger once it is in place. As long as it can be funded (through taxes), there is no reason for govt to get smaller and "less powerful".