For advertisement

Sample

1/12/2012

Ministerial salary debate in Parliament

The recommendations of the Salary Review Committee will be debated on Monday 16 Jan in Parliament. It will be PAP versus others, between those going to vote for the recommendations and those against it. It will not be a debate on conscience, not about morality or decency, but a debate on policy.

Yes, Gan Kim Yong said the whip will not be lifted. This means that the PAP MPs must toe the line, and vote for the new salary. They have no choice, they cannot vote against it. But would they stand up and speak against it? No, it is a PAP policy and they must be disciplined, cannot break rank, it is us against them. Those who believe that PAP MPs can speak to oppose PAP policies, this sitting will tell them rudely that they can forget it in important issues like this one.

The stage is set for a bi partisan debate, with PAP for and others against the recommendation. It will be 6 against 81. And the vote is final and the recommendations will be approved. The bill is passed, or as good as passed even before Parliament sits. This is democracy, the rule of the majority…in Parliament.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

2012.01.16 mon
1.30pm

Anonymous said...

EMP
6 against 81.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Thanks for the correction, 6 versus 81 and Monday 16 Jan. will amend that. WTF, making two mistakes in one article. Unacceptable.

Anonymous said...

6 versus 81 , what's there to debate? Debate for F ?? After "debate" decision is the same right ? Can change one ? No right ? But at least we get to see how much noise / voice of the people can be heard via the opposition. Hopefully can put up an impressive show to show DAFT sinkies , if we get more into parliament , the PAPPY dogs will not dare to continue to rob us blind.

Anonymous said...

Referendum ? Good one , referendum on many issues close to the hearts of sinkies . That's democracy.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

The majority in parliament will decide for you. You want referendum, the majority in parliament will decide whether you can have or cannot have referendum.

This debate is good to see who will speak for the high salary, who will speak against it, their trends of thoughts and values, and who is wayanging. Who will speak against it and vote for it.


It will be entertaining and a great revelation. This show should remove the blinkers from the sinkies.

Unfortunately it will not be reported live. Would the journalists and reporters give a detailed account of the actions in Parliament on this debate? It will be the most sought after news for the day or weeks or months.

Anonymous said...

What referendum ? I thought it is already replaced by PAPdum long long long time ago in the galaxy ?

Anonymous said...

Cock a doodle do
Singaporeans got one
Others got two

Some put hands in cookie jar
Fingers got caught
Faces turn blue

Anonymous said...

Sibei Dulan One
Sinkies all say Boo
But PAP say " We Rule"

Big fatty bom bom say Cut
Sinkie say what the phuck
In the end PAP say "Tough Luck"

Anonymous said...

Daft Sinkies should know this unaccountable and opaque government will not listen to the people and will wayang all the time. What do you expect? Ask yourself who did you vote in GE2011?

Anonymous said...

This is completely consistent with the below. Daft Singaporeans are themselves to be blamed for the present stage of problems in Singapore.

The logic of politicians’ remuneration:

You propose a formula for your own salary and present the proposal to the parliament for approval. You and your cronies have total control of the parliament. You know your proposal is definitely passed without meaningful debate.

You propose salary formula for you and your cronies to base on a group of top earners who are mostly from GLCs and your cronies' companies. You also know that your controlled parliament will pass your proposed formula. Next thing you do is to get GLCs and your cronies' companies to pay the chief very very well. As such, your and your cronies' salary will be increased accordingly.

After the people object to your proposal, you appoint one of your cronies to review the proposal and he recommend a revised proposal that you and your cronies (not the people) are happy about it. Then you present the revised proposal to the parliament again for approval. You know that all your cronies in the parliament will support the revised proposal because the revised proposal is for their own good. The parliament is still dominant by your cronies and the revised proposal will be approved without any question. 


After the revised salary proposal is done, one of your cronies can say she suffer pay cut by joining politics. She claimed she could earn much more in 'private' sector. Look at what 'private' sector she has worked before joining politics. She has worked for few GLCs before invited to join politics. Are GLCs really 'private' sector? If she is right, those GLCs must have paid her very very high salary. This proves that if you have raised the GLCs chief salary this will actually effect higher salary for you and your cronies. 



By controlling the corruption at lower levels, foreigners who do not know the details of this system will believe that a pro-business governance system is free of corruption. Is the system really corruption-free?

Based on the logic, it proves that the current system is very very clever to ‘legalize’ corruption at the highest level. If not, what is it?

You may look at the logics of GRC, NCMP and NMP. It is not difficult to understand the ultimate motive behind a fake democratic ‘feudal dynasty’ politics in action in a modern world.

Anonymous said...

When I initially left a comment I appear to have clicked
on the -Notify me when new comments are added- checkbox and from now on every time a comment is added I recieve 4 emails with the
same comment. Is there a means you are able to remove me from that service?
Many thanks!

Here is my web page; filing bankruptcy in Florida