APEC 2024 Peru. Biden shafted to a corner in the back row. Xi in front row next to Peru's President
3/26/2013
Does the Govt respect the people’s elected representatives?
Apparently this is so. It must be, the MPs are elected by the people to represent them and their interests and rightly or wrongly, the Govt has no choice but to work with the MPs, to show some respect to the people. Anyway, this is only an issue when the MPs are from the opposition. An article by Chua Mui Hoong over the weekend raised this relationship between the Govt and the opposition MPs.
The problem is that many Govt initiatives are backed and funded by public money and the Govt cannot deprive the residents of opposition wards of the public funds. Allocating the funds to grassroot advisers smack of impropriety in the sense that the grassroot advisers often are the rejects of the people. The people did not want the grassroot advisers to represent and did not want to work with them. If the Govt is spending party funds, the opposition MPs have nothing to say and the Govt can make love with the grassroot advisers for as long as it wants.
This tricky problem arose again in Parliament when Chan Chun Sing announced that his ministry would be setting up 20 social service offices across the island. These offices are to provide social assistance to the residents and would require the combined effort of social workers, agencies and also the MPs. Chan went on to ask the MPs to work with his officials to identify suitable sites for such offices. Innocently an opposition MP stood up saying she would love to work with the Ministry of Social and Family Development,MSF on this, and Chan’s reply was that he would work with the grassroot leaders. Wasn’t it awkward?
Chua Mui Hoong did not let this matter go away. In her article she posed the question whether it is time that the Govt should put the money where the mouth is, and seriously work with the elected MPs of both sides. The past practice of ostracizing the opposition MPs did not work and was done in bad taste. Should there be a new start to our all inclusive society trumpeted by the Govt, inclusive of opposition MPs when delivering services to the people using public fund?
Does the Govt respect the people and their choice of their MPs and would the Govt show its sincerity to work with them, and be answerable to the people?
It is not the first time nor would it be the last that the govt ignored the opposition MPs.What is surprising is that Ms Chua chose to write the piece that and it was published. I thought Ms Chua was too pro establishment to write any thing symbolic of support for the opposition. Or she has seen the light and crossed the line?
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think?
The profession of journalism is under seige. They used to be unchallenged and could write whatever they want without challenge and without having to listen to the vibes against their silly views.
ReplyDeleteSocial media has made it a point to rubbish them and their credibility. They cannot continue to write nonsense without damaging the reputation of the media they represent or themselves as thinking and intelligent individuals. They have to write sensibly from now on.
The social media is very unforgiving. And this is a small place and they have no where to hide their faces.
To be professional, to speak wisely and truthfully is the way forward for journalism.
In the fist place the Government does not even accept the opposition MPs position not to talk about respect.
ReplyDeleteOf course ostracising the opposition MPs did not work. On the contrary it is a double-edged sword that reflects badly on the Government (or the PAP) because opposition voters know why things cannot be done in their wards and they are not going to blame their opposition MPs. Their hands are tied. It is for this reason that opposition voters keep voting for opposition MPs, election after election and why it is difficult for the PAP to regain the wards they lost to the opposition, despite trying to turn the tide with all kinds of bribes. It is always too little too late.
Sinkies must not be daft for too long and learn from the few smarter ones who know how to change direction to go with the flow. Self preservation is vital to folks who are seen as radically against the people in their professions and or in their personal individuals.
ReplyDeleteAs me has said before, many are changing direction as the reality has made them jittery over their wellbeings and possessions. Imagine there is a change of power into the hands of a different ideological camp. Then the new regime starts to look into those that helped the former regime. For the matter, the average man on the street starts to spit and scold all these sycophants. How are they to live in peace?
I surmise that more will be going with the flow of the people as time goes, but to expect a change of regime within the Next Two General Election will be overly optimistic. Matilah Singapura had expounded at an earlier thread here which I fully concur.
PAPs' seats in Parliament will be reduced no matter whatever schemes it can come up with, but it will the Government for the Next ten years. It is not a good thing for the Party to hold the power as any serious blunder from it will result in stand off with the people. The tolerance of the people has been greatly tested in the Last two decades and little is left. Anymore challenges made to their survivals could result in them having no alternative but to behave in mass civil disobedience. The people will not want it, but they cannot help if the Rulers drive them to it.
Expect more to change their tacts, including some wielding the power now. They have to for pragmatic reason as well as for their own preservations.
Btw, do beware of sly shenanigans that takes one step back to plot three steps forward. Such calibres are the most dangerous and detestable.
patriot
The solution is clear.
ReplyDeleteWe have to keep supporting our pro Singaporean Opposition Parties.
To protect us from an anti Singaporean government.
People should learn to look deeper. It looks like democratic singapore on the surface but it is really the kingdom of lee kill you. Obey the king and serve him like a dog.
ReplyDeletePeople can vote the opposition all they want but how can something that is not transparent not be subjected to any fraud? Never heard of election fraud?
ReplyDelete" Chan’s reply was that he would work with the grassroot leaders."
ReplyDeleteKee Chiu,
why are we the taxpayers paying these unnecessary loser hundreds of thousands per year as grassroot leaders to communicate with you ? Did these salary to these losers come from PAP or from taxpayer's money. Isn't this a clear blatant abuse of power and authority when we force to waste money on these clowns ?
When opp party candidate lose, they get on with life on their own, and when PAP candidate lose, they still get elected as grassroot leader ? Who the PAP are fooling us with ?
Redbean,
any answer on that ?
Commentary, TODAYonline
ReplyDelete[Reforming MediShield to be truly national]
by Jeremy Lim
(Jeremy Lim has held senior executive positions in both the public and private healthcare sectors.
He is writing a book on the Singapore health system.)
"MediShield is the bedrock insurance programme intended to protect against the financial consequences of medical catastrophes.
It is the only health insurance scheme created by an Act of Parliament and must be national.
However, MediShield has 3 limitations that prevent it from being truly national:
Exclusion of pre-existing conditions from coverage,
non-eligibility upon reaching 90 years of age;
and
sharp premium increases with age."
http://www.todayonline.com/commentary/reforming-medishield-be-truly-national
ST Forum 27March
ReplyDelete[HEALTH-CARE FINANCING]
Bey Mui Leng (Ms)
Director, Corporate Communications
Ministry of Health
"WE REFER to Professor Feng Pao-Hsii's letter ('3Ms are outdated, says professor'; last Thursday),
as well as several other letters on health-care financing.
We understand the concerns of Prof Feng,
Dr Leong Choon Kit ('Prevention key to lower costs'; Monday),
Mr Koh Tze Hock ('Yes, it's time to review MediShield'; last Thursday)
and
Ms Linda Woo ('MediShield should be more inclusive'; March 16),
and thank them for their feedback."
http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-letters/story/review-will-be-forward-looking-20130327
ST Forum 27March
ReplyDelete[NCMP SCHEME -
Changing system not the answer]
Jack Lee Tsen-Ta (Dr)
Assistant Professor of Law School of Law,
Singapore Management University
"DR KER Sin Tze ('Picking out the winners in electoral systems'; last Saturday)
proposed that the NCMP scheme be altered
to increase 'participation in the decision-forming process'
and
'reduce the difficulty of enticing bright talents to serve in Parliament and the Govt'.
Increasing the potential pool of MPs by 10 will not really help to address the issue,
because the true challenge that all political parties face
is finding suitable people to stand for election in the first place."
http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-letters/story/changing-system-not-the-answer-20130327
ST Forum 27March
ReplyDelete[NCMP SCHEME -
Proportional representation has its limitations]
Devadas Krishnadas
"WHILE it is always useful to study other political and economic systems,
it would be a mistake to do so without considering the historical and current differences in culture, law and politics
('Picking out the winners in electoral systems'; last Saturday).
Applying the proportional representation approach to the NCMP system is unsound.
.. the idea of introducing proportional representation for the NCMP system as a way to 'entice talent' is oxymoronic.
If a person cannot get himself elected, then either he is not seen as talent
or the people have decided that the electoral winner is better.
We should not create 'backdoor' routes to political leadership.
If anything, given the growing electoral success of the opposition,
the more pertinent question to ask is if the NCMP system will continue to have justification beyond this term of govt."
http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-letters/story/proportional-representation-has-its-limitations-20130327
Thoughts of a Cynical Investor
ReplyDelete[Numbers show GCT & Lee Jnr messed up?]
"This chart shows all the economies that maintained 6% growth or faster over 30 years.
S’pore’s run of 7ish% growth ended in 1994, when GCT was PM
and Lee Jnr was Deputy PM and in charge of the economy.
How about a claw-back of ministerial salaries?
Esp of PM’s and DPM’s?
If it happens to bankers, it can happen to ministers:
after all, ministers’ salaries pegged to bankers among others."
http://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/numbers-show-gct-lee-jnr-messed-up/
What's up colleagues, how is all, and what you desire to say regarding this post, in my view its really awesome in support of me.
ReplyDeleteHere is my blog - raspberry ketone diet