ge: round 8. potshots and snide remarks

the pap has taken the first shot at the opposition. 'they were not around but suddenly appeared all over the places.' another shot, 'are they sincere in wanting to serve.' no reply yet from the opposition, probably busy finding lost ground and time to reconnect with the people again. actually, if the opposition candidates in waiting were paid $13,000 and all the perks, i am sure they will be around every day of the year. and they would be able to do just as much with all the funds and resources available to pap mps. even chiam and low who are around everyday are unable to promise any upgrading or extravagant plans. is it their faults? as for sincerity, the similar explanation can be applied. one is an elected mp who is paid handsomely to do the job. the other has lost the election and not paid anything to do anything. how much can the people expect from opposition candidates after an election? the question then, would an elected mp, without the pay, be as sincere in his commitment to the people? yes there are sitoh and low. but are we comparing apple with apple? other than the big organisation and machinery at their disposal, what else do they have to be able to do what they were doing over the last 4 years? it is interesting to listen and observe how the parties attacked each other and whether there is any substance from the punches they threw. or are they good for a laugh.

boundary got change or no change?

“The coming election won’t change anything, anyway. The government will still be controlling as it had done” seems to be a popular sentiment. All these frequent boundary changes simply contribute to the cynicism among young and old. I must say it is quite prevalent in the estate where I live. At a coffee shop breakfast this morning, an elderly gentleman asked me why was I surprised. “You should know better. Next time Serangoon Gardens may well move to Ang Moh Kio!” seah chiang nee posted the above in littlespeck.com. and i have just quoted a few mps dismissing the cynicism about boundary changes. nobody will know about the changes unless you are affected personally. i think chiang nee should be grateful for the changes as he is given a chance to elect a pap candidate of his choice. very probably he has not found a pap candidate of his liking in serangoon garden, braddell height and marine parade. now he is given a chance to vote for george yeo. and why not, george is the few good men that you can find.

ge: a sense of fair play

hsien loong is calling the opposition to field all 84 candidates. this is the first time where the call comes out genuine. and he meant it, for all the good reasons. the pap is confident, but is also feeling the pressure from all the gossips about how the game is being played. in the past it was simply ignored, talked away. but today, there is this intent to really test their support without being accused of all the things that they have done in the past. it seems that hsien loong really want to put to test where he stands, where the party stands. with minimal changes to the election boundaries, this has elicited many responses from both the party and the opposition. all welcomes this. ong kian min said, 'i think this increases the sense of fair play, and suggests the boundaries have not been redrawn for whimsical reasons. in the past, people complained that radical changes were made to suit the ruling party.' zulkifli baharudin said that it avoids criticism previously levelled against the system. how true were the criticism, it is just a perception. only time will tell the truth for the drastic changes in the past. like it or not, when one is holding a knife in the scene of a murder, it is difficult for people not to suspect anything. would the status quo in election boundaries really be a test of the strength of the pap? i doubt so. the system still favours the ruling party with its organisation and huge resources. it will be a fairer contest if there are more single wards and the huge grcs be reduced to 3 or 4 candidates. then the playing field will be more level. then only will we see a genuine contest, and where lies the heart of the voters.

mindless idolation of talents

i thought the nkf episode would have taught singaporeans an embarrassing lesson in behaving like little girls idolising their favourite celebrities. talents were blindly appreciated and praised and ended up with red faces. but at least there is now an attempt to correct the silliness of the whole episode, to right the wrongs and uphold values that are considered worthy. now the agu case is anything but stupidity. why would people entrusted with public money threw them at a rotten apple. everything is wrong. give him another chance, but not the way the events unfolded and the truth emerged. apparently agu returned only when he found out that he was not good enough in russia, uk and canada. during his absence, he was in these places for trial. otherwise he would be gone and with all our money, faith, trust and laughing at our idiocy. agu exemplified everything that is wrong, untrusthworthy, deceitful, greed, taking advantage of his naive benefactors, cheating, and what else. and he is going to don our national colours as one of us, and we pay him dearly. where is the sense of righteousness, uprightness, honesty, honour, trust...is a little thrash talent worth so much that we give up all the virtues that we live by and wanted our people to live by? the whole issue is not only a case of children playing their little pranks, but shame. we can forgive him, but not the way he is welcomed back to have a chance to repeat the whole damn thing once again. if he is not ask to go now, and if he does a repeat, all those who put the money and trust in him must go. this is a case of poor judgement, bad judgement, and a compromise of our simple decent values.

hdb: 5 equals 4

the latest announcement that hdb is converting its unsold 5 room flats into 2 x 2 room flats is another funny figure crunching. 5 rooms become 2 rooms. the only thing good is that the converted 2 roomers must be technically having 2 and a half room of a 5 room flats. so these flats must be bigger. just like a 5 room flat must be bigger than a 4 room flat. good buy. provided there are buyers. apparently so as the number of buyers for big flats have mostly disappeared and many are downgrading to smaller and smaller flats. so much for prosperity and a booming economy and good times. during good times people are all downgrading. what happens during bad times, all upgrading?