4/14/2006

ge round 30: too many tigers in parliament

The whole slate of new PAP candidates have been put up for display. The line up is indeed formidable. Some of the best men and women available in the island. Who would dare say we need foreign talents? When we are prepared to look among ourselves, there are many diamonds to be found. But all it needs is for someone influential to say that they are not up to mark, and people would panic and run in circles looking for foreign talents to replace them. If we do not give our locals a chance, they will never stand out to show their best. This is best manifested in our tv and media circles. If all our artistes and media people were not given a chance, then people may ask, who is Zoe Tay or who is Sun Yanzi? The most impressive of yesterday's product is Tan Chin Siong. He recalled the racial riots when he was only 5. His memory is first class. No wonder LKY said the opposition is not up to mark. It all depends on what LKY was expecting. Is he thinking that one of the opposition candidates would be a PM and use himself as the yardstick? If that is the case, none of the opposition will be up to mark. Also, none of the PAP candidates, including Choktong and Hsienloong is up to mark. His shoes are too big for anyone. No country is blessed with such a leader in succession. Even when we compared the academic brilliance and personal achievements of the candidates, the opposition is still lagging quite far behind except for a few. But to parade such a pristine list of candidates has its own problems. As I have mentioned earlier, these people are not multi millionaires yet, not at the peak of their career, and still quite hungry. Pushing them into politics would mean either they will lose out making the millions and honing their professional skills, or they must be fed the millions to satisfy their hunger. It is costly to them, to the system and to the nation. You really can't pay these people peanuts. Oops! We have to assume that they are all humans and want to have all the good things in life, including the multi million dollar bank accounts. They can't be serving the people for free or for too little. And many of them are ministerial material. The other issue is the competition for a few high positions by a large group of equally good candidates and some must be left behind. This is not good for morale of the candidates. The next question is that if some of them are to be MPs only, do we need so high calibre material to serve just as MPs? At the MP level, many of them will be over qualified. And many of the opposition candidates will be good enough. The Chinese saying, you can't have two tigers in a mountain. Now we have several dozens, including existing ones in a small parliament house.

4/13/2006

crooked bridge and straightens thoughts

The Malaysians have finally come to terms with their arguments for the bridge. They have eventually accepted that it was started based on wrong premises and unsound facts and cannot continue further without causing more harm to themselves and their own people and economy. What is important is the signalling by Badawi that the period of excesses and extravagance of mega projects of Mahathir is finally over. The bridge over trouble water is the last vestige of an era of wasteful policies. The scrapping of the bridge would probably strengthen Badawi's position and mark an end to all the crony companies and their projects to fleece the people and nation of their limited resources. It is good that all the shit on the table is wiped away together with the crooked bridge.

ge round 29: the youth factor

The engaging forum between LKY and the 10 young people from the media reflects the importance of the new generation in the politics of Singapore. There were 10 young people, opinionated, aware and informed of the political issues in the country, unlike the school kids that were featured before. Now, this group of people know what they were talking about. And for LKY to take them on in an open forum shows how serious he and the PAP is about the votes of the young. They are going make an impact in this general election, like it or not. And LKY was there to convince these young people and to convert and win them over to the PAP camp. Did he succeed in what he sets out to do? In the first place the 10 people were all of the same mind. That's what I perceived from their questions, body language and expression. They all have similar thoughts of what was wrong with the present systems and where the fault lies. Their questions were direct and unrestrained. Unlevel playing field, no mandate, restriction of expression, unfair upgrading, relevance of GRCs, a bullying govt, arrogance etc. LKY's response was to play hardball. Nobody plays fair in politics. These are the realities. The ruling party will not help the opposition. And when one of them made a general statement, he was mowed down by a clinical and precise argument on facts. It was a clever argument that will destroy and win a judgement in court. The young man could not substantiate his statement with empirical facts about the fear factor. He misquoted. But does winning that argument on technical ground win the ground? It will win a legal case or an argument. period. The listeners were not convinced, from their expression and rumbling. In fact that kind of statements, that people vote out of fear, can never be substantiated even if a proper survey is done. Not many will tell the truth, especially when they perceived the stakes were high. What ended up is the winning of an argument but losing the audience. This is politics. The explanations by LKY on the necessity for GRC did not address the question that GRC can be smaller. Neither was it convincing to say that GRCs were set up to test the ability of the opposition to run the country. The argument that because the opposition was weak or the walkovers, so the people are contented and there was a mandate for the PAP to rule did not cut any ice. It came across as winning by default, and supported the young people's point that it was due to the uneven playing field, apathy and restrictions placed on the opposition. As for the lack of good opposition, LKY said that all the good candidates were with the PAP. It is true that the opposition could not attract good quality candidates. But there are many excellent candidates that are not contesting for many reasons. What was not answered is why are good people not joining the opposition? But the answer was there. Did LKY manage to wind over the young people to his side? There were some reverence shown. But as to winning them over with hardball politics, the answer was obvious.

4/12/2006

bash a path and leave a trail

'Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.' -Ralph Waldo Emerson- the above is quoted in a NUS business school advertisement. In no time this will be adapted to fit the singapore context and change to: 'do not find your own path, go instead and follow the trail we have laid for you.' -redbean-

give pap a clean sweep

Maybe Singaporeans shall all vote for PAP and give PAP a clean sweep. Then ask for lesser control and more freedom to write blogs and forums without having to register. Would not that be a good bargain?