Remember this campaign in China? If I can remember correctly, this happened some time before the Cultural Revolution when there seemed to be a loosening up of govt control and the people were encouraged to speak freely. Freely they spoke, a bit too freely. Then the door was closed and all who spoke freely were rounded up in a dragnet. It was a clean sweep and all the dissidents, unhappy people and anti govt agitators were behind bars on sent to reeducation camps in the rural parts of China.
Free speech and freedom of expression have a price. It is free to speak, to express and attack people, but when done wrongly, unrestrained and without proof, spurious, defamatory, it can be like entering a mouse trap. A hundred flowers bloomed may end up with a hundred flowers doomed.
Don’t take your freedom too casually and for granted. One must know one’s place in society.
2/24/2012
No automatic by election
After Professor Eugene Tan’s comment that by election is automatic as in the case of Hougang, Hri Kumar has written a reply today in Today paper saying that it is not so. Hri’s position is that the law and reason behind the law in our system is mainly to elect a govt, and the position of an MP is secondary. A vacant MP seat is acceptable as long as the govt is in place. There is no automatic by election or no need for by election if the PM or govt thinks so.
So if 5 seats were vacant, or to stretch the argument further, 20 seats were vacant, legally as provided by the law and the reason behind the law, if the govt is in place and running, there is no need for by election at all and the vacant seats can remain, and the people can suffer for having no MPs to serve them. It is the fault of the people for choosing a wrong MP who may resign, expel, die or committed a crime and force to quit while in office.
Hri added, ‘It has another salutary effect: It holds political parties accountable to voters for the performance of their candidates. Parties must endeavour to field candidates who can last the term as MP.’ So political parties must now play God to judge that their MPs would not get into any trouble and resign or prematurely die while in office. Would a doctor’s certificate be needed, like runners for marathon, to ensure that the MP is medically able to live through his terms? I am not God and I don’t think any doctor is God enough to issue such a certificate.
But is it the intent of our electoral system to just elect govt and MP can die or go away never mind? Is that specified in the law or is that an interpretation or a personal opinion? This is the first time that I have heard of such a view that is claimed to be the law and the reason behind the law. No need to have by election. Not automatic.
So if 5 seats were vacant, or to stretch the argument further, 20 seats were vacant, legally as provided by the law and the reason behind the law, if the govt is in place and running, there is no need for by election at all and the vacant seats can remain, and the people can suffer for having no MPs to serve them. It is the fault of the people for choosing a wrong MP who may resign, expel, die or committed a crime and force to quit while in office.
Hri added, ‘It has another salutary effect: It holds political parties accountable to voters for the performance of their candidates. Parties must endeavour to field candidates who can last the term as MP.’ So political parties must now play God to judge that their MPs would not get into any trouble and resign or prematurely die while in office. Would a doctor’s certificate be needed, like runners for marathon, to ensure that the MP is medically able to live through his terms? I am not God and I don’t think any doctor is God enough to issue such a certificate.
But is it the intent of our electoral system to just elect govt and MP can die or go away never mind? Is that specified in the law or is that an interpretation or a personal opinion? This is the first time that I have heard of such a view that is claimed to be the law and the reason behind the law. No need to have by election. Not automatic.
2/23/2012
Foreign scholars - Bad meat bad broth
A piece of bad meat in a broth will turn everything in the pot bad. The Sun Xu incident is gonna turn the batch of scholars around him feeling sour despite the scholarship and opportunities given to them for a good foreign education in a world class university in a world class country.
Sun Xu is unlikely to feel good about the experience. He has shown to be quite an ingrate to rubbish the people of a country over a few stares by a few rude oldies, probably the illiterate type. His close scholar friends would likely be rubbed the wrong way and feeling uncomfortable with the whole issue. And so would other scholars who empathize with his plight.
The broth and meat have to be thrown away, including the millions spent on the whole batch of scholars. One bad apple is enough to affect the whole basket of apples. What a waste of money.
Sun Xu is unlikely to feel good about the experience. He has shown to be quite an ingrate to rubbish the people of a country over a few stares by a few rude oldies, probably the illiterate type. His close scholar friends would likely be rubbed the wrong way and feeling uncomfortable with the whole issue. And so would other scholars who empathize with his plight.
The broth and meat have to be thrown away, including the millions spent on the whole batch of scholars. One bad apple is enough to affect the whole basket of apples. What a waste of money.
CPF Poll - If you have a choice
I have added a poll on what the people would like to do with their CPF savings. Poll is at top right corner of page.
CPF’s shifting goal posts
While the govt keeps shifting the goal posts, the daft Sinkies, would you believe it, are resigned to the fate that their CPF savings are as good as gone, a given thing, a fait accompli sanctioned by new regulations!
Everyone enters the CPF scheme at a specific time with a list of accepted and agreed conditions and state regulations. The govt must honour them, or can it suka suka introduce new laws and apply them retrospectively like some unpredictable third world countries? The contractual and legal terms existing must continue to be applicable to the original parties. Any new rules, legislation should only be applicable to subsequent parties coming into the scheme. Failing to do so is unfair and unjust to the affected parties.
Of course the govt has all the power, laws and machinery to do as it pleases. It can introduce anything in Parliament and make them effective with little regards to the interests and feelings of the affected parties. The govt is the law. And this is democracy. The people elect the govt to rule over them and do whatever the govt claims to be good for the people. And the people cannot do anything or blame the govt for it. The people ask for it by voting the govt to be their masters and deserve everything they get from the govt.
Having said that, the human beans, no matter how daft, know that there are things called justice and fairness. What is yours must be yours and not belong to other people. No govt can cheat all the people all the time. Thinking that the people are daft and can be taken for granted will only last for a while and the people will wise up to know what is good or bad for them. A good govt will always have the people behind it. A bad govt will be sent away in due course.
What were the original agreements in the CPF Scheme?
1. It is the people’s savings and the money belongs to the contributors
2. There is a fixed date for complete withdrawal
3. There is a regulated interest rate to be paid
4. There are some rules and guidelines on how the savings can be used.
Changing these rules without the people’s consent is a breach of faith, is it not?. Sure, the people cannot do anything about it except to feel pissed off and pui pui all the time. And they will continue to vote the govt to power, trusting the govt to do good, even changing all the rules regarding their life savings and planning when they can or cannot use them.
And this will not change comes 2016. The people will continue to support the govt as they believe the govt is doing everything that is good for them, except for some who will continue to pui pui. And the people are so happy looking at how their savings are growing day by day. They can also bring their CPF statements with them one day, and rest in peace.
Does the govt really think that it can go on and on messing the people’s savings as it like and the people will continue to vote the govt into power to repeat the story forever?
Everyone enters the CPF scheme at a specific time with a list of accepted and agreed conditions and state regulations. The govt must honour them, or can it suka suka introduce new laws and apply them retrospectively like some unpredictable third world countries? The contractual and legal terms existing must continue to be applicable to the original parties. Any new rules, legislation should only be applicable to subsequent parties coming into the scheme. Failing to do so is unfair and unjust to the affected parties.
Of course the govt has all the power, laws and machinery to do as it pleases. It can introduce anything in Parliament and make them effective with little regards to the interests and feelings of the affected parties. The govt is the law. And this is democracy. The people elect the govt to rule over them and do whatever the govt claims to be good for the people. And the people cannot do anything or blame the govt for it. The people ask for it by voting the govt to be their masters and deserve everything they get from the govt.
Having said that, the human beans, no matter how daft, know that there are things called justice and fairness. What is yours must be yours and not belong to other people. No govt can cheat all the people all the time. Thinking that the people are daft and can be taken for granted will only last for a while and the people will wise up to know what is good or bad for them. A good govt will always have the people behind it. A bad govt will be sent away in due course.
What were the original agreements in the CPF Scheme?
1. It is the people’s savings and the money belongs to the contributors
2. There is a fixed date for complete withdrawal
3. There is a regulated interest rate to be paid
4. There are some rules and guidelines on how the savings can be used.
Changing these rules without the people’s consent is a breach of faith, is it not?. Sure, the people cannot do anything about it except to feel pissed off and pui pui all the time. And they will continue to vote the govt to power, trusting the govt to do good, even changing all the rules regarding their life savings and planning when they can or cannot use them.
And this will not change comes 2016. The people will continue to support the govt as they believe the govt is doing everything that is good for them, except for some who will continue to pui pui. And the people are so happy looking at how their savings are growing day by day. They can also bring their CPF statements with them one day, and rest in peace.
Does the govt really think that it can go on and on messing the people’s savings as it like and the people will continue to vote the govt into power to repeat the story forever?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)