Where and who do we trust?
Reading this on can also assume that it applies to Singapore. Too bad they did not include Singapore in their survey.
I do not trust the local print and broadcast media to be fair and complete in their reporting of anything. Trust in them was lost a long time ago and it gets to be even more stark during times when there are elections being held.
Is it healthy for this to continue? Who can you trust? I would be happy to trust the media but they have to earn that trust.
For this coming election, many questions need to be answered that I do not see being asked. Instead we see unproductive mudslinging. The thing here is that since the people who would ask these questions are potentially from the non-PAP crowd, whether these get reported by the media is debatable. There are no more Tan Cheng Boks left in the line up from the PAP - or at least, none yet. We need more citizen journalists to report on what is being discussed and debated and to get that info to the voting population - not lobotomized reporting as is seen by the media.
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
How do I register?
I searched the MDA site to see how would a person register to be able to post political comments/blogs/podcasts. It is May 3rd and there is still no information.
I searched the MDA site to see how would a person register to be able to post political comments/blogs/podcasts. It is May 3rd and there is still no information.
Should I update this page?
I got a couple of emails and SMSes from friends asking why I am not updating this site. Indeed, why am I not?
Well, for one, I am out of town. So, I do not get the hardnosed sanitized BS from the media. Thankfully. I cannot also exercise my right to vote. The area I live in has been given on a silver platter to the incumbent. How would then I be able to show any care for this entire sham?
Just visited thestraitstimes.gov.sg site and instead of talking about issues of concern - like high salaries for ministers, non-transparency of government investments via Temasek etc. Instead, what do we see, ... never mind.
The government has successfully suppressed the use of alternate media like blogs and podcasts to deny CITIZENS - not politicians nor political parties - the ability to participate in this election.
I got a couple of emails and SMSes from friends asking why I am not updating this site. Indeed, why am I not?
Well, for one, I am out of town. So, I do not get the hardnosed sanitized BS from the media. Thankfully. I cannot also exercise my right to vote. The area I live in has been given on a silver platter to the incumbent. How would then I be able to show any care for this entire sham?
Just visited the
The government has successfully suppressed the use of alternate media like blogs and podcasts to deny CITIZENS - not politicians nor political parties - the ability to participate in this election.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
The show begins
I am really glad that under the current illegal "walkover" scheme, we do have the PAP WOMPs holding less than 50% of the seats. I was tickled to see the facial reaction of PAP secretary general when he had to earn his seat in parliament. Having been elected into parliament only twice in 1984 and 1988 (with a statistically insignificant lower percentage and real vote), LHL has to earn his right to be an MP and a PM.
Unfortunately, I cannot cast my vote where I live. Some PAP WOMP is going to claim to represent me. Dude, you were never voted in. Live with that reality. If you want a mandate, work within your party and do the right thing.
I am really glad that under the current illegal "walkover" scheme, we do have the PAP WOMPs holding less than 50% of the seats. I was tickled to see the facial reaction of PAP secretary general when he had to earn his seat in parliament. Having been elected into parliament only twice in 1984 and 1988 (with a statistically insignificant lower percentage and real vote), LHL has to earn his right to be an MP and a PM.
1984:
Teck Ghee (16,866)
Giam Lai Cheng UPF 3,123 19.62
Lee Hsien Loong PAP 12,794 80.38
1988:
Teck Ghee (15,510)
Lee Hsien Loong PAP 11,512 79.13
Patrick Leong S C INDP 3,037 20.87
1991:
Ang Mo Kio (74,004)
Lau Ping Sum PAP walkover
Lee Hsien Loong
Umar Abdul Hamid
Yeo Toon Chia
1997:
Ang Mo Kio (125,344)
Lee Hsien Loong PAP walkover
Seng Han Thong
Inderjit Singh
Tan Boon Wan
Tang Guan Seng
2001:
Ang Mo Kio (166,644)
Inderjit Singh PAP walkover
Lee Hsien Loong
Sadasivan Balaji
Seng Han Thong
Tan Boon Wan
Wee Siew Kim
Unfortunately, I cannot cast my vote where I live. Some PAP WOMP is going to claim to represent me. Dude, you were never voted in. Live with that reality. If you want a mandate, work within your party and do the right thing.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Exercise your right to vote!
Later today, we will know who stands where. The sad reality of this statement is that there will be significant number of my fellow citizens whose right to vote will be nullified. All because of this nonsense called a walkover.
I caught some of the reporting on the local TV about them "bringing minute-by-minute reports" from the nomination centers. Yeah, riggghht. Blow-by-blow reporting to keep the audience at the edge of their seats. Singapore politics is full of excitement! Riggghhht.
Later today, we will know who stands where. The sad reality of this statement is that there will be significant number of my fellow citizens whose right to vote will be nullified. All because of this nonsense called a walkover.
I caught some of the reporting on the local TV about them "bringing minute-by-minute reports" from the nomination centers. Yeah, riggghht. Blow-by-blow reporting to keep the audience at the edge of their seats. Singapore politics is full of excitement! Riggghhht.
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
At least I live in Singapore!
I was in China last week. The way the Chinese government abuses human rights came starkly home to me - a foreigner. I was in the hotel room and was on line doing work. I had the TV on and was switched to CNN which was showing, live, the visit of the Chinese president to the US. The Chinese president Hu had just arrived at the White House and was being given the official welcome. Bush doing his welcome spiel and once done, Hu took the dais. Just as he started, a heckler started shouting about the Falungong and related abuses by the Chinese government. Immediately, CNN went BLANK. BLANK. No audio, no video, no inteference, no hiss, nothing. Silence. I was puzzled. I thought that the TV was toasted. Without missing a heartbeat, I switched to the next channel, CNBC, and viola, they were showing two angles - one on Hu and the other on a lady being manhandled by security. Switched back to CNN. Still BLANK. Switched back to CNBC. The scenes continue. Switched to BBC - still on and showing the video of the heckler being taken away. Back to CNN. Still blank. Then it comes back on showing Hu doing his spiel. Each time CNN switches to the heckler, it goes blank. Wow! How long does the Chinese government think they can continue to fool their people? I hope not for much longer.
Would the TV go blank when someone heckles the ruling elite here? I don't think so. Would the heckler be charged? I am not sure but IANAL.
So here I was subject to the blatant censorship by the Chinese thought police via blanks on CNN and not being able to reach my blog here. For those under the Chinese thought police regime, my condolences. At least I live in Singapore - a smidgen freer.
I was in China last week. The way the Chinese government abuses human rights came starkly home to me - a foreigner. I was in the hotel room and was on line doing work. I had the TV on and was switched to CNN which was showing, live, the visit of the Chinese president to the US. The Chinese president Hu had just arrived at the White House and was being given the official welcome. Bush doing his welcome spiel and once done, Hu took the dais. Just as he started, a heckler started shouting about the Falungong and related abuses by the Chinese government. Immediately, CNN went BLANK. BLANK. No audio, no video, no inteference, no hiss, nothing. Silence. I was puzzled. I thought that the TV was toasted. Without missing a heartbeat, I switched to the next channel, CNBC, and viola, they were showing two angles - one on Hu and the other on a lady being manhandled by security. Switched back to CNN. Still BLANK. Switched back to CNBC. The scenes continue. Switched to BBC - still on and showing the video of the heckler being taken away. Back to CNN. Still blank. Then it comes back on showing Hu doing his spiel. Each time CNN switches to the heckler, it goes blank. Wow! How long does the Chinese government think they can continue to fool their people? I hope not for much longer.
Would the TV go blank when someone heckles the ruling elite here? I don't think so. Would the heckler be charged? I am not sure but IANAL.
So here I was subject to the blatant censorship by the Chinese thought police via blanks on CNN and not being able to reach my blog here. For those under the Chinese thought police regime, my condolences. At least I live in Singapore - a smidgen freer.
What, moi to be quoted?
I got a call from the print media about the fact the blogs and podcasts are disallowed during the election period and seeking my comments about that.
I have no issue being quoted and while I think the local print media has chosen to not play any useful role to raise the political consciousness,but because they are the only way *some* information and views can get out, I reluctantly agreed.
Singapore is my country. It is wonderful that this country of mine has achieved a tremendous amount of growth and development from a physical point of view and from a certain extent, the social. But what has failed, is the collective sense of ownership of the political sphere.
It is good that the political parties have been doing their self-renewal fairly regularly, but for the sake of the country and it's future, self renewal is insufficient. Stepping back after a while of doing good and letting others take over and running it is more important. What purpose would the MM Lee serve as a WOMP that he cannot do as a external private consultant to the government? Step back and see how the nation moves on. Would it be fair to this country to have to figure out how to manage *after* he dies? I am sure that MM Lee loves this country just as much as I do. So, show that you are willing to stand down for the sake of the country. We will survive and thrive. Really. And inspite of the PAP.
Earlier this evening I was chatting with a friend of mine who is American and PR here, married to a Singaporean and with children who are Singaporeans as well. As a foreigner, he himself feels that the fear element is so pervasive that it is stifling. He was also saying that should the PAP not be in power, he would not want to be in Singapore. He has a choice. He can always bring his family to the US. Would I have that option? The fact we do not yet know how a non PAP team will govern this country means that we can only conjecture. Could we have been missing out on a real nirvana on Earth with a non PAP team? How will we know? The only reality that the bulk of the population knows is that PAP way of doing things. Thankfully, their way of doing things has worked out well for us - OK, 80% of the time. What happened to the remaining 20%? I don't know. I do not see transparency and accountability made available sufficiently.
Consider how this 2006 "election" will be run. After nomination day, possibly a wide swath of my fellow citizens will not be able to exercise their constitutional and UN-guaranteed right to elect their representatives. The WOMPs will then go around for their "thank you" drive arounds. Don't they have any shame? They were never voted in!
OK, so the nomination day passes. Now starts the classic uneven playing field of their so called "party political broadcasts" whose duration is calculated based on the number of candidates the parties field. Guess who gets the lion share? How does this sham help? How would people decide on a contrived formula of air time? The parties cannot blog nor podcast. "Nooooo, this is not a way to do things in Singapore. We are serious about politics. Get registered and be accountable." So, while Singapore aims to be a wireless and e-lifestyle hub, the political dinosaurs would rather that they lived in a world that contains only printed, audio and video broadcast systems that are in their control. "Ideas are dangerous", said a PAP WOMP/MP once.
You cannot have a First World electorate so long as you treat them as diaper-wearing cry-babies. No point trying to say that "oh, we are First World Political Party". You have to earn it. As it stands, while the shirts, pants and skirts and tudongs might be whiter than white, the individuals wearing it have to earn and be bestowed that label. Self labeling is pretentious.
As a final comment for now, no, I am not a western-liberal-ideas person. I love my country too much to let it continue to be cajoled by juraisic mindsets and "I have the experience, so shut up and listen" attitudes.
Majulah Singapura!
I got a call from the print media about the fact the blogs and podcasts are disallowed during the election period and seeking my comments about that.
I have no issue being quoted and while I think the local print media has chosen to not play any useful role to raise the political consciousness,but because they are the only way *some* information and views can get out, I reluctantly agreed.
Singapore is my country. It is wonderful that this country of mine has achieved a tremendous amount of growth and development from a physical point of view and from a certain extent, the social. But what has failed, is the collective sense of ownership of the political sphere.
It is good that the political parties have been doing their self-renewal fairly regularly, but for the sake of the country and it's future, self renewal is insufficient. Stepping back after a while of doing good and letting others take over and running it is more important. What purpose would the MM Lee serve as a WOMP that he cannot do as a external private consultant to the government? Step back and see how the nation moves on. Would it be fair to this country to have to figure out how to manage *after* he dies? I am sure that MM Lee loves this country just as much as I do. So, show that you are willing to stand down for the sake of the country. We will survive and thrive. Really. And inspite of the PAP.
Earlier this evening I was chatting with a friend of mine who is American and PR here, married to a Singaporean and with children who are Singaporeans as well. As a foreigner, he himself feels that the fear element is so pervasive that it is stifling. He was also saying that should the PAP not be in power, he would not want to be in Singapore. He has a choice. He can always bring his family to the US. Would I have that option? The fact we do not yet know how a non PAP team will govern this country means that we can only conjecture. Could we have been missing out on a real nirvana on Earth with a non PAP team? How will we know? The only reality that the bulk of the population knows is that PAP way of doing things. Thankfully, their way of doing things has worked out well for us - OK, 80% of the time. What happened to the remaining 20%? I don't know. I do not see transparency and accountability made available sufficiently.
Consider how this 2006 "election" will be run. After nomination day, possibly a wide swath of my fellow citizens will not be able to exercise their constitutional and UN-guaranteed right to elect their representatives. The WOMPs will then go around for their "thank you" drive arounds. Don't they have any shame? They were never voted in!
OK, so the nomination day passes. Now starts the classic uneven playing field of their so called "party political broadcasts" whose duration is calculated based on the number of candidates the parties field. Guess who gets the lion share? How does this sham help? How would people decide on a contrived formula of air time? The parties cannot blog nor podcast. "Nooooo, this is not a way to do things in Singapore. We are serious about politics. Get registered and be accountable." So, while Singapore aims to be a wireless and e-lifestyle hub, the political dinosaurs would rather that they lived in a world that contains only printed, audio and video broadcast systems that are in their control. "Ideas are dangerous", said a PAP WOMP/MP once.
You cannot have a First World electorate so long as you treat them as diaper-wearing cry-babies. No point trying to say that "oh, we are First World Political Party". You have to earn it. As it stands, while the shirts, pants and skirts and tudongs might be whiter than white, the individuals wearing it have to earn and be bestowed that label. Self labeling is pretentious.
As a final comment for now, no, I am not a western-liberal-ideas person. I love my country too much to let it continue to be cajoled by juraisic mindsets and "I have the experience, so shut up and listen" attitudes.
Majulah Singapura!
Sunday, April 23, 2006
Where is the debate on issues?
The Singapore blogosphere is really the only place where any form of valid and considered debates can happen in this country.
The mainstream media - print and broadcast - has, for a long time now, renounced it's potential role as a trusted opinion leader and has continued to rehash and be the voice of the ruling elite. Not that the ruling elite cannot have this channel. What we are sorely missing the the rest of the cacophony of the conversations we should be having.
The blogosphere is really the best way to get people to start discussing and be the way the "ruling elite" to engage with the population instead of hiding away and "banning" blogs during this crucial period of this country's future.
The Singapore blogosphere is really the only place where any form of valid and considered debates can happen in this country.
The mainstream media - print and broadcast - has, for a long time now, renounced it's potential role as a trusted opinion leader and has continued to rehash and be the voice of the ruling elite. Not that the ruling elite cannot have this channel. What we are sorely missing the the rest of the cacophony of the conversations we should be having.
The blogosphere is really the best way to get people to start discussing and be the way the "ruling elite" to engage with the population instead of hiding away and "banning" blogs during this crucial period of this country's future.
It's gonna be the same
Looks like we are back to the same set of suits and countersuits that is the hallmark of the Singapore political scene.
In a way, I look forward to abdicating my right to vote by the fiasco of walkovers so that I can just ignore what is happening and just sit back and enjoy life with my family.
Sad.
Looks like we are back to the same set of suits and countersuits that is the hallmark of the Singapore political scene.
In a way, I look forward to abdicating my right to vote by the fiasco of walkovers so that I can just ignore what is happening and just sit back and enjoy life with my family.
Sad.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Great Firewall of China
See my post at my other blog at livejournal.com. I cannot reach this site from China. I can post (using drivel) though? What gives?
I can access this site via anonymouse.org though.
See my post at my other blog at livejournal.com. I cannot reach this site from China. I can post (using drivel) though? What gives?
I can access this site via anonymouse.org though.
Monday, April 17, 2006
Help me understand what makes a mandate!
From this, if you do the math, here is what happened in 2001:
a) Total number of persons eligible to vote: 2,036,923
b) Number that could vote because of the "walkovers": 615,267, ie, 30.21% of voters
c) Of the 615,267, the number that voted in favour of the PAP: 453,527.
d) That number, 453,527 comprises 22.27% of the TOTAL number of voters. BUT, the ruling party would instead like to say that they got 73.7% of votes in their favour - 453,527/615,267, those who voted in favour of the PAP divided by those who could, NOT what it should be - 453,527/2,036,923 which is those who voted in favour of PAP divided by total number of voters. Spin doctors lying with statistics - naturally, our compliant daily rags did not do the analysis as well.
So, with a 22.27% of votes in favour of the PAP, the PAP has a mandate to govern? MM Lee, the wise one with the databank, will say that "it is a reflection of how bad the opposition is". How did we let this happen?
22.27% gives 97.6% or 82 seats in parliament! Can this be allowed to continue? We need to be able to VOTE in the MPs, not to get in on stupid technicalities. Walkovers are unconstitutional.
Look at it another way:
a) Of the 84 seats, only 29 are elected MPs, 27 of them being PAPies or, in percentage terms, 32% of the 84 MPs are elected PAPy MPs. All 29 of them have a moral and legal right to represent their constituents.
b) A whopping 55 or 65.4% (almost 2/3s) are WOMPs and have no moral right to represent anyone. Legal right to represent is bestowed by a flawed walkover system.
From this, if you do the math, here is what happened in 2001:
a) Total number of persons eligible to vote: 2,036,923
b) Number that could vote because of the "walkovers": 615,267, ie, 30.21% of voters
c) Of the 615,267, the number that voted in favour of the PAP: 453,527.
d) That number, 453,527 comprises 22.27% of the TOTAL number of voters. BUT, the ruling party would instead like to say that they got 73.7% of votes in their favour - 453,527/615,267, those who voted in favour of the PAP divided by those who could, NOT what it should be - 453,527/2,036,923 which is those who voted in favour of PAP divided by total number of voters. Spin doctors lying with statistics - naturally, our compliant daily rags did not do the analysis as well.
So, with a 22.27% of votes in favour of the PAP, the PAP has a mandate to govern? MM Lee, the wise one with the databank, will say that "it is a reflection of how bad the opposition is". How did we let this happen?
22.27% gives 97.6% or 82 seats in parliament! Can this be allowed to continue? We need to be able to VOTE in the MPs, not to get in on stupid technicalities. Walkovers are unconstitutional.
Look at it another way:
a) Of the 84 seats, only 29 are elected MPs, 27 of them being PAPies or, in percentage terms, 32% of the 84 MPs are elected PAPy MPs. All 29 of them have a moral and legal right to represent their constituents.
b) A whopping 55 or 65.4% (almost 2/3s) are WOMPs and have no moral right to represent anyone. Legal right to represent is bestowed by a flawed walkover system.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
How does this work?
a) Voting in any election is compulsory. Riiggghhhtt.
b) If you don't vote, your name is struck off the electoral rolls and you cannot then run in the next election (I think). You need to pay S$5 to reinstate your name. Need to give a "valid and sufficient reason" to want to be on the roll. I wonder why? Has anyone been denied before? If not, why bother?
c) If there is no one contesting the candidate, she gets into parliament without a single vote in her favour; you are deemed to have voted anyway. Hmm.
d) This WOMP (walk over member of parliament) gets a seat in parliament and is then subjected to the Party Whip - ie, there can be as much debate as you please in parliament but when it comes to voting in parliament, the PW dictates how the WOMPs and MPs vote.
Nice. It all works well. Life is nice.
So, it is a sorta democracy at the ballot box (assuming you can), and then it is dictatorial regime in parliament. Interesting. Use "democracy" to get in, and then use the whip to line things up.
Am I missing something here? Did my fellow citizens get shafted with slick propaganda all these years? I think so.
a) Voting in any election is compulsory. Riiggghhhtt.
b) If you don't vote, your name is struck off the electoral rolls and you cannot then run in the next election (I think). You need to pay S$5 to reinstate your name. Need to give a "valid and sufficient reason" to want to be on the roll. I wonder why? Has anyone been denied before? If not, why bother?
c) If there is no one contesting the candidate, she gets into parliament without a single vote in her favour; you are deemed to have voted anyway. Hmm.
d) This WOMP (walk over member of parliament) gets a seat in parliament and is then subjected to the Party Whip - ie, there can be as much debate as you please in parliament but when it comes to voting in parliament, the PW dictates how the WOMPs and MPs vote.
Nice. It all works well. Life is nice.
So, it is a sorta democracy at the ballot box (assuming you can), and then it is dictatorial regime in parliament. Interesting. Use "democracy" to get in, and then use the whip to line things up.
Am I missing something here? Did my fellow citizens get shafted with slick propaganda all these years? I think so.
So, your vote is secret.
Well, that is indeed true. I have no desire to keep my vote a secret. There is no reason to other than to feed the "climate of fear". For the record, in elections that I could vote, I voted for the competition. Why? Because every vote counts and I think it is unhealthy, distasteful and unwise for there to be no one from another political persuasion in parliament. Also, it would be nice to say "I never voted for you!" Mr PAP MP.
Well, that is indeed true. I have no desire to keep my vote a secret. There is no reason to other than to feed the "climate of fear". For the record, in elections that I could vote, I voted for the competition. Why? Because every vote counts and I think it is unhealthy, distasteful and unwise for there to be no one from another political persuasion in parliament. Also, it would be nice to say "I never voted for you!" Mr PAP MP.
So, the stage is set. We will have another round of what cannot be anything but a sham.
In a show on TV, MM Lee tried to engage with a group of Singaporeans who are what is being called the post independence generation. It was an interesting dialog with some highlights and some lowlights. What I got out of it was the MM Lee still clings on to some archaic ways of thinking tempered by his "databank".
He was challenged about podcasts, blogs etc. His answer to disallow them for the elections was because "we cannot engage in a robust dialog". It is hard to believe that the PAP really *thinks* that they cannot engage in a dialog via blogs and podcasts. It is a pink elephant. They know that they cannot get into a robust dialog because they cannot package their answers. They need spin doctors to spin their replies (and helped by the compliant media) which cannot be done on the net. So, let's just take the easy way out and ban it. There, done.
To a question if only 20% of people voted, would that be deemed to be a mandate, all he could do was to deflect it to say that it is a reflection of failure of the opponents. Who's pulling whose leg here, Mr Lee? The government that has been in office, at least since 2001, did not have the honest mandate of the people. The bulk of the people got in via walkovers which is an abuse of the constitutional right of a citizen's right to vote. Walkovers are a scar on the intellect and a fatal blow to the body politic. It takes away the raison d'taire for having a constitution and an elections process.
Overall the show as a sad display of a man and a party that has lost it. The party he founded is short of ideas and boldness (not that the other parties have anyihing better). All said, Mr Lee, it would be wiser for you to step aside and retire like a gentleman. You have served well and we will applaud you and your place in history is well deserved. Thanks for the memories. We can erect a statue for you in front of the Marina casino - seriously!
In a show on TV, MM Lee tried to engage with a group of Singaporeans who are what is being called the post independence generation. It was an interesting dialog with some highlights and some lowlights. What I got out of it was the MM Lee still clings on to some archaic ways of thinking tempered by his "databank".
He was challenged about podcasts, blogs etc. His answer to disallow them for the elections was because "we cannot engage in a robust dialog". It is hard to believe that the PAP really *thinks* that they cannot engage in a dialog via blogs and podcasts. It is a pink elephant. They know that they cannot get into a robust dialog because they cannot package their answers. They need spin doctors to spin their replies (and helped by the compliant media) which cannot be done on the net. So, let's just take the easy way out and ban it. There, done.
To a question if only 20% of people voted, would that be deemed to be a mandate, all he could do was to deflect it to say that it is a reflection of failure of the opponents. Who's pulling whose leg here, Mr Lee? The government that has been in office, at least since 2001, did not have the honest mandate of the people. The bulk of the people got in via walkovers which is an abuse of the constitutional right of a citizen's right to vote. Walkovers are a scar on the intellect and a fatal blow to the body politic. It takes away the raison d'taire for having a constitution and an elections process.
Overall the show as a sad display of a man and a party that has lost it. The party he founded is short of ideas and boldness (not that the other parties have anyihing better). All said, Mr Lee, it would be wiser for you to step aside and retire like a gentleman. You have served well and we will applaud you and your place in history is well deserved. Thanks for the memories. We can erect a statue for you in front of the Marina casino - seriously!
Monday, March 06, 2006
Electoral boundaries and walkovers
On Friday March 3rd 2006, the Electoral Boundaries Committee released it's recommendations to redraw the boundaries of the constituencies. While the changes have not be massive, it still begs the question of the independence of this committee. What we need is an independent Elections Commission that is answerable to the people not one that reports to the PMO.
In any case, no matter what is done to gerrymander the boundaries, what is more important is that we all get to vote and that we outlaw "walkovers".
The PAP has been childishly making "come, challenge me" types of comments and it is a reflection of a sorry state of affairs. Those who aspire to have a seat in parliament should be getting one because the people whom they are promising to represent genuinely voted for them and not because of a technicality of a "walkover". In today's world, it is an aberration of truth and legitimacy to continue to keep these arcane and illegal ways to represent the people.
On Friday March 3rd 2006, the Electoral Boundaries Committee released it's recommendations to redraw the boundaries of the constituencies. While the changes have not be massive, it still begs the question of the independence of this committee. What we need is an independent Elections Commission that is answerable to the people not one that reports to the PMO.
In any case, no matter what is done to gerrymander the boundaries, what is more important is that we all get to vote and that we outlaw "walkovers".
The PAP has been childishly making "come, challenge me" types of comments and it is a reflection of a sorry state of affairs. Those who aspire to have a seat in parliament should be getting one because the people whom they are promising to represent genuinely voted for them and not because of a technicality of a "walkover". In today's world, it is an aberration of truth and legitimacy to continue to keep these arcane and illegal ways to represent the people.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Please consider signing the petition.
I have posted the following to soc.culture.singapore - http://tinyurl.com/94s9y. The petition itself is at http://www.petitiononline.com/temasek/
I have posted the following to soc.culture.singapore - http://tinyurl.com/94s9y. The petition itself is at http://www.petitiononline.com/temasek/
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Elections!
The ruling regime has till about mid-2007 to call for general elections. But the sad thing about the whole affair is that we have a system that continues to honour "walkovers". Walkovers, should be, IMHO, made illegal and inapplicable in the case of elections. What we have seen in previous so-called General Elections, is that on nomination day, the ruling regime has essentially been handed the keys to the next government. All because there was no one to contest.
Together with the now defunct, The Roundtable, I have stated in 2001 and repeated in my NMP application, that every electoral contest must have a minimum number of votes in favour of the winning candidate. So, if there is only 1 contestant, that contestant must garner, say 30%, of the valid votes in favour before she gets the seat in parliament. The bulk of the people sitting in parliament today do not have a single mandate to sit there. They were never voted in. Just as President S R Nathan, they do not have the moral or ethical stand to represent Singapore. They got in on technicality. Shame on you.
The argument has been made that no ruling party will want to make it easier for another party to take over power from them. While that might sound logical, what I am asking for here is a fair playing ground. A ground on which, I as a citizen am able to exercise my fundamental human right to vote. I am sure this nonsense of walkovers is a contravention of the United Nations Convention on Human Rights.
Please join me in signing the petition. We have to fix it NOW!
The ruling regime has till about mid-2007 to call for general elections. But the sad thing about the whole affair is that we have a system that continues to honour "walkovers". Walkovers, should be, IMHO, made illegal and inapplicable in the case of elections. What we have seen in previous so-called General Elections, is that on nomination day, the ruling regime has essentially been handed the keys to the next government. All because there was no one to contest.
Together with the now defunct, The Roundtable, I have stated in 2001 and repeated in my NMP application, that every electoral contest must have a minimum number of votes in favour of the winning candidate. So, if there is only 1 contestant, that contestant must garner, say 30%, of the valid votes in favour before she gets the seat in parliament. The bulk of the people sitting in parliament today do not have a single mandate to sit there. They were never voted in. Just as President S R Nathan, they do not have the moral or ethical stand to represent Singapore. They got in on technicality. Shame on you.
The argument has been made that no ruling party will want to make it easier for another party to take over power from them. While that might sound logical, what I am asking for here is a fair playing ground. A ground on which, I as a citizen am able to exercise my fundamental human right to vote. I am sure this nonsense of walkovers is a contravention of the United Nations Convention on Human Rights.
Please join me in signing the petition. We have to fix it NOW!
Did not quite realize that it has been over two months since I posted. I suppose it is both a good and a bad thing - good in that I was busy, and bad in that poor time-management resulted in this lapse.
It is 2006 now and, personally, and from a family point of view, 2005 was amazing. Firstly, I was on the ground in Banda Aceh as a deputy commander of the SCDF Ops Lion Heart contingent on since December 29 2004 and the way I could usher in 2005 on the 31st was via SMSes to my wife and sons. Did I ever expect to be deployed for a real operation? And when the call came in, I did not hesitate. I will gladly be out there helping when the calls ever comes in again.
When I watched the movie The Towering Inferno in 1974 (amazing that it was over 30 years ago), there was a scene where a man working as a checkout clerk, leaves his job and rushes to put on a fireman's suit. He was a reservist firefighter and the fact that he responded to an emergency and, that he did it willingly, kinda stuck in my mind. That was the mental image in my mind when I got that recall from the SCDF at about 11am on December 29 2004!
I am proud to be associated with an organization such as the SCDF. They are trained for real life - not make believe. Saving lives is their primary motive. I think we need to get that "a-ha" factor into the SCDF reservists (or the politically correct "operationally ready national servicemen"). I say this because we need to have reservists inspire fellow reservists. I tried to do that during my last ICT in April 2005, where I took over one lesson period to share with my men what the SCDF did on the ground. I hope that the sharing did inspire some or all of them to do better and take their ICT stints more seriously but more importantly, raise their respect for the Force.
I have now been transferred to the holding list, meaning that it is unlikely that I will be called up for any more ICTs or operations. That is fine. It is time for younger officers to take over.
2005 was also exciting from another angle - I got inducted into the OSU College of Engineering Council of Outstanding Early Career Enginners. What an honour!
As a final item of reflection, I am glad to have passed the Red Hat Certified Engineer exams on December 31 2005. I was not planning on doing any of these industry/vendor certifications, but I chose this one over others - not because I work for Red Hat, but I wanted to be a sorta inspiration to my sons!
It is 2006 now and, personally, and from a family point of view, 2005 was amazing. Firstly, I was on the ground in Banda Aceh as a deputy commander of the SCDF Ops Lion Heart contingent on since December 29 2004 and the way I could usher in 2005 on the 31st was via SMSes to my wife and sons. Did I ever expect to be deployed for a real operation? And when the call came in, I did not hesitate. I will gladly be out there helping when the calls ever comes in again.
When I watched the movie The Towering Inferno in 1974 (amazing that it was over 30 years ago), there was a scene where a man working as a checkout clerk, leaves his job and rushes to put on a fireman's suit. He was a reservist firefighter and the fact that he responded to an emergency and, that he did it willingly, kinda stuck in my mind. That was the mental image in my mind when I got that recall from the SCDF at about 11am on December 29 2004!
I am proud to be associated with an organization such as the SCDF. They are trained for real life - not make believe. Saving lives is their primary motive. I think we need to get that "a-ha" factor into the SCDF reservists (or the politically correct "operationally ready national servicemen"). I say this because we need to have reservists inspire fellow reservists. I tried to do that during my last ICT in April 2005, where I took over one lesson period to share with my men what the SCDF did on the ground. I hope that the sharing did inspire some or all of them to do better and take their ICT stints more seriously but more importantly, raise their respect for the Force.
I have now been transferred to the holding list, meaning that it is unlikely that I will be called up for any more ICTs or operations. That is fine. It is time for younger officers to take over.
2005 was also exciting from another angle - I got inducted into the OSU College of Engineering Council of Outstanding Early Career Enginners. What an honour!
As a final item of reflection, I am glad to have passed the Red Hat Certified Engineer exams on December 31 2005. I was not planning on doing any of these industry/vendor certifications, but I chose this one over others - not because I work for Red Hat, but I wanted to be a sorta inspiration to my sons!
Sunday, November 06, 2005
The locals have spoken! The daily wastepaper did run the story and the government apparently could not be bothered with the fact that Singapore is ranked 140 in the press freedom stakes. My favourite PM, Goh Chok Tong, says that it is not important because the list has some other countries higher up on the scale who do not make it at all in the economic game.
Well, Chok Tong, it is sad that you have been given the task to tackle this instead of the man who brought it upon us. I am sure deep in you, you feel sad. This country of ours is being laughed at. Isn't it interesting that Loong does not seem to care?
The local press continues to have no credibility and trust (did it ever?). I am sure my friends in the press who earn a honest wage will be sad to see this - but, alas, what else can I say? My friends will not say it like it is for they know that their editors and their upper rung will not allow for honest writing and reporting. My friends are being dragged into this whirlpool of distrust and shadowplay and all they want to do is to see their children grow and live a good life. Choices!
Well, Chok Tong, it is sad that you have been given the task to tackle this instead of the man who brought it upon us. I am sure deep in you, you feel sad. This country of ours is being laughed at. Isn't it interesting that Loong does not seem to care?
The local press continues to have no credibility and trust (did it ever?). I am sure my friends in the press who earn a honest wage will be sad to see this - but, alas, what else can I say? My friends will not say it like it is for they know that their editors and their upper rung will not allow for honest writing and reporting. My friends are being dragged into this whirlpool of distrust and shadowplay and all they want to do is to see their children grow and live a good life. Choices!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)