"The right way to fix them, to buy my supporters votes."
(07Jan2011)
Re:
PAP MPs ‘concerned’ at widening income gap in Singapore
Just for laughs....
Maybe they are simply too busy trying to "fix" their oppositions or
potential oppositions and therefore forgot about the real needs of
their voters...
Nothing to laugh about cos its true and admitted to by Dragon
Prince himself in: 'PM
Lee says countries worldwide respect and admire Singapore's proven
system' [CNA 03May2006].
That said, the truth in what you suggest is seen in how the PAP viz
PA needlessly created the unnecessary title of 'grassroots
adviser', a position created purely to usurp the grassroots and
town council roles of an opposition MP.
According to:
‘Adviser over MP’ raises many questions' [ST, 22Oct2009]:
"PAP MPs are appointed as advisers to the grassroots
organisations in their wards by the People’s Association (PA). In
the two opposition wards, the PA picked the PAP candidates who
contested but lost in the wards in the last two polls as the
grassroots advisers."
This show of blatant disregard towards the local roles and
responsibilities of opposition MPs despite their fervent
protestations [see
link1: (LTK response),
Link2: (G Giam response)], rings true the suspicion that the
Prime Minister of Singapore is increasingly insecure about his
leadership and surreptitiously spends much time conniving plans
against the opposition about the "right
way to fix them".
This betrayal of the rights and responsibilities of an elected MP
unfortunately also is also lies in contradiction to the purported
reason for the almost doubling of GRC constituency size.
According to Elections Dept SG, [link]:"The
GRC system was established in 1988 to ensure that the minority
racial communities in Singapore will always be represented in
Parliament".
Records show however, that without any corresponding significant
change in neither the total numbers of GRCs nor parliamentary
seats, the number of seats per GRC progressively increased from an
average of 3 per GRC in GE1988, to an average of 5.4/GRC by from
2001 onwards [chart
pict]. The corresponding fall in the number of SMC seats was
from 42 (GE1988) to 9 (GE1997 and onwards).
This extraordinary GRC size inflation which was ironically
associated with a diluted original objective of 'ensuring minority
racial representation' [chart
pict] can purportedly be explained by the YPAP article titled
'THOUGHT OF THE MONTH : Top 5 reasons why we should retain the GRC
system' by Fong Yoong Kheong and dated 11May2010 [alt
pict], which puts 'economies of scale', 'grassroots work' and
'Town Council commitments' as the additional justification for the
hyperinflation of GRC parliamentary seats since inception.
The relevant paragraphs with the pertinent words highlighted are
quoted as follows:
Thus the conundrum. The PAP government on one hand insists that
the 'grassroots adviser(s)' in opposition wards shall be the
"PAP candidates who contested but lost in the wards in the last
two polls"; whilst on the other hand premises the needless
hyperinflation of each GRC on the importance of economies of scale,
grassroots relations and town council work. This vast disparity of
the importance of grassroots relations work to an elected MP only
serves to betray the PAP to be both a sore looser as well as a cold
and cunning conspirator, one that spends much time and effort
bankrupting the opposition through cold and calculated
schemes.
Perhaps democracy in Singapore has been subjugated to the pursuit
of profit; perhaps the PAP in its double speak is complicit of
indeed fixing the opposition by both usurping the relationship
between an MP an his constituents, insincere reasons for expanding
GRC sizes, not to mention using national
funds to suit partisan hegemonic gain.
Perhaps the Prime Minister was indeed prophetic when he declared:
I'm
going to spend all my time thinking what's the right way to fix
them, to buy my supporters votes, how can I solve this week's
problem and forget about next year's challenges?
Whatever the case, this does not augur well for the future of
Singapore and some serious soul searching is once again due.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty
to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."-- Benjamin Franklin
References:
- 'The new authoritarianism': "More and more
of us are willing to trade freedom for wealth or security... ... A
modern form of authoritarianism, quite distinct from Soviet
Communism, Maoism or Fascism, is being born. It is providing a
modicum of a good life, and a quiet life, the ultimate anaesthetic
for the brain." [Guardian,
1July2008]
- 'Don’t risk real freedom for short-term material
gain': "Our civil liberties are in jeopardy and we are
to blame. We have reduced democracy to the right to make and spend
money... (in return for) a temporary blanket of security and what
turned out to be an illusory prosperity" [The
Times, 7Sept2009]
Majulah Singapura,
Thanks for reading,
Love and God bless,
B.C.
