TS should comprehend what is being said.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_424799.html
AT YESTERDAY'S dialogue, writer Catherine Lim posed MM Lee this
question: 'Sir, in the event of a serious threat of a freak
election, would you do the unthinkable, that is, send in the army?'
This is an edited extract from Mr Lee's reply:
'You look at our record and the moves we've made. Let me put it
simply like this. First, we maintain a system which gives any
opposition the opportunity to displace us peacefully. We allow the
system: we've not interfered with the civil service, the judiciary,
parliamentary procedures, the police and so on.
If you can win an election, so be it. If at some point we are
not able to find a team which can equal an opposition team, on that
day we deserve to be out. If we become corrupt, inefficient, can't
deliver, we're out.
What if we have a freak election, as we may well have? Many
voters say openly: 'In my family, three of us voted for you but two
voted against, just to let you know that we want an opposition
voice.' In that situation, you may have a freak result. That
worries me.
So we've set in place a President with blocking powers. Any
opposition that comes in will find that he cannot touch the
reserves, otherwise you can promise the sky and spend the money.
And all our hard-earned savings will go in five years.
Second, you cannot change the top officials without the
President's consent. Any raiding of the funds must be approved by
the President who has a council of presidential advisers to advise
him yes or no.
Now, why should we do all these if we expect to overturn an
election?
We expect that if we are voted out, to stay out, and hope that
within one term, that new government, incompetent and unable to
deliver, will be out. And there's enough core competencies and the
funds to enable a fresh PAP government to revive the system.
I spent 15 years thinking about these safeguards and finally
persuaded my younger colleagues that we needed these because they
can't guarantee that each time they will produce a better team than
the opposition just because you've done so in the past.
I don't see any problem in the next election, and probably the
election after that. But if we don't get a good team in the
election after that and the opposition does get a good team
together, we're at risk.
Read the full story in Thursday's edition of The Straits
Times.
Close
window <!-- START Nielsen//NetRatings
SiteCensus V5.1 --><!-- COPYRIGHT 2006 Nielsen//NetRatings
--> 
<!-- END Nielsen//NetRatings SiteCensus
V5.1 -->
like i said in my thread..its an extract..and i had based on
that..just because its an extract doesnt mean such words never came
out from their mouths ya??the whole point is..from the extract..it
is the words of an unwise and selfish leader.
the next election,govt,sun rise are all opportunity cost
questions.the point is, he was hoping for a lousier opposition,
block their finances so they will fail..and pick up the pieces and
re emerge as heros.letting the whole world know that sg cannot do
without pap or more importantly him.
and no i did not misrep him..i do not rep him in the 1st
place..its the first conclusion i get from the papers..
