DEFINITION OF TRUE DEMOCRACY

last SG · 2004-09-06T21:30:40+00:00

Hello BadzMaro, Thanks for the suggestion. I am only giving my views as a citizen as encouraged by PM Lee so that if there are mistakes in the past they wil...

robertteh SG

FINALLY THE MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL - THE EXECUTIVE MUST BE ACCOUNTABLE AND TRANSPARENT IN GOVERNING PROCESS.

After 39 years of first-past-the-post governance, our political process looks set to produce certain problems - lack of alternative views and solutions to problems, high costs, elitism and loss of economic competitiveness.

No matter how the system of FPTP evolves, it cannot solve these problems with the governance determined by a few leaders without thorough debates or examination.

Anti-welfarism policy has been necessary to avoid creating a dependency economy. However it has produced fallouts too such as a high-cost economy as under such a policy, government departments and statutory boards set themselves goals and objectives aimed at recovering costs to avoid subsidy.

A policy of meritocracy or talents originally intended to bring about excellent management and results has its fallouts too.

The numerous scholars or talents are employed in government resulting in high costs.

These government scholars and talents were put to the real test during the Asian Financial crisis or the last two recessions, but they were found unable to solve the problems of high cost or rising unemployments. The private sector is probably being deprived of talents while entrepreneurs are finally what Singapore really needs to re-position itself to meet oncoming challenges.

The loss of economic competitiveness is one big problem. Not everything cannot be measured in GDP or growth alone. Our scholars are quite unable to see this point. Can Singapore identify its new economic strategy? In the 1960s to 1980s, there was some form of practicable basic strategy the country was seen as working towards e.g. from labor to capital base and from low-value to high value-added manufacturing.

Today, can Singapore say it is still on this strategic? What is its strategy? If there is any strategy, why not target all plans and investments accordingly to attain the goals set. The absence of alternative views has caused a drift in positioning Singapore economy strategically to attain needed resilience.

There is an ever-ballooning bureaucracy causing inefficiencies in running of services as witnessed by many accidents and complaints of poor services. Accountability and transparency is not in place. There is a need to set up scrutiny of whole governing processes and these changes are only possible from alternative views under PR system. Laughing

pikamaster SG

read posts by Daikinbetter and Big Cannon King in YP, and CAROLINE1021 in sintercom. they will tell you that Singapore has a constitution that enshrines such rights within, only that they have some common-sense restrictions to prevent us from falling into Western anarchy.

the pikamaster

P.S.: I think these people are conservatives, so I don't agree with them.

pikamaster SG

I have an extremely wild suggestion:

Replace the Speaker of Parliament and Parliamentary Secretaries with 10 THinkers (for lack of a better name):

1) an employer
2) an industrial worker
3) an executive
4) a k-12 student
5) a university student
6) a Christian
7) a Muslim
Cool A Hindu
9)A member of a minority religion
10)A special-interest party

Each Thinker's role is exclusive and unique. The politicians will debate, and then the Thinkers will vote. That way, when a BIll is passed, it can be assured that this is by the people's Mandate; that's true democracy. The Thinkers should not be fixed, rather they shall be different people each day of session.

The special-interest party will differ for every bill that is discussed. For a bill amending judicial law, we might have a judge. For a bill discussing motherhood (like the few recent bills), we would have a working mother as the special-interest party.

Only the last five Thinkers will have to be present at every Debate. For example, if it is a bill deciding on maternity leave for pregnant mothers, then obviously the students don't need to attend.

well, that's my wild suggestion. What do you guys think of it?

the inspired pikamaster

robertteh SG

To: Pikamaster,

Those who claimed that Singapore constitution already enshrines basic citizens' rights as mentioned in the 7 points may be answering only half the question.

I wonder if these rights are really enshrined why we are still experiencing so many problems with openness, accountability and transparency in our political process.

The real issue is : are these basic rights enshrined such that they cannot be easily circumvented or compromised in anyway in actual practical governance? Rolling Eyes

robertteh SG

I think an independent panel comprising a group of citizens is far better than all the committees set up to look after many aspects of governance.

Citizens' rights issues may be referred to such an independent panel with UN observers to give opinions or views in situations involving infringements of rights or conflicts of interests or interests in contracts by executives. Defamation law suits against political opponents may be referred to such a panel for mediation or solutions in the first place or declaration as to any possible breach of constitutional rights in political participation or election process.

Apart such constitutional safeguards which I regard as an essential element of successful democracy for our next stage of political evolvement, I agree that an administrative panel should be formed to render independent interpretation of interests and to impart greater public confidence in administrative processes. Rolling Eyes

robertteh SG

FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS

A political system based on FPTP gives rise to many problems including one party rule, lack of alternative views, high costs, elitism and loss of economic competitiveness.

Proportional Representation system permits opposition candidates to be elected to parliament based on proportion of votes cast, Such a system will ensure election of opposition candidates to truly speak up for people's grievances such a high costs etc without being overwhelmed by one-party agenda or rule.

With PR, the whole political system will be fair and will prevent or make it difficult or impractical for any party to try tinkering with electoral boundary to avoid opposition candidates being elected to parliament.

Similarly, PR will make it unnecessary for any party to try other method like GRC or NMP to perpetuate control by one party.

Singapore is a multi-racial country. The only concern is to ensure that candidates of minority race are put up by the different parties to stand for election. Based on PR, there will also be fairer representation of minority races in parliament as different parties will field their own minority candidates.

With fairer representation in parliament under PR, there will then be greater safeguard against any possible abuses of administrative/executive processes to perpetuate one-sided autocracy as will happen under FPTP.

People can then ensure by getting some proposition candidates into parliament that the governance of the whole country will not be just decided by a few men at the top but by the wishes of majority as represented truly in parliament. All actual exercises of powers can be scrutinized by independent civil panel comprising fair representation of different interest groups.

Politics are complex. There will be many arguments put up against proportional representation that it will result in bargaining of power among coalition parties is part of the necessary complexity any country has to go through. Deadlock is a possibility but it is better to have some deadlocks sometimes than a few men in cabinet dominating politics for decades without change or debates leading to big problems.

The 7 points of True Democracy is non-theoretical in nature. They are not intended to answer the theoretical queries of critics that there are some more alternative systems. If these critics wish to, they too can put up their own political model to show that it is more superior than these 7 points to convince us that they are indeed better alternatives than true democracy.

Based on the above-posted 7 points of true democracy, Singapore will benefit by using them as practical guide to enhance our present system (blending of control, meritocracy and socialism but suffering from domination by a few men or one-party rule).

Independent electoral panel can use these 7 points, to oversee election processes to ensure openness, accountability and transparency in the true sense instead of relying on the press or government to grant them eventually when the time is ripe in someone's opinion.
Rolling Eyes

pikamaster SG

Like I said, I don't agree with those pple I quoted.

ANyway, go read our constitution. the problem lies with teh Invisible OB Markers referred to by the word "sensitive". Who is to know what is "politically sensitive" or "religiously sensitive". What is "religiously sensitive" may differ even within a religion. Sunni and Shiite Islam have totally different sets of practices.

And of course, the Constitution reminds us that the "Basic rights" are not absolute and can remvoed if you are.... blablabla...in the name of national security and social harmony, again 2 very ill-explained terms.

the pikamaster

robertteh SG

To: Pikamaster,

Thanks for sharing information from other forums on the same topic.

As to be expected the current constitution does not enshrine the basic rights of citizens in a desired manner based on the 7 points of true democracy.

It is for the government to understand people's wishes to have more openness, accountability and transparency in the current political system (characterized as a mixer of meritocracy, control and socialism) as posted in the 7 points.

With the post-war baby boomers fast retiring with a few years time, when they shall reach 62-65, there might be a vaccuum in our political landscape.

If young people are to respond to government's calls for greater civic participation in governance indeed, then they will need to know whether there will be better protection of citizens' basic rights that will not be easily compromised on the ground of sensitivity alone as sensitivity like you said differs according to interpretations by different people.

Some strategic study will be useful to evolve Singapore political model to one that truly provide desirable values to motivate an increasingly educated population to participate in governance and retain local talents. This is the greatest challenge to the new PM I guess.

Rolling Eyes

pikamaster SG

or it is sth. the new PM won't do, since he is far too entrenched in his Party to talk about real political reformation. He won't see what you said as a "challenge"; he would see it as a "threat". Remember what he said about "western-influenced liberals"? THat should give you a true representation of how far he is willing to change politics down here.

the pikamaster

robertteh SG

According to Peter's Principle, legal minds will produce legalistic management - antagonistic contentions, disputes and litigations.

It is obvious that the first phase of Singapore nation building was largely influenced by legal and control approach.

It is simple logic isn't it this Peter's Principle predilection - we are what we are because of our innate inclinations ingrained by earlier training and environmental conditioning. The next level of Singapore economic and social development will depend how we assemble a diversified team of leaders of all-round training especially in technological knowledge and management excellence.

If our leaders continue to be legal or generalist in training, governance will be diffuse and conceptual. If they are too specialised, there may be narrow or microscopic. If they are legal, we will continue to contend about controls and litigations. Each type of training will produce its own limitations.

Advanced countries as revealed by Alvin Toffler have long been planning to re-position their Second Wave economy to Third Wave knowledge-intensive one - harnessing of nano-technologies in IT, Computers, Microelectronics, Space technologies (to produce many new materials and medical cures not possible under gravity conditions) to overcome shortages in resources and oil-based energy. Nano-technological advances are making revolutionary changes in waves after waves to change fundamentals of economies.

New political leadership will have to be wide-ranging in character and quality with a bias towards technology-oriented leadership if Singapore is to rise above conventional competitions. Only mass participation and practical knowledge application will unleash that rare critical mass to take a small country like Singapore to success. Rolling Eyes

fymk SG

The meaning of true democracy is *drum rolls*

There is no such thing as a true democracy!

If there is ....I will be running buck wild....

pikamaster SG

I agree... to a certain extent.

There is no general true form of democracy, but there is a specific true form for each stage of a country's development.

the pikamaster

robertteh SG

In classroom discussions, and academic researches, we may try to ask whether there is such a thing as true democracy.

Perhaps, we will be casual or non-committal in asking such a question too as it will be just pure intellectual dissertation actually - no prize awarded or consequence for any right or wrong answer.

However, in the running of a country, we are dealing with issues and problems affecting people's livelihoods, wellbeing of many citizens.

If Singapore is to progress from here, it is extremely important to ask at this stage especially when the baby boomers born after 1945 are fast retiring within a few years whether we have the next generations of social, industrial and political leaders to take over the running of the country to sustain its standard of living and prosperity.

Particularly, is there a real concern with our freedoms of speech, criticizing of government policies or participation in political process. How far should the government open up that space in order to bring about greater participation without which there could be no further progress.

If leadership, meritocracy or control-based approach of the past is to be continued, let there be full understanding of issues and problems based on debates and public feedbacks to see if Singapore should carry on such an approach.

If past political process is not sufficient as a few leaders at the helm will not get all to achieve excellence, entrepreneurship and creativity and mass participation in knowledge in every sphere holds the key to future progress, should we not re-examine and make fundamental changes to level up political and civic participation. Or do our leaders insist on keeping to the status quo and be content with only cosmetic changes?

In the light of such perspective, there is in my opinion a critical need to have serious re-examination of our current political process and level of participation by the masses. The right answers may not come from protagonists who seem to be overly concerned with keeping the status quo as they are probably beneficiaries under the existing policies or governance.

In this context, the above-mentioned 7 points of true democracy are relevant and will serve as useful practical basis for discussions. The young should be mature to understand what will bring about creativity, entrepreneurship and vibrance and will want to ask the right questions in answering the government call to them to participate in nation building. Laughing

goh meng seng SG

Dear All and Robert Teh,

I have been following your discourse on Democracy and find it pretty interesting. It happens to coincide with what I am doing right now, searching for a feasible political reform that is necessary for our next phase of economic growth.

Democracy to me, evolves out of the distrust of those in power. One must first understand the nature of Power inorder to appreciate Democracy. Someone says Power corrupts, absolute Power corrupts absolutely. I will add to that, Power is addictive, like opium. However, as a complex society or nation, we cannot do away with an instituition of power base, to take care of things on behalf and for the good of the society. Thus, Democracy, to me is a compromised system which provides two functions: 1) an instituition of power base to make things work for the society 2) an instituition that could provide a check and balance that will prevent the ills of concentration of powers.

It is true that as a small and young nation, it is lucky that our pioneer batch of political leaders are good and decent people that contributed SELFLESSLY towards nation building. But this doesn't guarantee that the next few generations of political leaders would be as selfless and righteous as our pioneers! Now they are talking about giving million dollar annual pay to ministers, just to "entice" the talented ones to serve the nation. This is no longer a "SELFLESS" contributions but a conditional one.

Thus, for our long term development, it is important for us to set up a system of balancing forces, just to keep the power instituition in checks. Without such checks and balances, we will only head for doom sooner or later. WE are already witnessing the power core in decay, falling into the traps of power; addiction. Those with great concentrated powers will want to maintain their grip onto power, by all means. They are the ones with great privileges and enjoy to be so. Thus, they will want to avoid "loosing". Running away from tough battles by redrawing of boundaries is a sign of weakness as well as decay.

The system of democracy must be both a system of selection as well as elimination. But with our present GRC system which provide covers for the "weak ones" to get into parliament without having to contest, this has defeat the purpose of the selection and elimination process. It will only take one or two generations of evolution that will result in having all "weaklings" in our power house! Could we possibly trust such selection process for the betterment of our society? Obviously not.

How does a democratic political reform helps us in our next phase of economic development? There is a wealth of literature out there, promoting what we call "Innovative Economy" or what I call "Thinking Economy". I shall not go into the details.

But Robert, have you ever consider to walk the talk? Wink

Putting up thesis on how we should reform our political system will have minimum effects. The greatest pressure comes from active political participation. You could draw up a wonderful picture of how our political field should be reformed, but without the necessary people fulfilling all the roles, this will only be a castle in the air!

If you are interested, please contact me at [email protected]

Goh Meng Seng

robertteh SG

To:Goh Meng Seng,

I am glad you have popped the ultimate question: "Are you willing to do something to effect the change instead of lamentations or being a armchair critics or people who only know how to put up thesis or systems."

All citizens should ask themselves the above-stated question.

A tentative program for change may consist of : (1) raising the level of political consciousness and participation (2) Sharing of common vision on true democracy (3) identify people with passions and common vision and right beliefs to come forward to serve the nation's interests (4) to cultivate a backbone group of active citizens to effect change and active participation.

There are many problems to solve in order to make Singapore competitive and vibrant again. Alternative views and suggestions should be debated regularly to form common platform or programs to be proposed in support of evolvement and change.

Let's hope that people will freely express their views or meet more often at speake's corner to rally active citizens to herald the change. Rolling Eyes Laughing

iveco SG

Right of assembly doesn't translate into having power to produce an effect

I REFER to XXXX's letter, 'Want to hear the silent majority? Let them assemble' (ST, Sept 10), in which he called for Singaporeans to be given the freedom to assemble and protest.

I urge Singaporeans not to be seduced by the powerful images of mass demonstrations in countries such as the United States, Russia and Australia.

It is often very easy and convenient to overlook the smallness of our nation and it is dangerous to chal-lenge the status quo blindly. We should understand that unlike the many vast Western democracies, a little instability could spell the end of our country.

It is a fallacy to suggest that being able to assemble and protest translates into greater political efficacy. Take the recent demonstrations in Italy, where tens of thousands urged their government to withdraw the 3,000 Italian troops in Iraq to save the lives of two Italian women aid workers held hostage by Iraqi militants. The result? The Italian government reaffirmed its commitment to keep its troops in Iraq till the job is done.

We need to be clear whether demonstrations are the means to an end or an end in themselves. Often, protesters demonstrate for the sake of demonstrating. Take the anti-Bush demonstrations in New York during the recent Republican convention.

What did they achieve? President George W. Bush pulled ahead of Democrat John Kerry after the convention. Americans merely saw the demonstrators who were trying to disrupt the convention as a nuisance and security hazard.

Recently, 7,500 school cleaners in New South Wales (NSW) walked off their jobs for one week, calling for better job security. They descended upon the Town Hall in central Sydney to voice their displeasure.

Many schools across NSW had to be closed because the principals did not want their students to fall sick due to poor hygiene conditions.

Instead of achieving their aim of getting greater concessions from the NSW Premier, the protesters only incurred the wrath of many parents whose children were affected by the protest, especially those whose kids would be taking the Higher School Certificate (A levels) in about a month's time.

These examples show that being able to assemble and protest does not translate into having the power to produce an effect. There are other more productive avenues for Singaporeans to provide constructive feedback to our leaders.

Instead of blindly clamouring for change, I urge Singaporeans to make an effort to comprehend the rationale behind policies and laws, in the context of a small, multi-ethnic and multi-religious society.

Anyone who has studied governance would know that it is the 'bread and butter' issues that are of most concern to the people of a country. In this regard, I cannot agree more with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's remark at the Global Brand Forum that political reform need not go hand in hand with economic liberalisation.

In my previous career, I had the opportunity to travel to many less-developed countries, such as Kenya, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Through such travels, I came to realise the crucial role of law in providing a framework for an orderly society. I saw how a country's people could suffer when abuses of political power were not curbed by the rule of law.

Singapore must never abandon its fundamentals - political stability, meritocracy and an incorruptible administration - in order to safeguard a strong economy and a secure environment.

I was heartened to read in a recent speech by Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong that our Government 'will not change just to please some Western-influenced liberals who apply their notion of democracy, pluralistic politics and freedom of the press unthinkingly to Singapore'.

Singapore is our home and, together, we must make the right choices for the Republic.

[name & address deleted]

Source: ST, 17/9/04

If any of the two aid Italian workers gets harmed, Berlusconi will be the next in line for the dole.

President Bush may yet lose his job. As the body count in Iraq rises, the nation's patience with him wears thin.

The right choice of the republic is to champion the rights of oppressed victims of state terrorism. To support the Palestinian cry for justice is to be a saint.

So far, Spain has been a paragon of virtue where the illegal invasion and occuparion of Iraq is concerned. Same goes to the Phillipines.

pikamaster SG

Originally posted by iveco:

If any of the two aid Italian workers gets harmed, Berlusconi will be the next in line for the dole.

President Bush may yet lose his job. As the body count in Iraq rises, the nation's patience with him wears thin.

The right choice of the republic is to champion the rights of oppressed victims of state terrorism. To support the Palestinian cry for justice is to be a saint.

So far, Spain has been a paragon of virtue where the [b]illegal invasion and occuparion of Iraq is concerned. Same goes to the Phillipines.[/b]

you know, ivevco, you might want to try writing a letter to the press rebutting "Xiao" Jia Wei's letter.

winking pikamaster

robertteh SG

To: Iveco,

Cause and effect relationship is often not fully understood or appreciated when people try to analyse or deal with problems.

If the root cause of a problem is not understood, people will attribute problems to symptoms rather than seeking for truths or real cures.

Demonstrations, assemblies and protests etc as mentioned are parts of symptoms of various ills in society.

The root causes of problems often lie elsewhere such as lack of checks and balances in political process, deprivations, lack of freedoms to express people's alternate views or grievances etc but not due to granting of rights of assemblies or demonstrations or protests.

To transit to the next level of our political maturity under the circumstances of more educated workforce, fast-paced changes and competitive environments of today, root causes of ills of society must be found and remedied at the fundamental governance level.

If people do not start from democracy with entrenchment or enshrining of basic rights of citizens, many problems will be locked in or suppressed waiting to be released one day sooner or later such as happening in the former Soviet Union or Suharto Indonesia.

Street demonstration in US or UK may happen but these demonstrations may help to release gradually certain problems which cannot happen in autocratic society.

In autocratic societies, the fact that there was no demonstration does not mean there is progress or no problems. Only fundamental democratic participation, openness, accountability and transparency with citizens being able to participate in governance with checks and balances can solve real problems.

The more open, accountable and transparent means the likelihood of cataclysmic changes such as demonstration, protests will be minimized.

So when our news media try to present a picture of freedoms leading to unrest, they are just giving one side of the human story. Idea Idea Idea

oldbreadstinks SG

just wondering,

if you want to have a demonstration in sg you need a permit right?
and since the demonstration's comfirmed 100% against the govt ideals and interests , (unless you're going for those" most number of people gathered together to eat sushi")
if not there's no chance of a permit isn't it?

robertteh SG

I hope to share with all a simple hands-on managing process for accountability, transparency and efficiency in works or business as follows:-

INTUITIVE AND AD HOC APPROACH

According to Mark Twain, The secret of getting ahead is to get started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex and overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks and then starting on the first one.

Today, most business activities however, are still managed intuitively or in an ad hoc manner as witnessed by commonly held secrets of success, viz:-

1. Focus and Consistency.
2. Positive Work Attitude.
3. Foresight & Insight
4. Supportive Environment.
5. Passion & Determination.
6. Coordination, Teamwork and Bottom-up Approach.
7. Adaptation to Changing Environments.
8. Creativity and Entrepreneurship
9. Leverage on Strengths and avoidance of Weakness. (Sun Sze Art of War)

Clearly traditional management is individualistic, ad hoc or intuitive relying on concepts, policies, leadership or talents unable to produce real management excellence, efficiency and productivity.

On the other hand, many tasks today have been taken over increasingly by divisible logical component processes defined in quality-time-cost parameters as in on-line banking, e-trading, travel-ticketing, CAD-CAM designing, transportation, logistics, stock-trading, accounting, telecommunications etc.

DOABLE WORK PROCESSES

Hence, management can be divided in steps, namely: (1) Study of Ideas, (2) Enquiry, (3) Securing Contracts and (4) Contract Administration (Operations) to facilitate performance and realize efficiency and productivity.

Operational or routine business activities can be performed directly, contracted out or delegated for systematic project or contract management in ten departments, namely: 1.(General) 2.(Human Resource) 3.(Revenue) 4.(Accounts) 5.(Marketing) 6.(Services-all outsourced activities) 7.(Facility) 8.(Enforcement) 9. (Production) 10.(Compliance).

DEPARTMENT REPORT OPERATIONAL/PROJECT MANAGEMENT

To be competitive, a production department can be set up consisting of 3-4 CORE ACTIVITIES for hands-on monitoring in one-page department report as follows:-

1. Set up 3-4 Core Activities.
2. Define each core activity in 2-3 quality-time-cost parameters.
3. Perform Core Activities to attain parameters.
4. Inspect and feedback variances in 1, 2 or 3 (or percentages) representing non-attainment, attainment and excellent attainment of parameters respectively.
5. Correct Department Reports' variances every Friday by 1630 hour elaborated by a two-way communication task-line.

SEQUENTIAL WORK FORMS

Divide Core activities in sequential in-out processes laid down in Work Forms to guide workers to attain quality-time-cost excellence with mass participation and knowledge application by all to avoid top-down or conceptual management.

TOTAL MANAGEMENT COORDINATION AND KNOWLEDGE-BASED MANAGEMENT

In summary, all tasks can be processed in (1) administrative forms, (2) department reports and (3) work forms to attain results as elaborated in "Objective-steps Processing Management System".

Conceptual, intuitive, leadership or talent approaches are vague whereas doable work processes will lead to efficiency and productivity. Let all contibute towards building teamwork with coordination, doable workable processes to attain hands-on efficiency and productivity.

Note: The above-mentioned guide is extracted from book Objective-Steps Processing Management System published by Robert Teh Kok Hua. Laughing

« Previous Page Next Page »