forgotten 1 Report post Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) 3rd May 06 - Lunchtime Election Rally "Right now we have Low Thia Khiang, Chiam See Tong, Steve Chia. We can deal with them. Suppose you had 10, 15, 20 opposition members in Parliament. Instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, 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?" Lee Hsien Loong http://singabloodypore.civiblog.org/blog/_.../4/1931906.html ====================== Buy votes??? WOW!!! Yeah man, buy votes using Singaporean taxpayers' money and not his own money. Funny idea here http://blogs.straitstimes.com/2011/4/1/the...ers-grc-dilemma GRC = buying onions? Edited April 6, 2011 by forgotten Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
forgotten 1 Report post Posted April 6, 2011 wow, you all have really good memories to dig out these old old newspaper reports~ just noticed that i have never heard of many of the MPs in that top 10 quotes... all those unknown names are from big GRCs.... It's ok that we don't remember each and every MP names (There are total 87 MPs!) We just need to remember the correct spot to draw the cross on our voting slips Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MSlovers 0 Report post Posted April 6, 2011 We must be thankful for "huge" bto supply, very "low" covs and lastly upgradings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bepgof 20 Report post Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) It is getting more "army kakis" in parliament, those "older" MPs give way to these, why? Always getting more "kakis" from NTUC, why? "Kakis Lan" easier to "talk", feel even less pressure while having meals together! Pathing way for someone to have better power in control! Edited April 6, 2011 by bepgof Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bepgof 20 Report post Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) Politic is defined as employing ways & means within "legal means", to hinder others' performance/contribution to maximise own interests. Not racist, Chinese & Indian are pretty good at this, in general. Unfounded story from 3rd brother: As long as there is an indian party chief, that party can't grow strong, why? You know I know. 3rd May 06 - Lunchtime Election Rally "Right now we have Low Thia Khiang, Chiam See Tong, Steve Chia. We can deal with them. Suppose you had 10, 15, 20 opposition members in Parliament. Instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, 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?" Lee Hsien Loong http://singabloodypore.civiblog.org/blog/_.../4/1931906.html ====================== Buy votes??? WOW!!! Edited April 6, 2011 by bepgof Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matrix0405 0 Report post Posted April 7, 2011 3rd May 06 - Lunchtime Election Rally "Right now we have Low Thia Khiang, Chiam See Tong, Steve Chia. We can deal with them. Suppose you had 10, 15, 20 opposition members in Parliament. Instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, 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?" Lee Hsien Loong http://singabloodypore.civiblog.org/blog/_.../4/1931906.html ====================== Buy votes??? WOW!!! It better to keep him busy with opposition, else he will have ample time to think how to fix peasants. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bepgof 20 Report post Posted April 7, 2011 (edited) Hungry makes an angry man. Once hungry anything also can. Once stomach full, lot of "creative ideas" coming out. Typical voters are busy looking for food to fill the stomach. Elites are so free to think of all the crap ideas to cover their own backside and to fix ppls. MP's monthly allowance is abt SGD13,000, no joke le, still can be CEO/Chairman/President/consultant of this & that companies. If opposition kena elected MP then must be full time MP liao. It better to keep him busy with opposition, else he will have ample time to think how to fix peasants. Edited April 7, 2011 by bepgof Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
therat 18 Report post Posted April 7, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Singapore Remuneration and pensions MPs receive a monthly allowance,[85] a non-pensionable annual allowance (commonly known as the 13th month pay), and an annual variable component that is paid in July and December each year.[86] The monthly allowance is 56% of the salary of an Administrative Service officer at the SR9 grade – the entry grade for Singapore's top civil servants – which is itself benchmarked at the salary of the 15th person aged 32 years from six professions: banking, law, engineering, accountancy, multinational companies and local manufacturers. In 1995, the monthly allowance was S$8,375 ($100,500 per year).[87] The allowance was revised in 2000 to $11,900 ($142,800 per year).[88] In 2007 it was announced that civil service salaries had lagged behind those in the private sector and required revision. MPs' salaries were therefore increased in phases. In 2007 the monthly allowance was revised to $13,200, raising the annual sum to $158,400. A gross domestic product (GDP) bonus payable to civil servants was also extended to MPs to link their annual remuneration to the state of the economy. They would receive no bonus if GDP growth was 2% or less, one month's bonus if the GDP grew at 5%, and up to two months' bonus if the GDP growth reached or exceeded 8%. MPs' allowances to engage legislative and secretarial assistants were also increased from $1,000 to $1,300 and from $350 to $500 respectively.[87] With effect from January 2008, each MP received another increase of his or her allowance package to $13,170 a month, bringing it to $225,000 per year.[89] Persons who have reached the age of 50 years and retired as MPs and who have served in this capacity for not less than nine years may be granted a pension for the rest of their lives. The annual amount payable is 1⁄30 of the person's highest annual salary for every completed year of service and 1⁄360 for every uncompleted year, up to a ceiling of two-thirds of the Member's annual salary.[90] No person has an absolute right to compensation for past services or to any pension or gratuity, and the President may reduce or withhold pensions and gratuities upon an MP's conviction for corruption.[91] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bepgof 20 Report post Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) From my observations, PAP will face a tough fight with oppositions, especially WP. The mindsets of voters getting "more daring", can see from questions asked in NUS. "To supervise the gov" in the parliament is the key at this point of time. Need some real voices in parliament, no all yes men. Give $ and take back $, who don't know. What's for?, wasted the resources of printing, news release, press conference, calculation, preparing, talking.....all are "decorative works" - who kena sway? Those who pay taxes lah! Edited April 8, 2011 by bepgof Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steelze 0 Report post Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) slowly, the younger generation (working adults) with higher education and also net savvy are joining the eligible voters group. this group of people (myself) have seen and heard stories from 2 different angles, unlike our parent's time when media is the only source (which is of course a controlled medium). although i am not confident that the oppositions will make any significant win in this coming election, perhaps in the next and subsequent ones, the opposition voice will be stronger... and i am definitely looking forward to that day. Edited April 8, 2011 by steelze Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bepgof 20 Report post Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) Unless opposition having >51% votes in parliament, otherwise ALL legislation changes will be passed one-way in favor of the ruling party. What to do? "since voters have authorised" the ruler to do so, as what the ruling party has always said. What we hope to see, at this juncture of time at this present global settings, a few seats (say 1% of elected MPs= 8 seats). The present Eleventh Parliament has 94 MPs consisting of 84 elected MPs, one NCMP and nine NMPs. NCMP & NCMP have no voting rights in parliament. What the 1% can do?, besides acting as "bridge" between constituencies and gov. Experience tells gov turns a deaf ear to what the elected opposition MPs have said/feedbacks. Opposition has very limited given resources. Look at the existing 2 opposition constituencies' town councils, they have done pretty well under present's political environment. Look at some PAP-led TCs, lost $ in some investments. From the actual history of "planting a tree" episode, one can tell how difficult oppositions are to survive, not mentioning "to do something" with ruling party's policies and network of political influence. My salute to oppositions. Of course, only to the ones deserve due respect & salution, not the brother-cum-sister team. Edited April 8, 2011 by bepgof Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
forgotten 1 Report post Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) I may get a chance to vote! Yesterday I saw opposition party's brocedure entitled "Voting is secret" on my gate LOL. None of my MPs is walking around. Recently, I only see foreign workers electing new concrete frames for posters along the road! I think these foreigner workers deserve the 15K salary more than my MPs. Edited April 9, 2011 by forgotten Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
forgotten 1 Report post Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) Unless opposition having >51% votes in parliament, otherwise ALL legislation changes will be passed one-way in favor of the ruling party. What to do? "since voters have authorised" the ruler to do so, as what the ruling party has always said. What we hope to see, at this juncture of time at this present global settings, a few seats (say 1% of elected MPs= 8 seats). The present Eleventh Parliament has 94 MPs consisting of 84 elected MPs, one NCMP and nine NMPs. NCMP & NCMP have no voting rights in parliament. What the 1% can do?, besides acting as "bridge" between constituencies and gov. Experience tells gov turns a deaf ear to what the elected opposition MPs have said/feedbacks. Opposition has very limited given resources. Look at the existing 2 opposition constituencies' town councils, they have done pretty well under present's political environment. Look at some PAP-led TCs, lost $ in some investments. From the actual history of "planting a tree" episode, one can tell how difficult oppositions are to survive, not mentioning "to do something" with ruling party's policies and network of political influence. My salute to oppositions. Of course, only to the ones deserve due respect & salution, not the brother-cum-sister team. I agree that Oppositions have limited funds to maintain their towns. Somemore, each opposition member must fork out >10K deposit for standing in the election. They also face risk of being invited to lim kopi by ISD. Irony is although PAP town councils have more funds than Opposition town councils, I observe that Potong Pasir and Hougang towns are cleaner than some other towns that are managed by PAP! Edited April 9, 2011 by forgotten Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marshmallow 0 Report post Posted April 9, 2011 i wished that Hougang NUS student had made his point on "can I don't pay tax?" more obvious. it is a very valid point. Why should residents in opposition wards be treated unfair though they also pay tax? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matrix0405 0 Report post Posted April 9, 2011 Not enough good people in Singapore? Friday, 08 April 2011 Vincent Wijeysingha The PAP view that politics is about getting skilled people to run an administration is based on a wrong presumption. Politics is a perennial debate around values, about the important things in a community: whether we look after the elderly or buy guns; whether we house people or see public housing as a means to make a profit; whether we keep the cost of living manageable or award ourselves millions of dollars in bonuses. The administration of a country is the next step in the political process: once you have determined the things of value, then you seek out the best civil servants to operationalise them. The idea that Singapore only has a few hundred people capable of serving the nation is an old idea propagated by former PM Lee Kuan Yew, and is based on his now discredited eugenic views. If the current PM is saying that we only have a few people able to lead this country, he is implicitly saying that our education system, which the PAP has presided over for the last fifty-two years, has failed. The political arena is a contest in which different parties put forward alternative scenarios for society which the people then choose at a general election. In Singapore, the PAP repeats this same argument: That we don’t have enough skilled people to go around. And yet, throughout its history, it has used the Internal Security Act and other means to silence even its own party members, let alone the skilled and intelligent people who have tried to express alternative views. This is not a party that has managed to attract the best people to itself. It is a party that attracts like-minded people and consigns those who challenge it with new ideas to the wilderness. It is a party that has never been confident of its views, its philosophy, or its policies. Not 'screwed up' yet? The idea that the PAP has not yet, to use his unfortunate expression, 'screwed up' has now been shown to be false. It has presided over the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars of our investment money. The bilingual education policy, by its own admission, has failed. The population policy has thrown up significant social problems. Public housing is unaffordable. The expansion of the CPF portfolio has meant that people in old age are left with no money to survive. People are putting off medical treatment because healthcare is so expensive. The ERP and COE systems have not managed to reduce traffic jams. Twenty-seven years of measures have not yielded any discernible improvement in labour productivity. The SME sector has still not gained a foothold in the economy. In fact, the only new idea it has brought onto the economic landscape in the last several years has been the building of casinos. International observers note our GDP growth throughout the years have been achieved through increasing inputs rather than through productivity and innovative goods and services. PM Lee says that in the event that the government becomes wrong or incompetent, then the time has come to look at alternatives. I am sorry to say this, but that time has come. His government is wrong because it no longer places the people of Singapore at the centre of policy-making; it places it own interests there. And it is incompetent because in every single area of policy, it no longer has the energy, the verve and the creativity to develop policies that will carry us through the next phase of development, policies that will serve the people of Singapore. No, this government is not doing a good job. Just ask every old person who has to work into their eighties. Ask every one of the 70,000 children who go to school without pocket money every day. Ask the clinic nurses, the secretaries, the salespeople, the technicians who have seen their wages decline. Ask the young couples who are postponing marriage because they cannot afford a flat. And what does it do when confronted with the idea that the people of this country will one day vote them out? It threatens us with our army. It is significant that in the pages of today’s Straits Times devoted to the activities of the PAP, alongside the article on the so-called quality of the PAP, there was the inevitable article defending its huge remuneration of the ministers. The PM said that the US President does not receive a high salary because once out of office, he is able to continue to command a high income. This is a reprehensible argument which essentially says that politics is about making as much money as you can on the back of your political service. No. Politics is about the service of the people, so many of whom have struggled so long under a now discredited government. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
