1. Workers' Party
It wasted no time to use its 1st GE2015 Rally to rebuke the on-again-off-again allegation by PAP and MND that AHPETC awards contracts to its friends, and that the TC had paid high price that allowed its Managing Agent (MA) to profiteer!
Personally I feel that PAP hammering on this issue is unhelpful to their causes as voters would have asked: IF there are indeed such terrible acts, bordering on dishonesty and abuse of public money for private gain of so-called friends, why can't the government and MND ask the police to investigate the AHPETC?
Why drag and drag on this issue till GE2015? How can an efficient and effective government who absolutely HATES corruption and corrupt practices be condoning it? IF the law is powerless, then PAP should have use its parliamentary majority to change the laws and bring the culprits, if any, to justice!
The fact that it cannot do so definitely will create an impression in the general voters that PAP and MND are just 'pissing in the wind' and creating an issue out of nothing! THAT cannot be good for PAP!
2. PAP
Focused on personal character and a good heart for a politician and MP of Singapore. Personally, that is a GIVEN really.
Any public office holder MUST ask this question: why do I want to be a MP? If the answer if for fame and fortune (S$16k/mth allowance is NOT that big a deal considering the MP works 24/7 and 365/year!) I can understand. BUT that is the ONLY 2 reasons one wants to be a MP, one will surely trip and fall in due course as one will do anything to cling on to the fame and fortune. Such cases will NOT be sustainable.
If the MAIN reason to becoming a MP is: 'to create a bigger good for as many constituents as possible without violating too many minority's rights leveraging on one's talent.' The MP will go long and far in his/her political journey.
For PAP leaders, the bigger question is: IF diversity is inevitable, how can PAP remains the dominant party working collaboratively with other opposition parties to create a bigger good for the majority of Singaporeans without violating the minority's rights.
Is it true that it has to be: if you are not with PAP, you are against PAP? Can there not be different of opinions that after collaborating and debating, a better solution emerges from taking the best of those differences?
It wasted no time to use its 1st GE2015 Rally to rebuke the on-again-off-again allegation by PAP and MND that AHPETC awards contracts to its friends, and that the TC had paid high price that allowed its Managing Agent (MA) to profiteer!
Personally I feel that PAP hammering on this issue is unhelpful to their causes as voters would have asked: IF there are indeed such terrible acts, bordering on dishonesty and abuse of public money for private gain of so-called friends, why can't the government and MND ask the police to investigate the AHPETC?
Why drag and drag on this issue till GE2015? How can an efficient and effective government who absolutely HATES corruption and corrupt practices be condoning it? IF the law is powerless, then PAP should have use its parliamentary majority to change the laws and bring the culprits, if any, to justice!
The fact that it cannot do so definitely will create an impression in the general voters that PAP and MND are just 'pissing in the wind' and creating an issue out of nothing! THAT cannot be good for PAP!
2. PAP
Focused on personal character and a good heart for a politician and MP of Singapore. Personally, that is a GIVEN really.
Any public office holder MUST ask this question: why do I want to be a MP? If the answer if for fame and fortune (S$16k/mth allowance is NOT that big a deal considering the MP works 24/7 and 365/year!) I can understand. BUT that is the ONLY 2 reasons one wants to be a MP, one will surely trip and fall in due course as one will do anything to cling on to the fame and fortune. Such cases will NOT be sustainable.
If the MAIN reason to becoming a MP is: 'to create a bigger good for as many constituents as possible without violating too many minority's rights leveraging on one's talent.' The MP will go long and far in his/her political journey.
For PAP leaders, the bigger question is: IF diversity is inevitable, how can PAP remains the dominant party working collaboratively with other opposition parties to create a bigger good for the majority of Singaporeans without violating the minority's rights.
Is it true that it has to be: if you are not with PAP, you are against PAP? Can there not be different of opinions that after collaborating and debating, a better solution emerges from taking the best of those differences?
No comments:
Post a Comment