Early elections?

My 11st November muse was amazingly prescient yet blindsided at the same time. Chua Lee Hoong writes a portent of doom advocating an incumbent government, and the next day the Elections Department is gearing up. The talk of the town now is, will we have an early snap election?

One would only need to profile the mouthpiece of the PAP government (ie ST) for a few days to read the barometer of things to come. It is very likely that an early election is coming. When it’ll be is anyone’s guess, but it certainly won’t be 2011, five years from GE2006. The Elections Department usually gears up 6 to 12 months before an actual election. Will we see it in mid to late 2009? Who knows, except of course the PAP leaders. It’s quite possible those 20000 civil servants called up for duty will have notice of the actual periods of duty. One of them has got to be a blogger!

On a side note, I read with amusement an article from Wayang Party about how the PAP has no right to call a snap election. Amusing, but the author fails to realise that a party-majority government equates to party rule. For Barack Obama’s Democratic Party majority government (the Democratic Party holds majority in the lower and upper Houses), while it is a majority, the political maturity of the USA means any Party Whip will not be a clarion call. But after an 8-year stretch of Republican sickness, the Democrats will take opportunity to use House majority to quickly pass reforms. For a party like the PAP, the Party Whip is truly effective and when it cracks, believe it when the grass sways with the resultant wind.

Call it what you will, but is that not a PAP government?

Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam

The biggest breaking news in the local political scene is that of JB Jeyaretnam being cleared of bankruptcy and announcing that he will plan to start a new Reform Party and possibly stand for elections.

As someone who never had the privilege of seeing JBJ contesting anything, I regarded him as a curiosity or even a anachronism of the Singaporean political scene.

For me, as a relative youngblood of Singapore, JBJ’s main claims fames are two-fold, that he fought a protracted war against our local PAP big guns to free himself of bankruptcy, and that he lost his bid to stand office in the 1997 GE, one where he claimed that the Cheng San polls were rigged by LKY himself to keep JBJ out of office.

Out of curiosity, I met JBJ in City Hall and had a short chat with the man about his ambitions and life long struggle with bankruptcy and why he was doing what he was doing, which IMHO was tantamount to banging his head against an ungrateful wall. I remember him saying these words:

“I fight because Singaporeans deserve rights, Singapore deserves more than the authoritative rights the PAP government has given you (me). Under the PAP’s regime, Singaporeans have forgotten what it means to have rights and have forgotten how to fight for these rights. I fight to remind them.”

Braver words were never spoken. I bought his book.

Years later he’s free of bankruptcy and I watched with interest his videos announcing his plan to build a Reform Party and possibly stand for elections. However, watching the video, I began to wonder. Frankly the videos do not cast him in a bright light. His thoughts were muddled, at times incoherent, at times trains of thought intermittent and turgid. I think the ravages of age have taken a toll on the man. He’s 81 and come 2011, he’ll be 85. By then as now, he’ll be reduced to a mere mascot.

Will he get the permission to form the Reform Party? I doubt that. Will be be able to rally enough supporters to help him form the party? With Worker’s Party the real alternative choice for aspiring alternative political paths, I doubt that. Even if he does, what are the issues he’ll stand for? Freedom of speech? Democracy? Sounds more like CSJ.

I will not vote for him.

http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=531

How the Ruling Party twists the courts to their favour

Health MInister Khaw Boon Wan said quite a good number of times that he “welcomed debate with the opposition on this issue” and that they “can have a thorough discussion of this”. By this of course we mean the NKF and this gross mismanagement of public funds for self-gain.

Prime MInister Lee Hsien Loong says that he is “disappointed with the opposition parties’ position so far” and that “their unwillingness to spar on issues is a letdown”.

Choice comments from 2 select elite from the upper echelon. Might I ask, what exactly does PM Lee mean when he, on one hand instigates the courts to initiate proceedings against TT Durai and gang and thus evoking sub judice, while on the other hand lament the lack of discussion on the issues?

Isn’t the mismanagement of NKF an issue? Didn’t Mr Khaw say that he wanted discussion on the issue? Now that PM Lee has spoken and sub judice is in effect, Mr Khaw is strangely quiet and PM Lee is firing with all guns, seemingly in an attempt to provoke the opposition to slip up and get sued.

As MSM has vividly shown, SDP has already taken the bait but is soldiering on. WP, SDA, NSP and SPP have wisely decided to sidestep the issue, by not commenting on the issue just yet. Suffice it to say, most of them are currently in the huddle to decide what can or cannot be discussed, or at all.

Read www.todayonline.com/articles/113678.asp, TODAYOnline’s take on the NKF sub judice issue for a clearer picture on the matter. According to Mr Shashi Nathan, head of criminal department at Harry Elias Partnership, “general comments on the NKF saga can still be made during the run-up to the elections, although specific references to allegations or to people involved in the case should be avoided at all times”.

It appears that the letter of the law is so vague it leaves everything to chance, tantamount to literally a blank cheque if sub judice is violated. Yet another masterstroke by the ruling party. It’s quite doubtful if any opposition party will mention NKF by its most glaring aspects without running afoul of the law. SDP, MM Lee and PM Lee have already shown the way, charting the path of ash and cinder for those who dare tread the NKF path.

http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=430

Hearts and minds gerrymandering and the opposition

The consensus on the ground is that there was hardly any change to the electoral boundaries and thus the PAP could not be accused of election gerrymandering. IMHO there was, tho not so clearly on the electoral boundaries.

Looking closely at the changes it’s quite clear on the surface that not much was done to change the electoral boundaries. The two big changes were the removal of Drs Wong’s and Tan’s wards (to be consumed by GRCs) and the creation of 2 new wards to replace the “lost” SMCs.

Now that the media dust has settled it’s alot easier to peek at the manoeuvres mades by the PAP. The first thought that crossed my mind was how the consensus was reached that not much was changed. Haven’t the people forgotten that the big changes were made in 2001, that’s why nothing much needed to be done this round? It’s like being slapped a million times; the millionth and one slap, really is nothing much eh? In one of PAPs ad nauseum adages, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.

The Holland-Bukit Panjang electoral map drawn by ST drew an incredulous grin on my face. The first image that popped in my head was “Israel surrounded by Arabs”. SMCs can draw from the firepower of the GRC eh? Truly… Maybe it’s not new that candidates seek help from other constituencies, but I’d appreciate it if you kept it subtle.

PM Lee “threw the gauntlet” at the opposition to contest all 84 seats. This remark drew an incredulous guffaw! In one fell stroke the PAP made the populace believe that not being able to vote was the opposition’s fault! Hey, if you can’t vote, it’s the opposition’s fault for not fielding enough competent candidates!

The fact that the populace has swallowed all the stories wholesale, shows that the PAP has truly succeeded in gerrymandering the hearts and minds of the people (well, 70% at least). With that, they could “lie, cheat and steal” all they want and they’d still win.

Ok, enough PAP-bashing. Now the opposition party. The news of UncleYap being booted was tres hilarious. Guys, the meeting of parties to mutually agree on avoiding 3-way fights is a good start, but really, if you had the people’s good at heart, then get off your asses and start thinking about forming a single opposition party, for fracks sake!

If you’re willing to sit down and talk about avoiding 3-way fights, and deferring to the “seniors”, why not form a single party? Is it for the sake of power? Everyone wants to be leader eh? I say, form a single party, call for party elections to vote in the key people (Chiam for chairman!) and contest the elections properly! If not, the opposition party will forever remain perfunctory and a sideshow to PAP’s circus.

http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=414

Blogging and the Law

On 18th January 2006, the Institute of Policy Studies organised a closed-door discussion on the topic of Blogging and the Law.

This is according to local bloggers mrbrown and Mr Miyagi,

They didn’t say much about what happened in this closed-door event except for some pictures. However the title of this closed-door event is interesting to say the least. Considering the venue, it’s very likely that the powers-that-be are considering legislating blogging. It’s pretty clear that this was mooted by the recent blogging/hate/Sedition Act cases.

In 2005 I wrote on this very specific issue. In it I proposed a self-policing or moderation policy as opposed to a throw-the-book approach that the PAP has adopted (clearly a political Send-A-Message).

However it would seem that the government is going to take this one step further by considering legislation on blogging, possibly also in view of GE2006.

To me, legislating blogging is missing the forest for the trees and reflective of the PAP’s neanderthal style. It’s analogous to flocking to a commotion in the street, seeing a loon hurling racial epitaphs at no one in particular, then getting offended and braying for a law to clamp down on talking in public!

While technology has changed, human nature hasn’t. Social ills and bad behaviour remain constant. There are enough laws to come down hard on these things. Bad behaviour exists everywhere, virtually or otherwise. If you open the floodgates of law on blogging, where does it stop? Websites? Forums? Mailing lists? Usenet?

http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=397

ST has shown its true face

WTF! 50 up and coming “young” Singaporeans for all (read PAP) to read and recruit!

It’s truly astounding that ST would report on the top 50 up and coming Singporeans in the vein of rags like FHM or Cosmo (albeit they aren’t as sexy, except maybe one or two).

It smacks like a hit-list for PAP recruitment. What’s galling is that ST even writes about its slant and affiliation to PAP in a small sidebar. Well, let’s hope the opposition will take this opportunity to headhunt and (if unsuccessful) watch out for them.

I do have a few to highlight tho. For one, I read (belatedly??) that the new ISD director is formerly of the PMO office! Opp members better watch our even more! The director is definitely on the beck and call of the PMO’s office, simply because of this director’s “old camp” sentiments. Singaporeans’ lives could be ruined over a power breakfast at Istana.

Second, young? You gotta be kidding… I was thinking 20s but they got late 30s. Perhaps the ascension of LHL has altered the definition of young?

Third, everyone in the list has one identical attribute: they are rich. From scholar directors to ex-scholar directors to lawyers, each and every one of them is loaded. Up and coming? Try super comfortable. What happened to the poets, charity volunteers, celebrities, common man made good people? Are they not worthy of being up and coming? Perhaps this is truly wat it means by “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer”.

This publication really adds fuel to the GE speculation fire. Me, it matters none since it’ll be a walk-over in my district. I agree with a forum writer recently; give me a Yes/No vote of confidence even if there isn’t a contest.

http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=182