Which are the strong opposition parties this General Election?

Nomination Day 27 April 2011.

Polling Day 7 May 2011.

Of the six opposition parties that could be contesting the General Election, no more than half are deemed as strong contenders, according to two analysts.

Dr Derek da Cunha, who has followed Singapore politics as an analyst for 20 years, named the three "real contenders" as the Workers' Party(WP), National Solidarity Party (NSP) andSingapore People's Party (SPP).

The independent scholar said, "These three largely centrist parties are essentially courting the most crucial block of voters -- the wavering middle ground."

"The other opposition parties tend to be viewed as outliers in the process," he added.

Dr da Cunha was giving a pre-election analysis at the Singapore Management University, together with law lecturer and political watcher Eugene Tan as the discussant on Tuesday afternoon.

Comparing residents' reactions during walkabouts, the quality of candidates and GE preparations, Dr da Cunha predicted that the WP would get 8 to 10 percent more votes compared to another opposition party, with "perhaps the only exception being Mr Chiam See Tong's SPP."

Tan said the WP is in a "class of its own" with the NSP and SPP coming in second.

The People's Action Party's letter to The Straits Times forum page questioning why the WP's star catch Chen Show Mao is contesting suggests the ruling party is concerned with the opposition's "A team", he said.

But both analysts, however, felt the PAP is unlikely to go overboard with "negative campaigning" as this may cause voters to recoil.

Tan said the SPP's "only draw" is veteran opposition politician Chiam, who might be able to "put up a stiff fight in Bishan-Toa Payoh", while the NSP is still "a bit rough around the edges" despite having matured somewhat.

Hot spots to look out for in the GE

Dr da Cunha expects East Coast, Aljunied and Moulmein-Kallang GRCs to be contested by the WP, Tampines GRC to see an NSP team and Bishan-Toa Payoh to be contested by SPP's Chiam.

"The significance of these five GRCs is their relative proximity to each other," he noted, predicting that the "energy" from the opposition campaigns would spillover across the electoral boundaries and be "mutually reinforcing".

Tan, however, felt Aljunied GRC "will not be not anything like 2006" and the "battleground" seems to be shifting to either East Coast or Moulmein-Kallang GRC.

PAP has attempted to preempt the WP from sending a strong team to East Coast GRC by fielding labour chief Lim Swee Say, who is known to work the ground well. There are also no new candidates in this GRC, explained Tan.

At Moulmein-Kallang, it would also be easier for the WP to field a high quality slate since it is a four-member GRC, he added.

Tan pointed to Marine Parade GRC as another constituency to look out for. Seen as "rock solid PAP ground", constituents may have been overlooked.

In 2006, four of the six candidates were new, while the fifth, Dr Ong Seh Hong, had only completed his first term. This time, the PAP is more "measured", fielding two new candidates Brigadier-General Tan Chuan-Jin and Tin Pei Ling, the analyst noted.

Among the 12 SMCs where three-cornered fights could "artificially inflate" the PAP vote, Potong Pasir, Punggol East, Mountbatten, Sengkang West, Whampoa and Pioneer are the areas that would see an "interesting contest", said Dr da Cunha.

Using the PAP's national vote of 66.6 percent in the 2006 GE as a benchmark, Dr da Cunha predicted there would be a swing against the PAP of 3 to 5 percent in wards where the opposition party is not seen as a strong contender.

If the main contender is the WP, he said the swing against the PAP could be up to 7 percent, and if the opposition party is in the five GRC hot spots, the PAP could lose up to 10 percent more votes.

The swing against the PAP is supported by several factors, including the high cost of living, unhappiness over the influx of foreigners and the high cost of HDB flats, said Dr da Cunha.

But these factors are mitigated by others such as the booming economy, political apathy and upgrading programmes, he added.

Winning the vote

While Dr da Cunha believed the opposition would need to field at least 2 "A teams" to put pressure on the PAP and encourage voters in multiple constituencies to vote for them, Tan disagreed.

The opposition needs to field one "dream team" to show voters that they are serious in winning a GRC, he urged.

Both analysts also touched on the important role of volunteers in leaving voters with a good impression of a political party.

Dr da Cunha, however, had a sober word of caution should the opposition party fail to win more than its current two seats in Parliament, or lose a seat.

"I have never seen the ground so polarised as it is today. Those who are against the government and its polices are vehemently so," he stated. "It will get worse if these people are not represented in Parliament".

This might result in anti-PAP voters turning to civil disobedience in hopes of bringing about change, he noted.

Reposted from Yahoo News,

Read more »

Posted in: Random Thoughts and Expressions

When the PAP loses an election, it will be time to leave.

I've never been interested in politics, never voted before. For the last 30 years of my life I have always believed that I was lucky to be born and bred in Singapore. Sure, nothing is perfect and the Government isn't either but we've never had like real situations like war or famine or poverty.

In general, life is pretty good. Until recently.

I'm speaking as a layman and as a layman something has got to give. Clearly there is something wrong when you feel like a second class citizen in your own country. And surely you won't be please to find out that your leaders are earning HUGE, like insanely large amounts of money perhaps at your expense when they make uncontested decisions that affects you be it in the price hikes, jobs competition with the foreigners and I don't think its just jobs but like seats and space and air and water and food.....there's only so much room in this speck of an island anyway.

I don't get this Government. I just don't. Would it be a high price to pay to get rid of this Govt and get a new one? Perhaps. But its not like it doesn't cost us to keep the current one anyway.

Here's a thought by Tan Joo Hymm which I agree thoroughly,

 

A letter to my friends on the General Elections

by Joo Hymn Tan on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 

 

We don't talk about politics, but I feel so strongly about these elections, I would like to find out what each of my friends think, and maybe persuade them at least a little!  :)  

 

Why all the excitement?

 

Over the last 15 years, I lived in:  Tanglin, Newton and Bukit Timah

 

Each time I checked the electoral rolls, it was the same:  Tanjong Pagar

 

Now, without having moved, I am in Moulmein-Kallang.

 

My neighbourhood was in three different constituencies in the last three elections:

Holland-Bukit Panjang 2001

Tanjong Pagar  2006

Moulmein-Kallang 2011

 

Question: Is there really a need to redraw boundaries every election?

 

I have never voted in all my 40+ years. It was always walkover since GRCs were implemented. In 1991, when it was still al Single Member Constituencies, my constituency was contested, and I was 21 years and 9 months old. However, that year, it was announced the the electoral roll of voters was only updated till July 1990!

 

Question: Has this ever happened before or since? Why the sudden inefficiencies in government?

 

PAP in 1950s is not the same as the PAP now

 

Yes, in the early nation building years, the PAP could have been said to comprise of highly principled, intelligent and dilligent people, like Goh Keng Swee, Rajaratnam, Lee Kuan Yew etc.

 

The PAP leaders today are completely different individuals (except for LKY), and their capabilities, outlook and values can also be said to be vastly different!

 

Question: would any of the existing PAP Ministers really be able to handle a crises?

 

Usual way mistakes are handled

 

Mistakes made in the last 5 years:

 

-           Mas Selamat’s escape (and subsequent failure of the police and military to search the homes of all his close relatives)

-           the floods in Orchard Road, and Bukit Timah immortalised in the dramatic photographs of overturned cars

-           the Youth Olympic Games being severely over-budget (and depending on who you speak with, under-publicised oversesas)

 

Policy inadequacies:

 

-           the over-heating of the housing market, where government housing aka HDB flats cost half a million dollars (where government housing is supposedly for the less well-to-do)

-           the inadequacy of CPF monies resulting in the elderly being cleaners in hawker centres and fast food restaurants all over Singapore

-           the huge and sudden influx of foreign workers, at all levels of employment leading to depressed wages for Singaporeans, and worse, loss of jobs

 

It’s not about not making mistakes. We are all human, Ministers, civil servants etc not less so. The issue is there is little post-mortem or reflection to ensure that the same mistakes do not happen again. The most important thing is to take collectively responsibility and learn all we can from mistakes to make sure they don’t happen again.

 

However, the usual focus by the Government is to place blame, remove the offending persons and brush everything under the carpet as quickly as possible. There are few avenues for the public to engage in meaningful dialogue with the Government over important issues.

 

Question: Did the Cabinet do enough soul seraching and reflection behind closed doors away from public eyes? Were there enough diverse opinions to help them see the issues from all perspectives?

 

Double standards?

 

Contrast Mas Selamat’s escape: “It was an honest mistake. Let’s move on”.

 

With the hoo-ha over James Gomez claiming he had filed his minority certificate when he had not during the 2006 elections. At least 4 days’ worth of campaigning and media headlines were focussed on this minor mistake.

 

Groundhog day of mistakes

 

After the first flood, the Minister said that it was a freak accident and would happen only once every 50 years.

 

Barely a month later, a second flood happened.

 

A better response would have been to be less defensive and stating that the matter would be looked into to find out the real reasons etc, and acknowledging the public’s concern that overbuilding along Orchard Road (Ion, Somerset 313) may have contributed to poorer water drainage.

 

An older example:

Remember “Two is Enough” in the 60’s and 70’s?

By mid 80s, it had become, “have 3 or more if you can afford it”.

Around 20 years for a complete reversal of policies.

 

Round two:

In the early 90’s, the Government limited the number of universities in the Commonwealth where law and medicine degrees would be “recognised” due to oversupply

By 2000, the number of “recognised” universities were increased, and soon after, they were recruting foreign doctors due to short supply.

Around ten years for a u-turn.

 

Not exactly comparing apples and apples here, but surely some lessons could have been learnt about how an “oversupply” could quickly become an undersupply? And in the second scenario, the reversal came only 10 years after the initial policy.

 

Yet, there seemed to be no in-depth inquiry into why the initial policies were made and what led to the reversal and what lessons could be learnt to prevent making similar errors in judgment. This unwillingness to take long hard looks at Government policies has really affected the ability to address many issues.

 

Question: Is the undersupply of HDB flats now another example of this short-sightedness?

 

Fixated on the same solution whether or not it works

 

1. Throwing money at the problem when main issue is not money

 

Since the 80’s, the Government has been encouraging WOMEN to have more babies, with very little success. AWARE has brought up the issue of paternity leave since 1989, but has always been rejected, seemingly right off the bat without serious consideration or research to back it up.

 

The Government’s preferred solution? Throw money at the problem.

 

Round One: Baby bonus and tax breaks for women having 2 or more children below 30 years of age.

 

Results not good. Solution? Throw more money at the problem:

 

Round Two: Baby bonus and tax breaks for all women having 2 or more children

 

Results still not good. Solution? Throw yet more money at the problem:

 

Round Three: Baby bonus and tax breaks for all women having children

 

(Note: Babies must be Singaporean at time of birth, and babies’ mothers must be married to babies’ fathers to enjoy benefits, so single unwed mothers and their babies are discriminated against and disadvantaged even as the Government keeps emphasising that human resources are all we have.)

 

It has been said time and again by various organisations and individuals that financial matters feature to only a minor degree in the decisions to have children, yet the Government seems “deaf to all criticisms” and suggestions yet again. The more pressing concerns such as work-life balance arrangements, including flexi work, quality of life issues, education stress etc, were all not adequately dealt with.

 

2. Not throwing money at the problem when the issue is chronic need of money

 

Contrast this with the issue of the poor who are on Public Assistance. They have to be unable to work, have no assets and little or no family support to be eligible in the first place. Clearly an area where some extra money would be an enormous help.

 

In the debate to increase it by around 10% to $290, in reply to arguments for larger sums by MP Lily Neo, the Minister replied infamously, “Do you want three meals in a restaurant, food court or hawker centre?”

 

3. Throwing money at everybody whether or not they need it

 

Contrast again to the new Grow and Share package (and previous New Singapore Shares etc etc), where each citizen receives at least a few hundred dollars. The top 20% certainly don’t need this handout at all. So why waste money by giving them any money at all? Wouldn’t it have been better to allocate it to the lower income groups?

 

Question: What kind of persons could blithely vote themselves 8 months’ bonus while quibbling for $100 increase in Public Assistance for the poorest of the poor?

 

Rich-poor divide reaching alarming levels

 

There are 100,000 households earning less than $1000 per month. That is households of 4 members (default definition by Government. Could actually have more than 4 family members). And over 800,000 employed persons earn less than $1000 a month. In a country where costs of living are spiralling upwards and even the middle classes are feeling the pinch.

 

Question: Whatever became of social support and social harmony?

 

So, what?

 

So what would more Alternative Parties members in Parliament achieve? At the very least, more debate on issues and and more reflection. Each MP is only allowed 15 minutes max (I think) to speak on an issue. So the more alternative voices, the more points of views can be raised, and more food for thought, not only for the Parliament but the public at large, to generate more informed debate. 

 

Why now?

 

It's also important to vote in Alternative Parties members now, because I believe in the tipping point theory of 30%: you need at least 30% of new people to feel the effect of the change. Which probably explains why the 22% women in Parliament have not been able to make their presence felt.  

 

It is also because as Workers Party has said, they are not able to form the government right now. We need to give Alternative Parties time to grow into the political process and mature. Because I believe there will come a time when the Alternative Parties form the majority in Parliament.

 

To me, it's not a question of if, but when. At the last elections, 66% voted PAP. I do not think it will take that long for the 16% to erode given all that's happened, even with the influx of new citizens and the constant redrawing of electoral boundaries. At some point, the balance will tip, and the "unimaginable" will happen. And honestly, I rather that it happened when Lee Kuan Yew is still around. Whatever criticisms has been levelled at him, at least he is capable, and more than anyone currently in government, I trust him to handle a crisis. Most people predict rifts in the PAP after LKY's demise, so that a swing to Alternative Parties after that is even more likely. Hence, I rather it happen now. (see also http://flaneurose.blogspot.com/2011/03/when-pap-loses-election-it-will-be-time.html   for discussion on why it will be sudden and not gradual).

 

Chasm between rhetoric and reality

 

There are many many more reasons why I will unhesitatingly vote Alternative Parties, given my experience as a volunteer in AWARE and elsewhere, I saw such a huge chasm between policy/rhetoric and what was actually happening on the ground, and the hypocrisy of it all. And now as a mum of a primary school child, I see how flawed the education system is. I hear horror stories of students being kiasu, nasty and perfectionists from a very young age because of the environment. I fear for the future of our country.

 

Learning from history so as not to repeat it

 

Maybe I'm more pessimistic, but with politicians with such a non-reflexive mindset, I am not sure we can make it through many more uncertainties and crises. There are more than enough examples of corporates being taken over or wound up, and historical examples of empires and dynasties falling into decay when their leaders stop listening to the public and insist on doing things their way.

 

 

 

Read more »

Posted in: Random Thoughts and Expressions

Five Reasons to Take a Career Break

For one thing, you don't have to ride a stuffy train and deal with technical difficulties on your way to work. I need to practice more of what I read and the train fault this morning reminds me the reason why I hate commuting to work so much! I can hear the winds of change....hmmmm....

You woke up this morning, washed your face, looked in the mirror and wondered, “How did I get here? Thirty-something, house, car, excellent job, by all measures “successful;” so why do I hate my life?” You’re not alone. I think eventually most people have the “Is this it?” moment in their adult lives where they step back and wonder if there’s more that they’re missing. The answer, most of the time, is “Yes! There is more and you’re missing it!”
- BootsnAll.com

Read more »

Posted in: Entrepreneurship,Nomad Life,Nomad Philosophy

An Academic's Delusion

Most corporate giants and MNCs is about about hiring the brightest Ph.D. academics and systems people on the planet. 
It makes sense right?

However, hiring every postgraduate they could get their hands on, they caused themselves a very big blindspot…

You could not even get an interview if you dropped out of college. So you wouldn't even consider the applications for the likes of say....

Mark Zuckerburg…

Steve Jobs…

Bill Gates?

Interesting and ironic that it is the intellectual individuals who quit school, drop out of college that seems to be the movers and shakers on this earth. This model has been repeated over the course of history over and over again.

It will take a long time for my academic friends to realize that chasing papers are just another of those writings on the wall.

There was a tectonic shift going on in the way we roll online.

 

Facebook was created by college dropouts and hackers. The majority of the world are not postgrads…

 

I advocate that one should pursue life long learning not so much of credentials made of paper but for the learning itself. Learning does not necessarily starts and end in a school or campus. In the end, it is not how far you study that the determines how you would influence the world nor would it indicate how far you would get ahead in life.

 

On a lighter note, wouldn't it be just awesome to 'Hack the Planet', topple the elites and monopoly-ism. I seriously don't mind.

Read more »

Posted in: Nomad Philosophy,Random Thoughts and Expressions

How to Shamelessly Promote Yourself

The internet has spawned many self proclaimed “celebrities” agree?

You can shameless promote yourself like how this couple did,

Not a bad strategy considering how the video which asked for people’s blessing of their marriage (she’s 47 he’s 23) went viral since Sunday.

[Note: PLEASE DON’T unless you are really aching for your 2 minutes of fame. ]

 

Or you can do what I did by marketing yourself and advertising your services and products freely,

 

Not like this,

 

 

Like this,

Disclaimer: I don’t get paid by featuring Anythinglah.com on my blog. I am a member of the site and returning the favour because they feature me on their page. Thank you Raswadi!

J.

 

Read more »

Posted in: Entrepreneurship,Nomad Philosophy,Random Thoughts and Expressions