Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Victor68

Do we need opposition party in parliament

Recommended Posts

LHL says no need for opposition since most of the population supports the PAP and they have put in Non-Constituency MP in today's ST report

http://www.straitstimes.com/politics/not-wise-to-purposely-let-the-opposition-grow-bigger-says-pm

 

Are these Non-Constituency MP what people want other than those participated in the election and how have they performed? Is a one party that has been debated over the years still what people want? Is the idea of not to "purposely" let the opposition grow bigger being the same as making sure they don't grow? How are we going to get another voice in the parliament?

 

If you have most of the resolutions passed in parliament with almost 100% yes, we need to review why then some of these decisions failed. All that have voted yes are not thinking enough or simply complying. Mr Lee also stressed the importance of thinking boldly, and long-term yesterday. The thinking must start from the top not bottom up.

 

Any thoughts?

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said it's not wise to purposely let the opposition grow, he did not say there is no need to have opposition.

  • Praise 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason to vote them out so that there will be more voices and ideas to move the country forward. How can a nation move forward if there is no diversification in ideas? All yes men is as good as putting all the eggs in one basket.

This is a sign of being too complacent already.

  • Praise 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Citing the Non-Constituency MP scheme, which will ensure at least 12 opposition MPs after the next election, he said that with the right 12 people, "they will be able to hold the Government to account... and then in the next election, they will win more".

 

 

See how controlled the situation is? Give 12 seats for the opposition and 12 it is, no more no less. [laugh] 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said it's not wise to purposely let the opposition grow, he did not say there is no need to have opposition.

 

Yes, that's what he said and I agree with it.

 

But he is being disingenuous - what people are asking for is a level playing field and not for the PAP to roll over and let the opposition win.

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason to vote them out so that there will be more voices and ideas to move the country forward. How can a nation move forward if there is no diversification in ideas? All yes men is as good as putting all the eggs in one basket.

This is a sign of being too complacent already.

Actually nations can move forward and can move forward fastest if there is no or not too much diversification in views.

 

Whereas if you have a proliferation of Indian chiefs, nothing can or will happen.

 

The problem is when father want to pass to son and ended up not the best man leading that there’s a problem

  • Praise 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually nations can move forward and can move forward fastest if there is no or not too much diversification in views.

 

Whereas if you have a proliferation of Indian chiefs, nothing can or will happen.

 

The problem is when father want to pass to son and ended up not the best man leading that thereâs a problem

Diversity in views can give the best solutions to problems, because different perspectives are able to see different problems.

I'm not just saying having different views for the sake of it. Synergy gives better solutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LHL says no need for opposition since most of the population supports the PAP and they have put in Non-Constituency MP in today's ST report

http://www.straitstimes.com/politics/not-wise-to-purposely-let-the-opposition-grow-bigger-says-pm

 

Are these Non-Constituency MP what people want other than those participated in the election and how have they performed? Is a one party that has been debated over the years still what people want? Is the idea of not to "purposely" let the opposition grow bigger being the same as making sure they don't grow? How are we going to get another voice in the parliament?

 

If you have most of the resolutions passed in parliament with almost 100% yes, we need to review why then some of these decisions failed. All that have voted yes are not thinking enough or simply complying. Mr Lee also stressed the importance of thinking boldly, and long-term yesterday. The thinking must start from the top not bottom up.

 

Any thoughts?

He getting motivated by his big brother Xi Jin Ping. Next he will say he should continue as a PM for the foreseeable future as there is no one good enough to take over from him.

  • Praise 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He also say when lky was in opposition, it was different... Cos today opposition is not lky.

 

 

Knn la .. Today pap is not yesterday pap. And the son is nothing like the father la.

 

And the ruling govt of the past is not like today's govt.. even the colonial Brits had more checks and balances than today's pap.

 

It's sickeningly clear that change is needed, but it needs to start from the top.

  • Praise 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the first place using the word "opposition party" is inadequate. It should simply be ruling party vs non ruling party. There is no need to call a non rulling party as opposition, what did they oppose? Did they oppose to eveything? If in any instance a non ruling party points out an inefficiency in the system, is that not a constructive suggestion rather than opposing ?

The days of a opposition party opposing practically to evrything for the sack of opposing is over. The quality of opposition have improved over time while they are not strong and capable enough to run a governemnt yet. Time to rethink how we should call the "oppposition".

Edited by Ct3833
  • Praise 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im all for reduced opposition if Tharman or someone more moderate and competent is made PM.

 

Seriously.

  • Praise 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People has been saying, and will always be saying, the present is not good enough.  In the past, people also say the government no good, but look at where we are today.  In the years after lky stepped down, people also said Singapore is doomed with the new batch of leaders, but Singapore survived and done pretty well, steering clear of recession and enjoyed consistent growth, low inflation rate (by world standard) and a high gdp, low unemployment etc.  Trust me, years later people will say the future batch of leaders is not good while the past (the current one) is good.  People are forever discontented and complaining no matter how fortunate they are.

  • Praise 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People has been saying, and will always be saying, the present is not good enough.  In the past, people also say the government no good, but look at where we are today.  In the years after lky stepped down, people also said Singapore is doomed with the new batch of leaders, but Singapore survived and done pretty well, steering clear of recession and enjoyed consistent growth, low inflation rate (by world standard) and a high gdp, low unemployment etc.  Trust me, years later people will say the future batch of leaders is not good while the past (the current one) is good.  People are forever discontented and complaining no matter how fortunate they are.

 

Ok pretty clear where you stand... [:p]

 

wait pple accuse you of group-think... [laugh]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Diversity in views can give the best solutions to problems, because different perspectives are able to see different problems.

I'm not just saying having different views for the sake of it. Synergy gives better solutions.

In governing, it often lead to compromised solutions at best, and splitting the baby solutions, at worst. Actually no, paralysis at worst. US guns situation for example.

 

Li shengwu was right, LKY tried to create the best system, marrying dictatorship with integrity, rule of law, and meritocracy. But he couldn’t resist passing it to his son.

 

China also tried, but it just showed that a strong enough man can tear up the rule book and you can’t ride the tiger.

 

So maybe we are back to democracy, but not because it is the best system but just least likely to blow up in the long run.

  • Praise 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok pretty clear where you stand... [:p]

 

wait pple accuse you of group-think... [laugh]

Actually, I am all for having an opposing voice, truth be told. but it has to be backed by rationale and not oppose for the sake of it.
  • Praise 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LHL says no need for opposition since most of the population supports the PAP and they have put in Non-Constituency MP in today's ST report

http://www.straitstimes.com/politics/not-wise-to-purposely-let-the-opposition-grow-bigger-says-pm

 

Are these Non-Constituency MP what people want other than those participated in the election and how have they performed? Is a one party that has been debated over the years still what people want? Is the idea of not to "purposely" let the opposition grow bigger being the same as making sure they don't grow? How are we going to get another voice in the parliament?

 

If you have most of the resolutions passed in parliament with almost 100% yes, we need to review why then some of these decisions failed. All that have voted yes are not thinking enough or simply complying. Mr Lee also stressed the importance of thinking boldly, and long-term yesterday. The thinking must start from the top not bottom up.

 

Any thoughts?

 

bro, cannot misrepresent what LHL said... he didnt say no need for opposition... sekali you kena caught :XD: 

 

anyway LHL dealt a low blow to the current opposition... 

 

He noted that in 1955, the PAP won just three of the 25 elected seats in the Legislative Assembly. One of the three elected was Mr Lee Kuan Yew. "I think the colonial government was fully held to account. Today, they don't have such a person in the opposition."

 

Im all for reduced opposition if Tharman or someone more moderate and competent is made PM.

 

Seriously.

 

be careful ah, people may whack you :XD:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People has been saying, and will always be saying, the present is not good enough.  In the past, people also say the government no good, but look at where we are today.  In the years after lky stepped down, people also said Singapore is doomed with the new batch of leaders, but Singapore survived and done pretty well, steering clear of recession and enjoyed consistent growth, low inflation rate (by world standard) and a high gdp, low unemployment etc.  Trust me, years later people will say the future batch of leaders is not good while the past (the current one) is good.  People are forever discontented and complaining no matter how fortunate they are.

criticism is good for growth and we must agree we didnt perform a perfect job, correct? so, if there are simply no alternative voices and things arent going smoothly, don't we want to review if we are in the right track? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said it's not wise to purposely let the opposition grow, he did not say there is no need to have opposition.

 

how can opposition grow by chance, i would like him to explain how he can achieve that.

↡ Advertisement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×