S’poreans should vote for new party if PAP is no longer capable

[jdelpiero]

SINGAPORE: Singaporeans should support a new political party if the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) is no longer the best vehicle to take the country forward, said Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo.

Mr Yeo was speaking to students at a dialogue session at the Singapore Polytechnic on Friday.

They discussed issues such as inducting talent into politics and how the ruling party aims to win the votes of younger Singaporeans.

On that, Mr Yeo said the people must be clear about what they hope to see in the future, before they decide on which party to support.

The foreign minister was also asked if the PAP is confident of winning back the opposition—held ward of Hougang in the next election.

Mr Yeo answered: "We should be quietly confident, but never take the voters for granted, and to work hard to serve them.

"The PAP must always have that spirit to want to serve the people of Hougang, believing that we can do better for them if we are in charge. That must always be our spirit, but of course, it’s for the people there to decide."


— CNA/so

[jdelpiero]

yeah.. remind us again in election year Mr Yeo.

[kazuki]

I saw this piece of article in the yahoo news not long ago too.
Actually i was quite surprised that he said that. He sure the "great uncles" in the cabinet isnt going to scold him???:salute:

[y1ch]

shocking huh. never expect someone to stand out like that.

but maybe he is making some sense there.

bringing citizens forward~

[jdelpiero]

*speculation*
erm.. he probably wouldn't say that unless he was given the authority or asked to.

[cyc]

*speculation*
erm.. he probably wouldn't say that unless he was given the authority or asked to.

I agree :D

I dunno if the PAP shld be given credit for this tho'

Singapore has fewer policemen per 100,000 people but lower crime rate than some cities


SINGAPORE: Cities like Hong Kong and New York have more police officers per 100,000 people of its population compared to Singapore.

Yet the Republic fared better when it comes to keeping crime rate down last year, said Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng at a community event.

And that's because Singaporeans have played their part to deter criminals.

Speaking to some 300 Raffles Junior College students and grassroots leaders on Sunday, Mr Wong urged the community to be proactive in fighting crime.

Mr Wong, who is also an MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, said: "We sometimes give opportunity for criminals to commit a crime....A lot of these crimes, if you see in the data, are opportunistic crimes. We need the cooperation of citizens and since we cannot put police officers around every block and patrol the street, we need you to take an active part in it."

In 2007, Singapore has 239 police officers per 100,000 people. In Hong Kong, the ratio was 393 to 100,000 and in New York 430 per 100,000.

Yet, Singapore's crime rate was the lowest among the three cities, at 696 cases per 100,000 population. For Hong Kong, it was 1,167 cases, while for New York, it was 2,432.

But Singaporeans should not rest on their laurels, said Mr Wong.

Certainly not for students present at Sunday's event. They fanned out to over 2,000 households in Bishan estate to tell residents how to keep crime at bay.

- CNA/ir

[Leslie]

shocking huh. never expect someone to stand out like that.

but maybe he is making some sense there.

bringing citizens forward~
But ... what's so shocking?

To my knowledge, the PAP has not said that they were in theory the only game in town, merely that they were in practice the only viable party to take the country forward. What George Yeo has said appears nothing more than common sense and/or a re-statement of the obvious.

Not trying to knock George Yeo, or the PAP, but I really don't see what's the groundbreaking news here.

[y1ch]

to me it is not shocking but was thinking it must be shocking to singaporeans.

i feel that many singaporeans always self-censor in order not to get into trouble with the government. i personally felt that citizens need to be taken care of first, esp the middle income family and below.

[Defiler]

We can the vote for another party??? :o

Erh... Can do that meh? :question:

I so de stopid. Glad tat our great leaders tell me. :beg: They so nice wan. They definitely worth my tax $$. :thumbsup:



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense. This word should be struck out from the dictionary. It is so damn bloody rare these days.

[Leslie]

to me it is not shocking but was thinking it must be shocking to singaporeans.
Well, perhaps it's safer not to assume that all of us are incapable of independent thought, although I must say that I can understand how one might come to that conclusion, given the intelligence (or lack thereof) of what could appear to be an inordinate number of Singaporeans.

i feel that many singaporeans always self-censor in order not to get into trouble with the government.
Could be. Likely, even.

But, that's not really got anything to do with whether we understand that technically, we have the power to give our vote to a party other than the PAP.

i personally felt that citizens need to be taken care of first, esp the middle income family and below.
Sure.

But, that's not really got anything to do with whether we understand that technically, we have the power to give our vote to a party other than the PAP.

[Lolicon2000]

We could, but we probably won't.

Fear of the unknown and things like that.

Is there not a saying of better to have an enemy you know of instead of an enemy you don't? :D

[Leslie]

We could, but we probably won't.
Which is presumably why George Yeo can so confidently say what he's said :p

I mean, it (the statement) costs the PAP nothing. It's the technical truth, is supported by the democratic system currently in place, it contributes to the perception that the PAP is fair, plus the likelihood of the electorate voting conservatively (given as you say the fear of the unknown, better the devil one knows, plus the current state of the opposition and the electorate's general lack of political risk-taking appetite).

So can say lah, small risk nia. For all the noise that young people make, it's a good bet the majority of them still know which side their bread is buttered on.

[kazuki]

Problem is all

"You should vote differently, but problem is YOU DARE or not..."[-X

[Anomaly]

Is there really a viable choice? The opposition hasn't shown themselves to be better than the PAP. Sure, we pay and pay but you think things will be better with the opposition in charge? Humans are creatures of habit, they like to do same thing cos they don't like changes if nothing drastic happens.

[y1ch]

by saying that, it shows a good side of PAP, although most ppl know PAP is good, but the statement reinforces they r still capable of winning. strategy. :D