Skip to main content

IPPT70%不及格 PAP只剩30%战斗力


【任何一项政策,如果大多数的人不及格,不合格,就像体能测验,公积金最低存款那样,而这些政策又累积好多年不改变,这到底意味着什么?推而广之,细想一下,这就是行动党政府的一党独大,不透明,不以大多数人利益为前提的办事作风。】


军人体能测验推行了这么多年,到现在竟然有70%的人不及格。这到底是国人体能上的问题,还是行动党政府的政策出了问题。为了弥补这个漏洞,新的体能测验标准就不得不出炉了。

从体能测验的没有与时并进,再联想到行动党的其他政策,我们就更加容易明白,了解,为何行动党的政治战斗力只剩下30%。简单的举出几个例子:

*公积金最低存款:大多数会员到了55岁,还是无法达标。既然达不到标,又如何养老?

*贫富差距无法改善,低收入人士的薪金,10几年没有调整。行动党在照顾落势群体上,可以说是不及格。

*医院床位和医生人数不足,迟迟不解决。医药保险在无可逃避的情形下,只好推出应付人民的不满。


体能测验为何如此多人不及格

原因可能很多,但是归纳起来可以有三点:
1.国民服役人员的体质,越来越差,比起建国一代来得差。
2.测验标准根本就有问题,只是一直没有加以改进。国防部在宣布新的三项体能测验时,就指出这点。问题是为何延迟到今天,才来改变。
3.体质差,测验指标也不对。两者加在一起,不及格的人竟然高达70%

如果以即将淘汰的体能测验作为标准,武装部队70%的军人在体能上不合格,这也意味着武装部队的战斗力只剩30%。如果要打持久战,在体能上,也只有30%军人能够耐得了。

所以,无论在公在私,体能测验的标准是一定要改变的。30%及格率,实在是太难看了。新的体能测验标准,更加接近现实,务实的体能要求,务实的标准,结果当然就是要突破50%的及格率。

2011年大选过后,行动党政府一直在做补丁的工作。他们在体能上,在政策上的改变,就犹如这次国防部大动作修改军人体能测验标准一样,就是希望把行动党的战斗力提升上来。如果一直处在30%的战斗力,即使有优良的军备,政府的所有资源协助,行政法令的垄断控制,行动党还是无法守住根据地。没有真的和假的动作,行动党面临失守选区,失手阵地的机会很高。

但是,通过修改标准,没有改进体能,以虚幻方式取得及格,对于选民来说,是否是真的应该给行动党及格?选民是否能够看清楚,行动党的虚幻造势,而不再被行动党蒙骗过关。

行动党端出的牛肉,虚的实的都有。建国一代的红包,医药福利,限制外来劳工人数,增加新组屋数目,补贴公共巴士数目,限制校友小一报名,全国对话,行动党领袖网上社交活动等等,的确让行动党的战斗力增加不少。选民如何分清楚,看明白,虚虚实实,又让行动党过关,再次错失真改变的机会。

即使行动党端出的牛肉再多,有几个基本点,行动党是无法妥协,不会让步的。第一个就是透明度。行动党不相信人民有判断力,因此,治国不需要向人民详细交代。行动党说,人民要相信公积金,储备的多少,我们有AAA的评级,审计总长的背书,如果进一步透露更多详情,反而对我们的外汇储备政策造成伤害。因此,政府透露多少,人民就要相信多少。

第二个就是经济挂帅。搞经济,行动党认为自己是内行人。在新加坡它认第二,没有敢认第一。而行动党50年来的经济政策,不可能为了迁就选民,而做出大改变。行动党的务实,不会因为有人没钱看病,55岁过后,没钱养老,有人没有房子住,而手软,心疼。我们只要看看,公积金最低存款,即使多数人无法达标,行动党还是要一直不断的增加最低存款数目。

第三个就是战将问题。行动党提了几十年的接班人问题,一直都没有办法解决。现在的问题,不只是青黄不接,素质上,献身精神也有问题。候选人依然是来自政府部门奖学金得主的小圈圈。从目前端出来的可能候选人牛肉看来,也不见得有何特出之处。年轻和资深部长,处处让人担心,害怕他们再次说错话。虽然,错话对反对党有利,但是,对于新加坡人来说,看到他们领取高薪,又说错话,心里真不是滋味。因此,还是希望他们少说错话。

体能测验虽然只是国家社会的一部分。但是,从这个点,我们把它放大,就可以知道行动党政府是如何治国的。国防部是财政预算开支最大的部门,它连军人的体能都搞到不及格,不是30%而是70%不及格。因此,我们绝对有理由相信,行动党不及格的地方,何止体能一项,看看公积金,医药政策,社会政策,房屋,交通甚至经济政策,都出现瓶颈和令人不满的地方。


行动党当然明白自己的战斗力如何。它一方面呼吁国人注意身体健康,多做运动,自己也锻炼体能。另一方面,它也在修改标准,把不能达标的项目,说成达标,还找人背书,期待在大选时胜出。选民可要分辨清楚,这里的虚虚实实,不要再上当了。多看看不同的意见,多听听反对党的声音,就能分出虚实来。

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...