Skip to main content

Appointed MPs are products of lack of drive and confidence?





When we have a system of appointing and nominating members of parliament in an orderly planned and non-competition way, we really have no right and moral authority to comment on whether our students are really lack of drive and confidence.      


Even it is true, it is just a reflection of the reality in Singapore.


In order to attract foreigner investors, we have to show them we have a stable government that is based on a planned and arranged political system.  Hence, we have to put up this artificial show to convince foreigners.  But is this a true picture of today’s Singapore?


Are these appointed and nominated MPs politicians?  It seems they are not.  Does parliament need a team of ‘feedback’ MPs to enrich the debate?   It seems they are raising their own interest in the parliament.


Degree quality and critical mass


The Education Minister’s concern is like 自打嘴巴 – slapping own face. Before criticising students, the minister must know that our students are the products of our education system and our society.  Our system only wants to train obedient students and upon graduation, their roles are to serve foreigners, elites, and the rich.   In return, they are awarded with job security and protection.  


This is our success model of the past and the PAP wants to continue with this practice.  They also want to control this protected group of students, i.e. limiting the numbers of university places and local graduates.   Hence, it is not surprising that this privileged group of undergraduates would raise question like:


“Would the increase in university intake and the coming fourth university dilute the quality of a degree? “ (Quality seems to refer to monetary value).
To be fair to the Education Minister Heng Swee Keat, his answer is at least partly correct. Mr Heng assured the students that their degree would not be diluted and a degree's worth "goes beyond economic value". 
The aim in expanding the tertiary education sector is to ensure there is a "critical mass", which is "critical to everything we do", explained the minister. "A bigger talent pool attracts more jobs to Singapore," he added. (http://www.todayonline.com/Hotnews/EDC120201-0000075/Build-deep-skills-to-attract-employers--Education-Minister)


His answer is partly incorrect as he seems to suggest the government still wants to control the number of Singaporean graduates to a limited “critical mass”.  Anything outside the critical mass is not planned and is not welcome.


Who is to define the critical mass? Who should be in the critical mass?  Critical mass is a change factor and sometimes cannot be defined in advance.


Self-interest can turn into drive and confidence


No matter how obedient a student can be, when comes to self-interest, in the new political environment, they will want to voice out. We have seen the residents of Rochor and Woodlands expressing their disagreement in a big way.  Their actions have forced government to re-think the way they handle the matters.  Certainly, the NMPs cannot help to get the feedback for the government.  I wonder whether the ‘critical mass’ can help in one way or another.


People now dare to voice out their unhappiness. This is a significant breakthrough as Singaporeans are now more confidence, with drive and eager to voice out.  Can NMPs help residents in an effective way to bring their concerns to the authority?


Comfort zone and competitive environment


“The Education Minister is concerned about the number of employers who have said that Singaporean students lack drive and the confidence to venture out of their comfort zone.
These are the very qualities that chief executives and entrepreneurs singled out to him as being essential to succeed in the competitive global playing field.” http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_761689.html


When you compare the above statements with the NMP scheme, you will see the double standard in the handling of NMPs and commenting on students in Singapore. Why some people don’t have to venture out their comfort zone, compete in an election and can easily get into the parliament?  By the same analogy, Singapore students will expect to get jobs with no contest, but planned and arranged by the government.  Why is the need to be drive and confidence?


Whether NMPs or students, for Singapore to move upwards, there is a need to go beyond drive, hungry and confidence.  We are also lack of innovation and creativity.  There are still rooms for improvement......

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 ...

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...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...