Skip to main content

Empowered Ignorance? From SMRT to Hougang


Only u HG 不离不弃后港情2

“Consensus among the ignorant is still ignorance.” – George Elliott

We have seen the result of an ignorant CEO at SMRT.  As a CEO, she was empowered to carry out the job of first world metro system.  But at the end we need a public inquiry on MRT breakdowns as we have over trusted and empowered her to do a good job. This is really a heavy price for Singapore!

Do we still need another PAP ignorant MP in the Parliament? It will not do any good for Singapore as the consensus among the PAP ignorant MPs is still ignorance about the people, especially the lower income people and Hougang residents.

Can ’I am my own man’ raise national issues?

The Hougang PAP candidate for the by-election is from NTUC.  Has he raised the issue of lower income workers? Besides providing free medical, legal and food to Hougang residents, can he as “I am my own man’ voice out the national issue of lower income workers, housing, education or other issues. Perhaps, there is already a consensus for the PAP ministers and MPs to voice out in one same message – productivity before wages increase.  Can he go beyond the party line?

Hougang, as a typical Singapore heartland, does have lower income workers and the braved one, who requests for a court hearing on by-election, is also a lower income worker as stated in her statement.  Same as Workers’ Party, she wants to have an early by-election so that the new MP can take care of her needs – the typical need of lower income families.  And the PAP, PM and the PAP candidate for Hougang are quite ignorance about her basic need.   

No wonder the PAP only wants to talk about local issues at the by-election.  They have already reached consensus and group think about low income workers, public transport, housing, education and other national issues.

Assistance is not teaching fish catching

The PAP candidate Desmond Choo is his own words:

[One thing I will champion in Hougang: Assistance schemes, such as for health, education, transport and job matching; and a free legal clinic'I want the residents to know that I am my own man, that I have my own vision for Hougang, that I've...executed my plans, and there's more that I can do. So, having party bigwigs here or not is not going to distract me from how I want to run my campaign in Hougang.' (ST 11 May 12)]
Health, education, transport and jobs are national issues.  Without the support of party bigwigs, can you cut Upper Serangoon Road into two, build another school or hospital, or create more jobs? This is why Choo said he could only provide assistances.  And assistance is not teaching people how to fish.

Different empowerment (and different result) of SMRT and Hougang

From SMRT to Hougang, we see the difference of empowerment. Only in Hougang, you are given a chance (reluctantly) to empower your new MP.  While for SMRT, the CEO is appointed and surely there is no reminder of pubic duty and responsibility.  So, the CEO only looks at profit, money and productivity.

Whoever wins the by-election in Hougang is challenged and reminded by his duty to serve the Hougang residents and as a wider responsibility in the Parliament of Singapore. It is suggested that all key appointments of public infrastructure and organisations must go through a public duty and responsibility test.  Otherwise, they will think that they are joining a profit making, business oriented private company.    

Only you, the Hougang voters stand tall to remind the government in the past 20 years on the duty of government, public service and responsibility.  Now, there is a chance to empower your representative again, what are you waiting for, hesitating for? 

Comments

  1. The COI has thus far shown up our world class MRT transport system. From an operator that focus on profits and retailing and neglects engineering and maintenance to a regulator that is clueless and generally going motion of inspection and audit. It was probably fortunate that the system was falling apart and did not crash. Imagine train derailment or collision

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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...