Why my votes matters - A dialogue with Minister Mentor
-
LinYu, what is the hanyi for democracy. Can tell me. Thanks.Originally posted by LinYu:
-
huh? defintely not linyu, i tinkOriginally posted by king108:LinYu, what is the hanyi for democracy. Can tell me. Thanks. -
wah lan eh robertteh YOU should be the one asking MM Lee the questions, THEN we would have a REAL show!
Btw, i won't be surprised if the whole damn show was an "arranged" thing. I'm not saying it IS, i'm just saying i won't be surprised. -
What an interesting exchange indeed. The journalists fielded some quality questions.
But of course, like most shows on local politics, we never really got the answers to the questions, did we? There was talk about the past and the success and the past and the success and the pastÂ…. (did anyone count the number of times 1950s was mentioned when a question about current politics was posed?). Instead, we took away some interesting insights
Question: Mr Lee, people are afraid of voting against the PAP, soÂ…..
MM Lee: (interrupting) Are you afraid to vote against the PAP?
Darius: No lah, why would I be afraid? After all, if I do not vote for the PAP, my estate will not be upgraded. My Town Council will be last in queue for the funds and like Potong PasirÂ’s residents; IÂ’ll just wait for more than a decade for any housing upgrading. Aiyah, nothing much what.
MM Lee: Do you think that my son needs me to tell him what to do? Do I need to whisper in his ear and tell him how to answer? (Reads: I am not pulling the strings from behind)
Darius: Oh yeah? I guess someone else said this like 15 mins ago huh? “There are things that I can do, and the Prime Minister and Senior Minister know it, that NO ONE else can do. They all know that.”
Question: Why do we need GRCs around?
MM Lee: Because there are innate, visceral biases those are natural...... Because when you run out of curry, you go next door.
Darius: Eh hellow, you forgot that Chinese voters voted for JBJ when he won Anson? And Anson wasnÂ’t exactly your upp-tty class estate to begin with. Heartlanders voted for an Indian. Oh waitÂ…Â… didnÂ’t Rajaratnam also get voted in so many times before the GRC came into place? Or was that because he spoke Hokkien??? HummmphhhÂ….
Question: If voter turnout was 30%, would you see that as people being a political?
MM Lee: No I would see that to mean that people are satisfied and happy with their lives.
Darius: Wait a secÂ…Â…. Apolitical = Happy & satisfied people?
Question: So if only 30% voted, would you still see that as a mandate?
MM Lee: Yes of course I would see it as a mandate.
Darius: Heya Big Daddy, 30% of the people voted and you got in because they love you – Wow, that’s POPULAR MANDATE indeed. You legitimate son.
Question: Mr Lee there isnÂ’t an equal playing field for the opposition, so how canÂ….
MM Lee: (interrupting) Does any government help the opposition to install itself? No!
Darius: Uh-oh, so there is an Unequal playing fieldÂ…..
Question: Taking the scenario that only 30% have voted, what if there is no one voting, would there still be a mandate
MM Lee: Yes! I remind you, that I have not been contested for 3 elections. That is because the opposition know that they cannot displace me.
Darius: You know what is scenario or not? Scenario got you meh?
Well folks, we sure did get our answers -
Shit man, missed the CNA show. Will watch the repeat on Fri night.
Reading all your threads was addictive! It just sprung to mind one thought - "Who do the civil servants vote for?"
I spoke to this SAF regular friend a few weeks back. He stays in Hougang and I asked him who he would vote for. His instinctive reply was PAP, "otherwise he would be traced and penalised" (in other words, no renewal of 2nd contract).
I met up with another SAF regular friend just last week and he also gave the same reply. So from then on, I figured that it's the same for every other govt linked organisation or stat board.
Any one has any comments??
LKY has once said that "he makes no apologies for the state of the opposition parties today" and another fella (forgot who) has mentioned that if there was "strong opposition in parliament, PAP would not have been able to press on forthrightly with many of its policies".
Are we really a great country today? There are lots of Mercedes, BMWs and Lexus cars on our roads today. Most people have nice homes and big houses etc but the truth is EVERYONE IS IN DEBT.
A huge percentage of our population working in the lower rung eg. lorry drivers, mechanics, production operators, cleaners etc, this group earns about $1k - $1.2K on average. With a family to feed, how to survive?
What about fresh grads from Polytechnics (another huge chunk in our population)? Today's poly grads have become the O'Level grads of yesteryears. Their starting pay is about $1.3k - $1.8k on average. After deducting their personal expenses and contributions to parents, very little is left. How to even set up a family of their own in a few years time?
The rich get richer and the poor remain poor, not to mention that expenses rise all the time.
All that news reports on Singapore achieving high GDP growth quarter after quarter makes me wonder.
Any one any comments? -
That man is still very sharp. look how he refute the journalist
I have watched the 1130 pm telecast..
J: Voters are afraid to vote
MM: How do you know?
J: Over a 100 being interviewed say so
MM: Can you name them?
J: Yes, but why should I
MM : Who are the 100?
J: Er.. those interviewed by the ST
MM: Did you asked all of them?
J: No. but I interviewed about 40 of them
MM: Did the 40 of them says they are afraid?
J : Some say they don't care, so say the result is certain, so say they are scared...............
MM: So are you all afraid to vote?
J & other j : No...
J: ........without question till dialogues end.
Here's my opinions.
1) This group of so-called young first time voters are not articulate at all ( except 2, but still not up to par ). Infact, I'm surprised that most of them are journalist, and their command of english is questionable, and they are not steady and not tough standing enough.
2) At somewhere in the beginning, when MM was asked about public being afraid to vote ( something to that effect ). MM actually retorted forcefully to that journalist, where he got his figures, Did he got their names ?, Did he interview 100 interview by himself, He then said 120 in all, but he interviewed 40. Then MM says that his a lawyer, and he more or less is sensitive to this in nature.
WTF, this to me is this Intimidation (not so different from how the opposition parties are subjected to). This group of not so young professional are obviously not lawyers and they are just speaking out of general view of things AKA.. man-in-the-street talk. And this the very thing the focus group are trying to get MM to understand what they are asking further down the programme. In fact, If this were the case, won't opposition better need to be a lawyer. ( I'm not questioning the antics of other opposition who made false and damaging remarks) But this focus group are not the opposition. In fact, If this group are indeed articulate, MM would have a hell to a discussion on his hands. because later, the "getting rid of opposition parties" came up ?
2) When the worst articulate girl asked MM why is the PAP arrogant, MM replied if it was so.. they won't be having this discussion. Which is really moot, because obviously this programme was planned and approved by PAP, for what ever reasons. A programme of such nature does not pop up from nowhere, nor were it a request by this focus group. I mean would everyday people simply walk up to MM and asked " why are you so arrogant". Mind you MM is a very Articulate personality and is a man of power, No one in his right mind (at least in Singapore) would want to answer and risked being stuck in a mud, and then asked himself "what have I got myself into" (see point two... the lawyer thing).
As someone said earlier, not much was answered. At least not the really important once and most are not unexpected. BTW, I am really disappointed with the focus group, at their age in comparisions to western countries, I worried, I mean they are in a very professional line - Journalism for god sake. Suddenly, I'm now certain that we do need more foreign talents. What a damper...
cheers -
Not a bad show really.The panel of youths had the courage ask tough questions. Of course,there was limitation.They deserve praise.
-
This reminds of a meeting years back when LKY was invited to meet the press people, from all over the world, all experienced and many very senior ones, in Hong Kong. After the meeting, he said to them " I had expected sharper knife...." He had also handled a one to one interview with this Sapphire guy from the New York Times, and he handled well.Originally posted by MobyDog:I have watched the 1130 pm telecast..
Here's my opinions.
I am really disappointed with the focus group, at their age in comparisions to western countries, I worried, I mean they are in a very professional line - Journalism for god sake. Suddenly, I'm now certain that we do need more foreign talents. What a damper...
cheers
To journalists, his famous words to me were this "you don't bring your rules to play game on my ground, you want to play games on my ground, follow my rules." I don't think FT stand better chance, especially if they make their money here.
LKY is an old hand in this kind of game. Our young journalists have done well. Not enough, but ok. They just need to learn from this, so that in the next GE, if they have the chance, having the same dialogue with LHL, i expect to see sharper knives.
-
Originally posted by robertteh:
On a personal note, I have lost the respect for the PAP when the GRC came into existence.
...Therefore MM Lee by his own admission has revealed that GRC has been conceived to boost the PAP at that time when PAP was losing support.
Conclusion: MM Lee could not answer the problems created by his past policies which were not working.
He could not answer to the journalists' question on why he needs GRC which was not good for the country but only for PAP's own interest.
Singaporeans will have to rethink the GRC and seek their own answers to all these unanswered questions avoided in this forum....
"THEY' 'justififed that the GRC is for a) 'Economy of scale?" (singapore's town very BIG meh?), 2) ensuring minority will be represented in Parliament? (well, a different minority MP can also equally deliver goods to another different monority group can he? Need to ensure the SAME Monority group to deliver the goods meh?).
Pleasseeee.....prior to the GRC, 'THEY' have the legal right and the moral right to claim victory (in an election) and to rule. But with the GRC, THEY can claim a legal right to rule but NOT THE MORAL RIGHT to rule. -
MM is a big bully.Originally posted by LinYu:That man is still very sharp. look how he refute the journalist
J: Voters are afraid to vote
MM: How do you know?
J: Over a 100 being interviewed say so
MM: Can you name them?
J: Yes, but why should I
MM : Who are the 100?
J: Er.. those interviewed by the ST
MM: Did you asked all of them?
J: No. but I interviewed about 40 of them
MM: Did the 40 of them says they are afraid?
J : Some say they don't care, so say the result is certain, so say they are scared...............
MM: So are you all afraid to vote?
J & other j : No...
J: ........without question till dialogues end.
Q: Why upgrading is not given to opposition wards
MM: because it is not the government's job to support opposition
??? Since when did government = PAP? Government is elected by the people for the people. Is he saying that those staying in opposition ward are not Singaporeans? That opposition MPs are not Singapore's MP???
They should question him further whether does that mean those staying in Opposition ward, including opposition MP don't need to pay tax. -
The local reporters are not impressive, dare not rebut/ question further.
Why didn't use foreign reporters from BBC, CNN etc since we are so fond of FT? -
mm asked that fella if that fella think he should step down. you think that fella dare say YES?
-
Without MM, we will die.. -
It's psychological warfare....Originally posted by LinYu:That man is still very sharp. look how he refute the journalist
J: Voters are afraid to vote
MM: How do you know?
J: Over a 100 being interviewed say so
MM: Can you name them?
J: Yes, but why should I
MM : Who are the 100?
J: Er.. those interviewed by the ST
MM: Did you asked all of them?
J: No. but I interviewed about 40 of them
MM: Did the 40 of them says they are afraid?
J : Some say they don't care, so say the result is certain, so say they are scared...............
MM: So are you all afraid to vote?
J & other j : No...
J: ........without question till dialogues end. -
Does it feel like a brainwash/PR session for the youngsters just before election? -
i tink that today journalist very talkative, the pretty girl Lee ching wren sitting in front. She dont give other ppl a chance to post question. Some of them are just to make up the numbers nia. To me the show is MM lee with 3-4 person, not 10
-
Many more questions were not covered. 1 big burning question among singaporeans i believe is the family related appointments. Son PM and Minister of Finance, wife CEO of Temasek, DAD chairman of GIC, PM vice chairman of GIC, other son runs SingTel. All juicy appointments in family control. Where are the check and balances here exactly? Everyone else can hold the lower level portfolios in the government. Somebody should have asked him all this on TV? would have loved to see what he has to say.
-
he will wink and the host will say "now lets stop for a commerical break."Originally posted by gill_hfc:Many more questions were not covered. 1 big burning question among singaporeans i believe is the family related appointments. Son PM and Minister of Finance, wife CEO of Temasek, DAD chairman of GIC, PM vice chairman of GIC, other son runs SingTel. All juicy appointments in family control. Where are the check and balances here exactly? Everyone else can hold the lower level portfolios in the government. Somebody should have asked him all this on TV? would have loved to see what he has to say. -
he claim that many of his canididates are of Minister calibres then how come up till now we can't find ourself a Minister of Finance?
-
i think lets face it.. no one in PAP or any single party govt is going to make concessions by making level playing field for the opposition..
i think all the more it falls on us, the voters, to make that field more equal. -
My observation is that between MMLee and those in the forum, their thoughts are generations apart! What MM Lee emphasied was jobs, racial harmony,opportunities and survival. What those youngsters wanted are freedom, fairness, equal opportunity............Looks like PAP may sail into trouble water without deeper understanding of this group of highly educated, young and upcoming Singaporeans!
-
i would think that there would have been some OB markers that has been set and also referring to all the case histories of people accusing him of nepotism and their eventual conseuquences.. libel yadda yadda.. and he also emphasized the point that he was trained as a lawyer.. so that's like saying:"u better watch what u say.. or i can have u sued.."Originally posted by gill_hfc:Many more questions were not covered. 1 big burning question among singaporeans i believe is the family related appointments. Son PM and Minister of Finance, wife CEO of Temasek, DAD chairman of GIC, PM vice chairman of GIC, other son runs SingTel. All juicy appointments in family control. Where are the check and balances here exactly? Everyone else can hold the lower level portfolios in the government. Somebody should have asked him all this on TV? would have loved to see what he has to say.
the early example was hw he flexed his "muscle" against the guy who said pple being fearful to vote against PAP.. -
the fact is.. no one can deny this huge databank and wealth of experiences he has.. i guess he still is able to make himself relevant.. but he keeps harping on the old days when there were riots and racial tension..Originally posted by Heartlander:My observation is that between MMLee and those in the forum, their thoughts are generations apart! What MM Lee emphasied was jobs, racial harmony,opportunities and survival. What those youngsters wanted are freedom, fairness, equal opportunity............Looks like PAP may sail into trouble water without deeper understanding of this group of highly educated, young and upcoming Singaporeans!
one point he made which disturbs is how he think we (the young) want to see a fight in parliament just for the sake of it! he is completely missing the point.. -
tink kinda agree with you.Originally posted by Heartlander:My observation is that between MMLee and those in the forum, their thoughts are generations apart! What MM Lee emphasied was jobs, racial harmony,opportunities and survival. What those youngsters wanted are freedom, fairness, equal opportunity............Looks like PAP may sail into trouble water without deeper understanding of this group of highly educated, young and upcoming Singaporeans! -
i watched the interview with great interest, since this year would be my first time voting at the GE.
did anyone notice how MM Lee didn't answer about 50% of the questions posted? he simply strayed off into another topic altogether.
AND IT DIDN'T HELP THAT THE GIRL IN THE CENTRE KEPT HOGGING THE LIMELIGHT AND ASKING IRRELEVANT QUESTIONS!
at the same time, viewers got a good sense of how much fight he still has in him. i must say, he's still as tough as ever. it's not going to be any easier for the opposition now than it was before, even though the number of SMCs have increased from 2001.
also, the interview group consisted of mostly journalists. while they put in a commendable effort to ask rather controversial questions, i would feel that the group lacked background information to sufficiently counter MM Lee's answers.
perhaps professionals from other industries should be included to provide greater depth to the interview e.g. seasoned political commentators, lawyers, professionals who had undergone an education in political science etc.