Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Interesting Straits Times Article on Elections

  1. #1
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Interesting Straits Times Article on Elections

    As quoted, emphasis added:
    Quote Originally Posted by ST 17/05
    2 different views from 3 MPs in opposition;
    Low Thia Khiang says new election rules generally positive but the two others say more hurdles in the way

    NEW changes to election rules drew different responses from opposition MPs yesterday, with two saying they would result in further obstacles for the opposition, and a third saying he was not so pessimistic.

    Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng yesterday announced a slew of measures designed to 'simplify' the procedures for candidates who want to stand for General Elections.

    Among these was a new Section 29 of the Parliamentary Elections Act, which will require the candidate to present his proposer, seconder and at least four of his assentors in person at a nomination centre on Nomination Day.

    Currently, just their signatures on the nomination papers would do.

    Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong and Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia objected to this new requirement, arguing that it will deter Singaporeans from lending their names to support opposition candidates.

    Fellow opposition MP Low Thia Khiang, however, was more sanguine. He thought the changes to the Act, which cover the nomination process, reporting of election expenses and other areas, were generally 'positive'.

    As for the requirement for supporters to be physically present, Mr Low said: 'I think there are enough courageous Singaporean voters who will be prepared to go to a nomination centre with opposition candidates, though I understand there will be some hesitation, which is a fact.'

    In a parliamentary democracy, exercising one's right is 'not the sole business' of opposition parties, he said pointedly. 'I think the voters play a part. So I would expect them to do their part. If they're not prepared to even go with us to the nomination centre, then you don't get to vote. I'm sorry.'

    He did, however, question the need to 'inconvenience' volunteers to require them to be physically present on Nomination Day, which is not a public holiday.

    The new requirement is not expected to make much difference to People's Action Party candidates, who usually bring their proposer and seconder along on Nomination Day, as revealed by Mr Wong yesterday.

    In contrast, it will have an impact on the opposition, said Mr Chiam, accusing the Government of making a change that is 'purely political'.

    He said: 'When an opposition party wishes to field a candidate in a constituency where there are no party members there, the party will have to look for non-party members to sign the nomination form.'

    Those people may be 'total strangers' to the party, he added. 'Especially for a new or unknown candidate, he usually finds it difficult to persuade six strangers to sign his nomination form because in Singapore, even up till today, the element of fear still exists... People are afraid to be seen to be helping the opposition.'

    Rising to address their comments, Mr Wong said that Mr Low displayed a 'sensible and mature approach'.

    Dismissing the other two MPs' concerns, Mr Wong quipped: 'But if there are indeed difficulties in finding assentors who would turn up, please let me know, Mr Chia, and I will try to persuade my *** colleague... in that constituency... to find a supporter for him so that they will be present.

    'So I don't see an obstacle in this one.'

    The reason for the new requirement, said the minister, was to 'ensure that there is no fraud' where the candidate may forge an elector's signature.

    Quote Originally Posted by ST 19/05 - Leong Sze Hian
    I REFER to the articles, 'Election process simplified' and '2 different views from 3 MPs in opposition' (ST, May 17).

    The Home Affairs Minister said that the main concern of the amendment was to prevent fraud.

    He told the House that a People's Action Party supporter had found his name on an opposition candidate's paper - and his signature forged on it - during one election, even though he had not given approval.

    I am somewhat puzzled by this revelation, and would like to ask whether there was an investigation into this instance of election fraud.

    Why is it that the perpetrators of this election fraud were not charged or taken to task?

    As I understand that there has been no instance of election fraud in Singapore for the last 40 years, is it not pertinent for this incident to be disclosed earlier? Why are Singaporeans told only now?

    As the fraud was allegedly committed by the opposition on a ruling-party supporter, the opposition members may be wondering why they were let off.

    Why was the obvious not done, which is to gain political mileage in the election by exposing the opposition party concerned?

    Quote Originally Posted by ST 21/05 - Lee Seng Lup Head Elections Department
    I REFER to Mr Leong Sze Hian's letter, 'Election fraud: Why wasn't action taken?' (ST, May 19).

    What the Home Affairs Minister said in the House was that 'he had heard a story told by his colleague where in one election, one of the *** supporters turned up at the nomination centre and saw his name on the opposition candidate's list of assentors'. He was told of this story only recently.

    The Elections Department is unaware of any occurrence of such fraud and did not receive any such complaint in past elections. If the incident had been reported to the Elections Department at the time when it was said to have taken place, we would have investigated the matter then.

    There is no way we can verify the facts now as the nomination papers and all related documents have been destroyed, as required by law at the end of six months after every election.

    The recent amendment to the Parliamentary Elections Act requiring the proposer, seconder and at least four assentors of every candidate or group of candidates to be present at the nomination for verification of their intent, will eliminate the possibility of such an election fraud occurring in future.


    What I wonder is how the Elections Dept Head can speak for Mr Wong Kan Seng at paragraph 2....


  2. #2

    Lightbulb

    i do not think the head of elections dept was speaking for wong kan seng('wks'). what wks said in the house was widely reported over tv and papers. however, the last short sentence in the said paragraph is something which i am not sure that wks said in the house.

  3. #3
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    That is precisely what I am referring to.
    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    i do not think the head of elections dept was speaking for wong kan seng('wks'). what wks said in the house was widely reported over tv and papers. however, the last short sentence in the said paragraph is something which i am not sure that wks said in the house.

  4. #4

    Lightbulb

    looks like such subject matter is not high on CS's interests.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Cons digger.
    Posts
    3,924

    Default

    it might not be high on interest value.. but we're threading on dangerous waters posting our comments. Say something wrong without backing/truth/research into it and you'll lend yourself in hot soup.

    Politics never interest much of the common man anyway

  6. #6
    Senior Member glennyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,587

    Default

    i like politics... but singapore one.. no action la.... not like taiwan... hahahaha..

    when the price-cut, gst raise all these things... all will attract csers attention.. esp food and bus fare raise..

  7. #7
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    Well, no opinions never mind, the aim was just to create awareness so that people will read, especially ALL three articles together in series.

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    looks like such subject matter is not high on CS's interests.

  8. #8

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by glennyong
    i like politics... but singapore one.. no action la.... not like taiwan... hahahaha..

    when the price-cut, gst raise all these things... all will attract csers attention.. esp food and bus fare raise..
    .....name-calling and flaming types. as i am typing, bandwidth is shoot up. hehe! (i am disappointed as i cannot find my thread on president nathan - retiring?)

  9. #9
    Senior Member glennyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,587

    Default

    or maybe the moderator's policy were effective due to strong and firm leadership ? hahahahaha....

    NO POLITICS !! ahahahahah..

  10. #10

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by glennyong
    or maybe the moderator's policy were effective due to strong and firm leadership ? hahahahaha....

    NO POLITICS !! ahahahahah..
    IMO, strong and firm leadership has no place in .... . did i unintentionally step inside the area deemed as 'out-of-bound markers'?

  11. #11
    Senior Member azul123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Eastern Bloc
    Posts
    2,776

    Default

    My two cents is that we all should have interest in politics if not at least know how policies affect us. One may not be directly impacted and life is easy going, but there are alot of people still struggling to make a living.

    From just reading the headlines of this thread I don't see any conflicting views from the Opposition MPs, just that one said generally not an issue, it could mean there are some setbacks but generally not that bad, what the other 2 said there was liek a little setback.

    Did I read into this wrongly?

    ../azul123

  12. #12

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by azul123
    My two cents is that we all should have interest in politics if not at least know how policies affect us. One may not be directly impacted and life is easy going, but there are alot of people still struggling to make a living.

    From just reading the headlines of this thread I don't see any conflicting views from the Opposition MPs, just that one said generally not an issue, it could mean there are some setbacks but generally not that bad, what the other 2 said there was liek a little setback.

    Did I read into this wrongly?

    ../azul123
    from first reading of yr 2nd para, catch no ball. one should not have narrow viewpoints/interest or only concerned with issues which impact them directly. i think leong sze hiang is a singaporean we could learn a thing or two from.

  13. #13
    Senior Member azul123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Eastern Bloc
    Posts
    2,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    from first reading of yr 2nd para, catch no ball. one should not have narrow viewpoints/interest or only concerned with issues which impact them directly. i think leong sze hiang is a singaporean we could learn a thing or two from.
    Catch no ball?

    How about if I repeat this sentence "Low Thia Khiang says new election rules generally positive but the two others say more hurdles in the way".

    From this I deduce that there are new election rules, could mean these are hurdles but generally ok... what the other 2 says these are hurdles but it did not mean they are not ok.

    I mean... anything that will prevent election fraud how can anyone not agree with that, so little hurdle to overcome but it's for every candidate is it not?

    ../azul123

  14. #14

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by azul123
    Catch no ball?

    How about if I repeat this sentence "Low Thia Khiang says new election rules generally positive but the two others say more hurdles in the way".

    From this I deduce that there are new election rules, could mean these are hurdles but generally ok... what the other 2 says these are hurdles but it did not mean they are not ok.

    I mean... anything that will prevent election fraud how can anyone not agree with that, so little hurdle to overcome but it's for every candidate is it not?

    ../azul123
    it is really 'election fraud' in the first place? or the intent was to create more hurdles.

  15. #15
    Senior Member azul123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Eastern Bloc
    Posts
    2,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    it is really 'election fraud' in the first place? or the intent was to create more hurdles.
    Hmmm.. I get your drift.

    I'm not against any rules that carries equal weightage for both, only against rules that tilt the favour to one side.

    In this case, it appears an equal weightage.

    ../azul123

  16. #16

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by azul123
    Hmmm.. I get your drift.

    I'm not against any rules that carries equal weightage for both, only against rules that tilt the favour to one side.

    In this case, it appears an equal weightage.

    ../azul123
    yes, on the surface, it appears to be so.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Better stay out of politics...in sg, say good things about govt (like the funny man Liang Zhi Chang) can lo...look tat that funny man talk so many sweet things about the govt and look at him now...good life man...get alot of awards man! Govt wants to promote marriage then he go and produce 'I Do, I Do'. He have very very good skills in carrying b*lls until he good life liao lo...
    You can't say bad things about the govt in sg here lo...they are always right one lo...

    (Balls carrying skill is a talent which is born natural....some have more talents while some have none...ball balance skill is another factor....carry balls wrongly, balls might become unbalanced and drop and can results in fatal death....)
    Last edited by XXX Boy; 23rd May 2005 at 01:03 PM.

  18. #18
    Senior Member King Tiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    In the heart of SengKang
    Posts
    5,882

    Default

    No politics, please
    CS Rules, remember
    War is one of the most regrettable human activities.

  19. #19

    Default

    Singapore politics ? zzz...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •