Acemundo Supercharged April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 so far only a few MP like lily neo, tan cheng bock display they are prepare to argue with their bosses for the good of the people. and look at them, is there any surprise why they remain as MP only while many of the rest went on to become minister? ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryn Turbocharged April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 In this case, even an MP sleeping also can bo chap and vote along party lines, then WTF? I believe every MP irrespective of party affiliations must vote with their concience for their electorate and not for the party's interest. Otherwise I only see the same thing happening irresepctive who is voted into power. Your assumption should be that when they are setting policy (i.e in caucus meetings) the individual MP DO vote according to their beliefs and what is good for their electorate. However once come to the "public Parliament session" everybody fallls into line with what was agreed behind closed doors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peqasus 1st Gear April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 Just a dumb Qn, are all the questions fielded in the discussion pre-empted b4 hand? My confusion here goes - if pre-empted and prepared then the airing of views is jus wayang - if not pre-empted the. I dun see how the views and responses are meaningful. Thinking back to the ltk stare down, it seems like a personal issue btw 2 pax then to deliberate theaters at hand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryn Turbocharged April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 Just a dumb Qn, are all the questions fielded in the discussion pre-empted b4 hand? My confusion here goes - if pre-empted and prepared then the airing of views is jus wayang - if not pre-empted the. I dun see how the views and responses are meaningful. Thinking back to the ltk stare down, it seems like a personal issue btw 2 pax then to deliberate theaters at hand. My opinion? If I were "in charge" of PAP there is NO way I would allow "open" questions. All would be pre-empted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acemundo Supercharged April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 My opinion? If I were "in charge" of PAP there is NO way I would allow "open" questions. All would be pre-empted. actually that is my suspicion as well Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happily1986 5th Gear April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 (edited) i think you might be too optimistic. In the good ol days back when the first guard was in power, it is clear as daylight that the critical decision making and debating was concentrated in the triumvirate of lky, sr and gks. Here we are in the second guard. i am too sure that power is spread out among 21 individuals. Some habits die hard. Edited April 25, 2011 by Happily1986 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneve888 4th Gear April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 Doesn't the party whip runs counter to the idea that our elected representative represents the interest of the electorate rather than to their own party? IF an MP of any party feels otherwise, but is bounded to the party whip then isn't that his vote for any bill is in the interest of the party and not the people? I only use whip on my dog and sometimes inside the confines of my bedroom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 25, 2011 Author Share April 25, 2011 If no whip... later some Mps gets too hot and start to NBCCB... li kong smi LJ..... So must have the whip, just like skool discplinary master.... NBzz only... shoosh... onto the buttock.... The idea of the whip is supposed to keep the house in order. Not to be used as a party loyalty wand, at least that is what I thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 25, 2011 Author Share April 25, 2011 This is exactly my point. With such an overwhelmiing majority, I think EVERYTHING should be a conscience vote - what does it matter? Apparently us locals don't do that. Or I should say our A-team do not subscribe to that.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 25, 2011 Author Share April 25, 2011 In this case, even an MP sleeping also can bo chap and vote along party lines, then WTF? I believe every MP irrespective of party affiliations must vote with their concience for their electorate and not for the party's interest. Otherwise I only see the same thing happening irresepctive who is voted into power. MPs are supposed to be the voice of the people who elected them in true faith. What we want are passionate MPs to represent us, speak for us & in doing that may come into conflict with the executive branch i.e. Cabinet. Like some bros mentioned, examples of such exemplary legislative folks are Dr TCB, Mr TSK & Dr Lily Neo. Sadly the first two have since retired. In true democracy sense, speaking against policies deemed detrimental to the society & ultimately crashing with the policy makers is normal rather than the exception. It is through these forceful debates that policies are scrutinized, fine tuned or even thrown out if the legislative find them against the interests of the people. Here, such voices & those from the oppo MPs are apparently deemed hindrances to the BIG picture. Basically once they deem the bills are excellent from their POV & gets clearance from the 21 of them, then it is most certainly become law in the 82-2 parliament if the party whip is not lifted. How sad can that be... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispie 5th Gear April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 i dun know what is party whip.. so as a self reliant singaporean.. i googled and found this. so who can whip who? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 25, 2011 Author Share April 25, 2011 so far only a few MP like lily neo, tan cheng bock display they are prepare to argue with their bosses for the good of the people. and look at them, is there any surprise why they remain as MP only while many of the rest went on to become minister? They don't produce such fine caliber of people's MPs any more. Out of production. Period. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 25, 2011 Author Share April 25, 2011 Your assumption should be that when they are setting policy (i.e in caucus meetings) the individual MP DO vote according to their beliefs and what is good for their electorate. However once come to the "public Parliament session" everybody fallls into line with what was agreed behind closed doors. The way things work here should the BIG decisions are decided in the cabinet. The 82-2 parliament then just follow-up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leok777 Clutched April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 Just like the IR vote where no matter what was said, when it cam to the vote they did not lift the party whips so now we have 2IRs for a maybe more to come, with all the suicides n divorces that may come with it. Don' t you guys think that we need more dissenting voices so that things are not bulldozed thru just because they want it so? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poper 2nd Gear April 25, 2011 Share April 25, 2011 Forget about 9 NCMPs or even 82 NCMPs... Don't buy that bull s--t stories.. We need people who can vote freely for the good of the people, not just speak freely.. Wearing the PAP badge already disqualified one from voting freely 99% of the time. Period. Cast your votes wisely; it's not about which party can form the govt or who has better ideas, it's about re-gaining for our birth-rights as Singaporeans by revoking unfair policies; it's about demolishnig an invisible fortress that has bonded us for so many years.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 25, 2011 Author Share April 25, 2011 Just like the IR vote where no matter what was said, when it cam to the vote they did not lift the party whips so now we have 2IRs for a maybe more to come, with all the suicides n divorces that may come with it. Don' t you guys think that we need more dissenting voices so that things are not bulldozed thru just because they want it so? I remembered then that all the major religious groups protested or voiced concerns but our 82-2 parliament still went ahead, saying that they would monitor the situation & take action if necessary to curb any social ills. We have learnt so far of many crimes committed e.g. cheating, collaboration, impersonation, etc & of course the high profile loses in terms of tens of millions of dollars directly related to the IRs. Like I mentioned in another thread, all these maybe just a tiny tip of the gargutuan iceberg below. We may never know how damaging it is inflicting on our society.... All in the name of creating jobs & contribution of a few percentage poitnts to our GDP... Anyway, this is the result of an overwhelming 82-2 parliament. And they still has the cheek to warn us of possible freak results? You decide come May 7. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 25, 2011 Author Share April 25, 2011 Forget about 9 NCMPs or even 82 NCMPs... Don't buy that bull s--t stories.. We need people who can vote freely for the good of the people, not just speak freely.. Wearing the PAP badge already disqualified one from voting freely 99% of the time. Period. Cast your votes wisely; it's not about which party can form the govt or who has better ideas, it's about re-gaining for our birth-rights as Singaporeans by revoking unfair policies; it's about demolishnig an invisible fortress that has bonded us for so many years.. If only the 2m plus minus 87 folks out there knows what is going to happen if the overwhelming dominance continues & what effect it has for the future of our nation & our future generations... Sure hope it is not too late to do the right thing come May 7. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcann 6th Gear April 26, 2011 Author Share April 26, 2011 Just a dumb Qn, are all the questions fielded in the discussion pre-empted b4 hand? My confusion here goes - if pre-empted and prepared then the airing of views is jus wayang - if not pre-empted the. I dun see how the views and responses are meaningful. Thinking back to the ltk stare down, it seems like a personal issue btw 2 pax then to deliberate theaters at hand. I believe the MPs must file their questions before hand to individual ministries they wish to seek clarifications from. The respective Minsiters, MOTs will then direct them to their PSs or Stat Boards if related to them & if concerning the bills they proposed, views from the cabinet since it is their collective decision. Depends on how you look at it, these ministers or MOTs come prepared with replies. ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
Parliament 2024
Parliament 2024
How much to replace shock absorbers?
How much to replace shock absorbers?
Cost Door Lock Repair cost how much?
Cost Door Lock Repair cost how much?
Eating too much protein?
Eating too much protein?
Parliament debate 2020/2021
Parliament debate 2020/2021
Third Party Claim Query
Third Party Claim Query
How much did you spend on house renovation?
How much did you spend on house renovation?
How much to install Retractable Awning for home?
How much to install Retractable Awning for home?