This topic is for the benefits of the opp. wards.This topic by right should be raised by opp. MPs.The issue of course is whether the govt can discriminate against opp. wards in spending public fund.

The big picture is whether the govt should discharge its responsiblilities fairly.Is it right for them to act unfairly?Is it a moral responsibilitiy for the govt to be fair?What str the consequences when the govt show to be unfair openly? What can the ppl do if the govt doesn't act fairly?

That would never happen. Its easier to use the state controlled press to portray that they are using funds fairly. Do you think the auditor general would check on PAP's usage of funds? Besides, the general public are politically apathetic.

what if many people are members of the clan?

.. this is like expecting dogs not to pee near a fire hydrant...

Originally posted by kilua:

That would never happen. Its easier to use the state controlled press to portray that they are using funds fairly. Do you think the auditor general would check on PAP's usage of funds? Besides, the general public are politically apathetic.

The ppl should make it happen.Everyone should speak for it.

Originally posted by PRP:

This topic is for the benefits of the opp. wards.This topic by right should be raised by opp. MPs.The issue of course is whether the govt can discriminate against opp. wards in spending public fund.

The big picture is whether the govt should discharge its responsiblilities fairly.Is it right for them to act unfairly?Is it a moral responsibilitiy for the govt to be fair?What str the consequences when the govt show to be unfair openly? What can the ppl do if the govt doesn't act fairly?

To talk about this topic, you must have examples and case studies in which the government uses public funds unfairly I guess. Care to share them?

I only know of HDB upgrading scheme so far...

Originally posted by eagle:

To talk about this topic, you must have examples and case studies in which the government uses public funds unfairly I guess. Care to share them?

I only know of HDB upgrading scheme so far...

Depends on what you mean by unfair?
There are plenty of people grousing over progress package, reserves been transfered to the GLC without due transpirancy etc...

Originally posted by HyperFocal:

.. this is like expecting dogs not to pee near a fire hydrant...

v funny similies u got there..

Originally posted by PRP:

The ppl should make it happen.Everyone should speak for it.

But we need to also recognise the Ren Zi Cu.

Who is their employer, for the most of them?

people believes that their ricebowl is associated with their decision.

they cannot sway the decision?

too big a landlord?

too much goodies dangling at year end?

One of the reasons for unfairness is self interest.The govt uses the public fund to promote its party interest.The ruling party means the ministers themslves.

Members from the opp. ward don’t speak up.Ppl who oppose the got don’t speak up too.So the govt think the ppl is not interested in this subject.Are u interested?

Originally posted by PRP:

This topic is for the benefits of the opp. wards.This topic by right should be raised by opp. MPs.The issue of course is whether the govt can discriminate against opp. wards in spending public fund.

The big picture is whether the govt should discharge its responsiblilities fairly.Is it right for them to act unfairly?Is it a moral responsibilitiy for the govt to be fair?What str the consequences when the govt show to be unfair openly? What can the ppl do if the govt doesn't act fairly?

They shouldn't discriminate. Although the government mentioned that it is the choice of the voters in the Opp Wards not to bite the carrot, the thing is, is it fair to offer choices like that? What's the difference between such actions and the action of buying votes? And in fact, such action is worse than buying of votes because ultimately, the voters still do not get to see the "incentives" from voting them, but rather, HDB upgrading; ie the money still do not go to them.

I remember someone in this forum mentioned that taxes are paid by everyone, including those in opp wards. This is indeed true, and is a strong basis for funds to be utilised more fairly and equally, to those in the opp wards.

Originally posted by eagle:

They shouldn't discriminate. Although the government mentioned that it is the choice of the voters in the Opp Wards not to bite the carrot, the thing is, is it fair to offer choices like that? What's the difference between such actions and the action of buying votes? And in fact, such action is worse than buying of votes because ultimately, the voters still do not get to see the "incentives" from voting them, but rather, HDB upgrading; ie the money still do not go to them.

I remember someone in this forum mentioned that taxes are paid by everyone, including those in opp wards. This is indeed true, and is a strong basis for funds to be utilised more fairly and equally, to those in the opp wards.

Yes, voting for a candidate is not the same as voting for estate upgrading.The voters were given material incentive to vote for PAP.

The People might like to be reminded:

to Either Exercise their responsibility for democracy in order to sustain democracy or

Loose this privilege.

Do they know how many people elsewhere could only dream of having the right to vote?

Democracy is not about being scared.
Democracy can exist only when the voters exercise their due diligence. Nebber expect to be given democracy to you wholesale. You got to earn it.

Originally posted by reddressman:

The People might like to be reminded:

to Either Exercise their responsibility for democracy in order to sustain democracy or

Loose this privilege.

Do they know how many people elsewhere could only dream of having the right to vote?

Democracy is not about being scared.
Democracy can exist only when the voters exercise their due diligence. Nebber expect to be given democracy to you wholesale. You got to earn it.

Right, ppl must exercise their voting responsibly.Otherwise,they might vote in a bad govt.Improving the democratic process is necessary towards this end.

yea should be use more fairly.. use all the money pay PM lee =.=

Originally posted by youyayu:

yea should be use more fairly.. use all the money pay PM lee =.=

1st part of your msg is right,2nd part of your msg is not true.

The govt leaders can't set an example to be fair.What would thousands of  civil servants do?Follow the govt learders?

You choose to back a lousy horse and your bet...you deserve it. Voters who vote in the winning team should be rewarded above those who back a losing one....and that's fair

Originally posted by oxford mushroom:

You choose to back a lousy horse and your bet...you deserve it. Voters who vote in the winning team should be rewarded above those who back a losing one....and that's fair

I agree with you...in a way completely opposite to what your picayune intelligence suggests.

The fault lies in Singaporeans who continue to vote for a government that is more opaque than twelve inches of concrete.

Wah so much eye candy

Good job PHP.... would like to award you the most sanest forumner award

Good read and good responses

edit* PRP = PHP

Genie,

Thank you.Very rare to get a praise in this forum.

Originally posted by oxford mushroom:

You choose to back a lousy horse and your bet...you deserve it. Voters who vote in the winning team should be rewarded above those who back a losing one....and that's fair

The lousy horse didn't form the govt!

U disregard the questions of a fundamental principle I posed.

I think the PAP is only shooting themselves in the foot with this policy. I don't know who thought it up but the effects will probably be seen in the coming elections.

Democratic Government who resort to threats and blackmail to stay in power usually don't stay in power long. The traditional carrot and stick approach doesn't work in democracy.

PAP knows that ministers should be set an example on corruption.What about fairness,PAP?