Adopt an open system and let people nominate and vote in the first round who are our potential leaders from people they know who are passionate and sufficiently experiences and capable first. Don't let a small group of self-centred people decide our talents behind closed door or reward their own connections like former classmates or campmates.

Some committee can be appointed to loosen up the present academically based or job based or connection-based system of nominating talents so that the criteria can be wider and more practical to embrace more people who have the true potential.

After putting up such nominees the nominees will have to be scrutinized for qualities like passions, political and social philosophy, practical contributions to society, ability to interact and motivate people to work towards common goals and other appropriate qualities.

During such nomination period points will be gained from public voting for each factor or quality and Simon Cowe will be able to chair and give us comments to public before voting.

Truly capable and passionate people nominated by people will then be filtered through to become candidates for election to be our MPs and going on to be chosen by their own fellow MPs to be our ministers and leaders.

PM or ruling party has no power to interfere and will let the people participate in choosing our future MPs and ministers the American Idol way.

Get A Simon Cowe to give us some practical ideas how to spot true practical talents and let all our political loosen up and stop believing they alone are the talents.

Let people decide who are good people and who could lead this nation as so far under the existing system all we are seeing are self-centredness and abuse of power for personal glories and personal agendas without really benefiting all citizens.

The conventional wisdom that someone like the judges must choose the talents.

In American Idol, judges do not count as much as the people. Young and old all can be given a chance to decide by SMS and judges if any are merely facilitators.

In American Idol the basis of choosing talents is not left to the experts and experts are only present to facilitate and serve as a guide to people in determining particular candidates' hidden potential or qualities.

So we too can benefit from such a open system of nominating potential MPs and remove the hidden agendas from those who are in power as power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Do not let those who are in power to tell us that citizens do not know how to decide who are good or who have passions or abilities.

Judges can still exist like the American Idol judges but their functions are limited to guiding and facilitating nominating of potential MPs and such winners as voted by people in first-round nomination votes will then be automatically be candidates for voting in the election proper.

A close door system of PMs and his powerful ministers nominating future candidates for election is not guaranteeing us of the bests who will understand and serve the people e.g. to check on rising costs and question ministers for any ERP or transport or medical care inefficiencies.

Such a system will produce real talents who will be truly committed to serve the people and eliminate once and for all all the self-centred hypocrisy serving the only the narrow interests of those in power.

ni ba wo definitely wun vote for u one

Originally posted by FireIce:

ni ba wo definitely wun vote for u one

Not for me true. Wo bu ba ni bu dou wo.

Originally posted by robertteh:

Not for me true. Wo bu ba ni bu dou wo.

lousy HYPY.

Popular SMS votes are instantaneously effective and will make all citizens take an interest in playing their part in nation building including offering themselves to be nominated subject to passing facilitators' certain test questions as mentioned to bring out their qualities and passion to serve.

SMS voting is solely used for nomination only. The election will still be conducted as normal except that now people will be taking an active part in throwing up or nominating true talents not known to the few leaders or their party.

The effectiveness of such SMS voting for nomination purpose will be the most effective as done in American Idol - instant SMS responsive to judges' facilitation roles in asking candidates test questions to bring out answers to a range of questions to test his passion, experiences, academic and related professional qualifications, contributions, abilities to interact and serve the people, abilities to bring about economic and social development, motivational and other abilities.

Let One man one SMS voting be used to nominate potential MPs to serve people instead the past closed door system of nominating connections which will result in power corruption.

Dear Robert,

I think your idea is good but as with all ideas, problems arise with the implementation.

When you say some committee, you actually hit the crux of the matter. How will the committee members be selected? How do we know the committee will decide fairly? What will the priorities of the committee be when filtering candidates? How will we know there is no conflict of interest in their choice? How can we account for the committee's own biasness or prejudices? Will some be disqualified because they have connections to the committee? The list of questions go on.

Every method of choosing of our leaders is imperfect in one way or another. I'm sorry I don't have a better solution to offer up.

Edited: Can you imagine if Durai got a place on the committee because of his "successful" management of NKF (before he was exposed)?

With Instantaneous SMS voting, everything is fast and interactive. There is no chance for any politician to use his monies to buy such a large number of SMS votes. Who will be nominated who will be receiving whose votes no body will know immediately until further revelation of qualities and abilities through the Interactive Political Idol session live.

So there is no need to be afraid of use of money power in such a nation wide selection through Interactive Live Interview of potential candidates.

If anyone goes around using his money to buy nomination he will also run the risk of being exposed and votes will turn again him. He cannot influence every home in live show as he cannot be everywhere all at the same time.

So such a Live Interview nomination of candidates from a large number which eventually narrow down through elimination or knock-outs will give us the best possible candidates for our future MPs.

There has to be an independent judges chosen by the people in the first place to act as facilitators to guide people in bringing out the qualities and abilities of the political talents so that they can use their SMS (one man one SMS) to nominate candidates and eliminate all who are less suitable until the final slate are left for election.

If Durai is nominated, to be on the Facilitator Panel he may not not be voted in as people already know about him and his character and they have the power to decide to vote or not to vote for him. May be he has a chance to explain his part and be better understood by the people and get voted. May be, he will be exposed more in such a live session and be voted out by people's Live Nomination Interview.

Unlike the past closed-door system of nomination, the one-man-one-sms Live Nomination Interview conducted by Independent Facilitators who themselves are sms-voted will prevent abuse and clinging on to power by serving politicians which is where our biggest problem is.

Originally posted by phil30k:

Dear Robert,

I think your idea is good but as with all ideas, problems arise with the implementation.

When you say some committee, you actually hit the crux of the matter. How will the committee members be selected? How do we know the committee will decide fairly? What will the priorities of the committee be when filtering candidates? How will we know there is no conflict of interest in their choice? How can we account for the committee's own biasness or prejudices? Will some be disqualified because they have connections to the committee? The list of questions go on.

Every method of choosing of our leaders is imperfect in one way or another. I'm sorry I don't have a better solution to offer up.

Edited: Can you imagine if Durai got a place on the committee because of his "successful" management of NKF (before he was exposed)?

A committee for conducting Live Nomination Interview will have to be chosen by the people in the first place.

Existing politicians should be excluded from being members of such a committee.

If necessary we could ask Simon Cowe and some other expert judges (to be scrutinized by people in the same SMS voting process) to be selected for people's SMS voting first.

1. Any government formed this way will be short-sighted, implementing policies popular with the people but not focused on long-term benefits for the country.

2. It takes not one man but an entire team of capable ministers to administer the country. Voting separate individuals into the government may not create the synergy needed for effective governance.

Originally posted by xavier1979:

1. Any government formed this way will be short-sighted, implementing policies popular with the people but not focused on long-term benefits for the country.

2. It takes not one man but an entire team of capable ministers to administer the country. Voting separate individuals into the government may not create the synergy needed for effective governance.

There is a fear that by popular voting we may elect people who are only shallow and superficial in nature or straw men unable to have good or true talents to be our leaders.

For too many years, people have been exposed to the propaganda that good leaders are those who are prepared to make unpopular decisions even though they may hurt the people's pocket but at the end will serve the long-term good of the people.

People should ask themselves this question - if we allow a government who keeps taking unpopular actions like raising the GST to 7% even when it is making a lot of monies and surpluses is such a painful action also considered "The long-Term Good Necessary Panadol for the people". Through such a propaganda today many citizens already surrendered to the power that be that allow them even to take away their retirements without the right to withdraw their own CPF savings.

So it is certainly not true that good leaders or government are those who are taking unpopular actions for the long-term good.

More likely "Power Corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts absolutely" is the greatest of all dangers facing our young promising nation.

Do not be afraid to choose your own MPs through Live Nomination Interview popular SMS nomination. Do not believe in propaganda that by doing so we might choose only leaders who will only do wrong things to please people and let the country down. It is not true. The greater fear today is when people are unable to nominate their own leaders democratically it will lead to power corruption which is the greater danger than the danger of electing a populist government.

It is time for people to use their own judgment and not believe every fear created by autocratic leaders so that they themselves will always be elected and they could always do as they like and people at the end just become sheep and cattle to let them slaughter.

This is only a fear painted by our past leaders. Let such anti-progress and selfish views be exposed by choosing our own leaders by Live Nomination Interview through interactions with people.

This is a very naive lie told by clever propagandists who are out to carve power and use power to do as they like even against normal expectations of citizens.

At the end people who wanted to get their way and seek greater and greater power have successfully make people accept them and even their own self-serving taxing-and-scheming and passing-back-the buck system.

Among all the Live Nomination Interviewees questions will be well designed with the expertize of Simon Cowe type of Live Interview selection that those who are only trying to be popular or to speak well without action plans that are credible will also be exposed and voted out - not necessarily voted in just because of looking handsome or speaking eloguently. Let the expert Nomination Facilitators design the interview processes so that the true talents will be spotted and not the salesmen or conmen.

Originally posted by xavier1979:

1. Any government formed this way will be short-sighted, implementing policies popular with the people but not focused on long-term benefits for the country.

2. It takes not one man but an entire team of capable ministers to administer the country. Voting separate individuals into the government may not create the synergy needed for effective governance.

I think you brought up important points to consider.

Yes, it's difficult to balance long term and short term goals as well as issues where a minority has to suffer for the good of the majority and still be popular. The person who promises he will return all CPF with 12% interest to the people will definitely get voted in but may not be the kind of policy maker we need.

Synergy is more relevant to having different people in this case. It is based on the premise that people or disciplines that are too similar only reinforce the prejudices inherent in the people/discipline with the implication that such a makeup hinders better/creative solutions.

Dear Robert,

I have met liars and cheats and they are some of the most charismatic and believable people I've met.

While I think your idea has a lot of merit, I'm wary of pointing out flaws. You have obviously given it much time and thought. I don't want to appear to be attacking you.

I vote for him.

Originally posted by phil30k:

Dear Robert,

I have met liars and cheats and they are some of the most charismatic and believable people I've met.

While I think your idea has a lot of merit, I'm wary of pointing out flaws. You have obviously given it much time and thought. I don't want to appear to be attacking you.

Some people are afraid that such an open nomination process may result in liars and cheats being chosen.

The fact is if the system is closed there will be worse consequences than just some liars or shallow people.

A good Independent Panel of Nomination Facilitators should have the expertise to easily expose any such character in a Live Nomination Interview as they will be equipped with expertize to floor any superficial and shallow characters of doubtful abilities.

The criteria to be put up by the facilitators will be tough to clear if a candidates nominated for SMS voting are unable to answer certain in-depth questions honestly and thoroughly. I have already provided a few examples of the type of questions that need to be put to potential nominees. There is no reason given the careful selection (also by SMS voting by people) of truly Independent Nomination Facilitators with the correct briefs a good set of test cannot be put up to be answered by candidates.

Through answering such seriously prepared political and social issues and questions as put up, the line is then open. Worse that can happen is to put up among the finalists (nominees) some who are shallow and superficial who slip through the net but there is no problem as finally these final nominees (should be more than 84 seats x 2) are still subjected to election process which will then truly decide who are our best leaders from such a slate.

Now our present system of nominating candidates for election as MPs is totally closed and serving only the self-interests of the people in power. There does not seem to be an end to all their self-serving and self-glorifying in our government because of lack of participation by the citizens in the nomination and election process.

Which is worse - the present closed system or the Live Nomination Interview system. You decide !!!

Originally posted by Love Supreme:

I vote for him.

The fact is William Hung did not even get past the first two rounds. So this is a good example to prove that people's eyes and eyes and perceptions play a part in throwing up our talents. Because he was not totally good in singing talents he was finally exposed and voted out.

Independent Judges or Facilitators who are not connected or having a conflict of interest well equipped with the right sets of criteria and able to ask embarrassing questions will have to do their jobs well to extract all the lies and shallowness of a talent.

Let the Facilitators play their roles well so that people will then be in a position to decide and vote (SMS) the best short-listed talents eligible for election to become our future leaders who are definitely more critical than just singing or performing talents.

Dear Robert,

As I've said before, the weak point of your proposal is the formation of the committee. No amount of rhetoric can change that.

I'd be glad to hear any ideas you have on that.

Originally posted by phil30k:

Dear Robert,

As I've said before, the weak point of your proposal is the formation of the committee. No amount of rhetoric can change that.

I'd be glad to hear any ideas you have on that.

I have clarified the composition of such a facilitators committee in previous post. Please read the posts again. It is not a committee appointed by the government but an independent entity which will be directly chosen by similar SMS voting by the people so that it will never be influenced by the party in power to serve its own interest to stay in power.

I have called such an independent entity Nomination Panel of Facilitators. So it is quite practicable and possible to go through the process of throwing up our future leaders through accepting all possible eligible persons stepping forward for audition rounds like in American Idol with televised 10 rounds of screening through SMS instantaneous voting over 10 rounds of elimination with elimination of up to [X(nos. passing audition)-(84x2)] /9 to choose a minimum of (84 seats x 2) nominees to stand for final election

Originally posted by robertteh:

I have clarified the composition of such a facilitators committee in previous post. Please read the posts again. It is not a committee appointed by the government but an independent entity which will be directly chosen by similar SMS voting by the people so that it will never be influenced by the party in power to serve its own interest to stay in power.

Dear Robert,

Thank you for taking the time to clarify. Even with rereading and your additional clarification, I'm still unclear what the answer to my question is. I'll list my questions for you and with your help I hope I'll better be able to understand your response.

1. Given that the Citizens couldn't be expected to know off hand the names of people who would make good independent facilitators. How would Citizens SMSing their choice of facilitators know whose name to SMS?

2. And if they are provided with a list, they probably know nothing about any of the names on that list. How do they evaluate which facilitators to choose from that list?

3. And if such a list of facilitators was provided to them for them to SMS their vote on. Who, assuming it was not the Government, was the authorized person(s) to choose the facilitators whose names went on that list?

4. If they are provided with information of the facilitators. How can they verify that the important information which will help them make a choice is accurate? Who, assuming it is not the Government, is the party providing that information to them?

Thank you for your patience.

The past methods of appointing MPs and Ministers are too secretive and lacking openness, and transparency in the selection process.

There are too many subjective factors and as such the whole process of nomination will be subjected to abuse, favoritism, nepotism or protectionism to serve the interest of those in power rather the people's ultimate interest.

Why is the American Idol so successful as a form of modern-day talent scouting?.

There appear to be three main reasons, namely:-

(1) Mass Televised interactive forum to arouse public interest.

(2) Independent Facilitators Panel's ability to assess talents objectively by asking the right questions and getting the truthful responses.

(3) Transparent Live Nomination Process by the masses.

We have always been told how difficult it is to source talents with a host of reasons like people shun politics, lack of commitments, selfishness, apathy, lack of certain personalty traits, lack of population size, fear of defamation suits etc.

We may yet to see the real reasons for our perceived lack of political talents. For all we care to know the real reason may be hypocrisy on the part of those who desire to stay entrenched in power or simply the  lack of openness or methodology in encouraging talents to come forward and be tested and accepted for their talents and abilities.

There is a Chinese Saying " A mountain cannot inhabit two tigers".

The American Idol method of scouting and scrutinizing talent is totally open and transparent allowing anyone with real talents to come forward to serve and the fakes to be exposed by Independent Panel of Facilitator.

If we indeed want to encourage people with potential to be our future MPs and leaders we must learn from American Idol and throw the door open to encourage all possible talents to come in and allow anyone with talents or abilities to be auditioned, and highlighted while the fakes exposed through the most transparent and fairest selection exercise.

No doubt the devil may be in the detail of how we want the Panel of Facilitators (or judges as some prefer) to be appointed to help the masses in screening every quality needed to be our potential MP.

First conduct a publicity campaign to invite people with knowledge in particular areas of expertise to be nominated to be one of the 11 members in the panel without conflict of interest or connection to the government.

Once the independence of the Facilitators are resolved it is not diffiult to decide on what right and embarassing questions to ask to expose the fakes and highlight the real.

This panel need not be televised or that widely publicized as the facilitators are simply people who are not likely to be influenced in their conduct of Live Nomination of Potential MPs.

When the Panel criteria to be set up for asking of difficult questions to tell the men from the boys.

We finally will just have to let the panel decide details as required before launching the invitations for auditions to the Live Nomination of Potential MPs.

Dear Robert,

I'm glad to see your view on the idea of facilitators.

As you say "the devil is in the details" .

I am thinking this is a system with loopholes

1. Rich people may become your prime minister simply because they can afford to pay more for SMS

2. SMS is not controlled. Someone may make use of their grandmother handphone to send out SMS when they r bathing or don't care

3. Actors and singers may have a higher chance of becoming prime minister due to past popularity

4. Attractive looking people who can talk a lot with no real calibre can have a higher chance to be the prime minister

5. Inert skills such as management is not considered in such competition. Quick thinking is the only skill tested

Dear Stupidissmart,

Good thing does not come cheap or easy. There will be questions and objections but it is important that all the pros and cons should be considered with a open mind.

The traditional system of choosing talents whether political or performing is usually ad hoc and subjective giving rise to abuse and selection of unsuitable people as talents. Many yes-men were already chosen under our ad hoc leadership closed door system to become our MPs and ministers who do not have enough passion or true abilities to serve and solve our many problems.

The Live Nomination of MPs is not a talent time. The nomination process will be conducted by an independent Panel of Facilitators well chosen by the people themselves as explained earlier comprising of experts from various fields who will and have the ability and overall intellect and experience to design the right combination of criteria for sizing up and commenting on candidates appearing in Televised Live Interactive Sessions for up to 10 rounds of SMS-voting by qualified voters on one-man-one-vote nomination process. Public or the masses play a major but not necessarily naive role of choosing such candidates for good performances or rhetorics because of the roles played by the Facilitators,

It is not as easy as one likes to think to pass through the intense testing of talents, intellect and abilities by such a panel.

Ever watch live Beijing International Chinese Debates among the various teams from many international universities. It is not the good-looking and eloquent alone who will win such debates. The panel of expert judges go through topical assessments commenting on a host of factors for the live audience to decide their choice by voting guided by these experts.

Only the best with intellectual abilities presented through transparent and publicized Televised Live Nomination of Candidates will be able to throw up the best nominees of MPs, to stand for election.

If a particular candidate is lacking in sufficient command of economics or social organizations or infrastructural aspects of nation building do you think he will be well regarded by the panel of facilitators who have certain amount of casting votes to override possible errors.

So it is not possible for salesmen or performers to pass such batteries of tests in such a process. The large audience in such a live nomination ensures the best will come forward attracted by opportunities to put their abilities to such a test.

It is for both the panel of independent facilitators and the masses to weed out any doubtful candidates using the criteria to great advantage.

Like the Americal Idol it is a system which will through up the best talents due to a combination of factors i.e. great publicity and prestige, transparent screening of candidates, and democratic and fairest voting by the citizens.

We will definitely encourage many talented people who are otherwise by-passed due to lack of personal connection with the present leaders to come forward and be nominated,

Lets look from a system approach first

SMS vs Ballot Box

Obviously in this case, the ballot box offered more control over to SMS. Ballot can ensure the person voting is the person itself, and not someone who just make use of other people vote. In all elections there r always some people who heck care. Their votes tis time can be used by overzealous supporters. Second is ballot box ensure "hiding". The person who vote do not feel pressurized to vote for people who they do not want to vote. For example a housewife, who wanted to vote a party, may end up voting the opposition because his over zealous and bossy husband who support the opposition look at her when she send the SMS. Third, physical paper is more transparent than IT savvy SMS. There may be chances of hacking, overwriting etc tat will disturbed the whole election process. To replace the ballot box, it is not feasible.

On American Idol style approach and conventional approach

Lets talk about the time frame first. American idol take a few months, each time eliminating one person out. Not all citizens r so enthusiastic in politics and forcing them to spend a night every week is time consuming and silly. Not only tat, it waste the minister time to prepare every week for tis glamour show and not working instead. I believe one night is enough. Secondly, SMS can be sent at the spur of the moment during the speech and when they regret, it is too late. It is still better for them to cool down a night before they cast the vote using their head and not their heart. Thirdly, an independent panel is prone to corruption. In the ideal case they work ideally. But in actual facts, from project superstar, there r already many rumours of corruption and personal favours involved between the judges. Also it is impossible for the panel not to be lop sided in their view because any politically interested person will find it hard not to control their perspective. U can talk about debate style and not glamour style but again it favours people who have quick thinking and good at rheotorics and argument, such as lawyers. The important skill for an MP is more than just arguing and boasting. It consist on management and good perspective tat may be hard to show during the show.

If u want, the best tat can be formed is just a 1 night 2 person debate like the US system now. The rest remain intact

I think all the opposition party should combined to form a combined "democratic" party or something. Now they r just a plate of loose sand everybody working for themselves thing