Ladies and Gentlemen,
In Singapore's one man one party state government of Lee Kuan Yew's son, the Prime Minister appears to be arguing that he and his ruling party the PAP alone knows what is in the best interests of the citizens, never mind what anybody thinks.
That arrogant argument is the gist of what he appears to be making in their charade of a parliament on May 28, 2014. See state controlled Straits Times report titled
"Singapore: Constructive politics will help Singapore scale new heights but "wrong politics will doom us", says PM" http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/parliament-constructive-politics-will-help-spore-scale-n
But what is "constructive politics" is never really defined. If we are to go by what is being done in the island for the past 50 years, it simply means "what we (the Prime Minister and his handpicked minions) say is constructive politics" or simply "don't criticize us and if you do, it will be deemed wrong politics". Or rather "only what we say is constructive, anything else is destructive"
There was a lot said in the debate, both by the Prime Minister and the so-called opposition politician Low Thia Khiang but sadly in the end, none of us, I have to sadly say has been any the wiser.
These Singapore parliamentary debates if you could call it that is nothing but a charade, total theatrics, unadulterated entertainment.
It is simply a tom foolery exercise to give the impression that they are in fact really debating Singapore affairs but in fact an exercise merely to affirm whatever the Prime Minister and his hand picked lieutenants have already decided for their citizens. To even suggest that they are parliamentary debates is to do grievous injury to the term itself.
Lets forget about these nonsensical debates and ask what is Singapore today. It is a small island where one man, in this case the Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew's son, whose father put him there, who like his father, handpicks opportunistic scholarship students deputized as his Ministers who decide what is good and what is not for their people.
As for the people, as far as they, these rulers, are concerned, they are a bunch of morons who are incapable of deciding what is good for them because only they, the Prime Minister and his deputies, know anything and everything. They alone are the repository of all wisdom, the meaning of constructive politics, and the saviors and guardians of the realm.
And in order to run their one party one man dictatorship, they have effectively sidelined the Constitution, denied free speech and expression, hijacked the entire media, denied the right to protest or complain and run the country entirely on defamation of character regime, where anyone who questions is promptly sued and bankrupted by their Kangaroo Courts.
After having done all that, it would appear that there should be no need for any debates, let alone a parliament; an institution wholly intended to hoodwink the local Singaporeans and the rest of the world into thinking that it is in fact a democracy!
The entire speech by the Prime Minister was simply Double Dutch. It was an attempt to say a lot but with a specific intent to say nothing. At the end of it all, none came out any the wiser, totally understandable because if you are talking nonsense, it usually doesn't make much sense no matter how much you speak.
His definition of constructive politics is as follows.
He says "Constructive politics should develop effective policies and improve the lives of the people". True. But he conveniently leaves out who decides what improves the lives of the people and what is effective policies. Singapore's history clearly shows that, according to his father and now him, only he knows what are "effective policies" and things which supposedly "improve the lives of the people" not any other ordinary citizen.
And then he says there should be no "sound bite" politics and that "proposals should be examined". But how do the citizens do this when there is no free press and where a critic is sued whenever he suggests the contrary is no where defined.
Then he has big words. He says "Scrutiny should be conducted responsibly through open direct raising of pertinent questions and establishing the truth to prevent dishonest or self serving people from getting positions of authority".
I can't help saying that it apears as if he is referring to himself and his handpicked minions when he says this.
I would have thought that a Prime Minister who pays himself and his handpicked Ministers no less that $3.7 million a year or 5 times the salary of President Obama is highly dishonest and outright corrupt.
And they are totally incompetent too, for allowing no less that 40% of the population of tiny Singapore island to be made up of foreigners, where locals can't find jobs anymore because they go to foreigners, where the fertility rate is the lowest in the world and the emigration rate is the highest almost totally depleting the local citizenry who prefer to flee to the West than continue living in his island paradise.
And they are highly incompetent in creating a lemon of a CPF retirement scheme, where their citizens in spite of living in over prized government housing, have no money left to retire and have to resort to cleaning tables in outdoor food stalls even though they are 80 years old! Otherwise they would starve.
And then he goes on to give lip service to what are other virtues of good government except he has no intention to let anyone else decide how the country is run, except for him and his handpicked minions who run around with the title of Ministers with over-sized pockets.
Despite Low Thia Khiang, the Prime Minister's approved opposition politician's feeble attempts to stand up to the Big Boy, Lee Kuan Yew's son, he never made any attempt to discharge the mandate the people gave him in electing him in the first place.
Instead of skirting around the individual issues of matters such as immigration policy, he deliberately fails to ask the Prime Minister the real questions, such as, are you prepared to give us freedom, are you prepared to uphold the Constitution, are you prepared to restore the democratic rights of the people and dismantle the dictatorship?
Low should be asking for freedom of speech and the removal of the requirement of a permit to speak, freedom of assembly and the removal of the requirement of a permit to assemble. In fact Low should be asking for democracy instead of allowing the Prime Minister's insistence of a dictatorship.
Either Low deliberately pretends not to know, or he is totally ignorant of the fact that arguing about these issues such as immigration without first having the Constitutional rights of free citizens, would mean forever having to listen to this nonsensical Punch and Judy show parliament.
And the bad news for Lee's son the Prime Minister is at the end, despite all that they do in the name of Singaporeans, no dictatorship ever got is right in the end. Mussolini built the roads and bridges in Italy because he too thought he knew everything. But he didn't get it right in the end. They hanged him upside down in a square in Milan after the people had enough of him.
Democracy has it's shortcomings like anything else. But in the end, it is still the enduring political system like nothing else; because right or wrong, it is the will of the people, not the will of bullies like Lee Kuan Yew's son the Prime Minister of Singapore.
People would rather have, I dare say, less of glass towers and skyscrapers skirting the sea front of downtown Singapore and bullies like the Prime Minister and his handpicked errand boys and a little more freedom and a say in the way their island is run.
Attorney at Law
A Singaporean in Exile
Fremont, California USA
Tel: 510 491 8525