13 June 2006

PAP Policy Belies "Staying Together, Moving Ahead"

Sunflower send me a scanned copy of a $traits Times forum article dated 13 Jun 2006 (click picture to enlarge) and it was authored by our NCMP (Elect) Sylvia Lim of the Workers' Party.

It struck a very deep chord with me as it reflected my sentiment exactly when I wrote about it in my previous blog entry. What I feel about PAP wards getting preferential treatment is very dangerous. It reeks of segregation. The very taboo that we are trying to avoid when we go all out to combat things like racism. Hence our pledge " one united people, regardless of race, language or religion..." Looks like the PAP has forgotten all about it already.

Like Ms Sylvia Lim echoed, we are the same taxpayers on equal footing regardless of which ward we are in. At no time, did the opposition wards ask to be pushed to the front of the queue. All they are asking is a fair shot in the queue instead of getting stuck, by default, to the back.

Is that too much to ask? 

Is it so wrong to ask for a level-playing field? 

The whole idea behind "one united people" is that each and every Singaporean get a equal chance to stand on equal footing. What PAP does with this upgrading queue scheme totally undermines that.

Despite paying the same taxes like everybody else, are folks in the opposition wards second-class citizens? Are folks, who are in opposition wards, any lesser of a Singaporean than the rest? If no, then why do they not get a fair* chance in the queue?
Think about it and draw your own conclusion, please.

* The keyword here is "fair" and is different from asking for "preferential" treatment. Big difference there. Please note.

 - Voxeros

1. Pam left...
Tuesday, 13 June 2006 5:24 pm
i can't seem to enlarge the article - so can't really comment on it - but what i find interesting is that the mediocre media actually had the guts to publish it. good on them!! :)

2. JayWalk left...
Tuesday, 13 June 2006 5:47 pm ::
Pam: That's because your browser as a auto-shrink-to-fit-screen feature.
Just hover your mouse over the image, click once if you need to. A button will appear at the bottom right corner of the image.

Click that and the image will be restored to it's original enlarged size.
Let me know if you still have trouble.

If all else fail, the address is here

3. Pam left...
Tuesday, 13 June 2006 11:33 pm
completely agree with you. would just like to add that over here at least, I have a Conservative Party MP, ie not the ruling party (which is Labour). Practically the whole of the SouthEast of UK is Conservative, but that's not the point. The taxes we pay are many tiered. We have the normal 'income tax' (lowest 22%, highest 40%), and then we have monthly council tax which is paid to the city council which will pay for the police, garbage collectors, road-resurfacing etcetc. The council will take on the ideas of whichever party they work for, so my council is basically 'conservative'.

i doubt it will work in Singapore this way, but perhaps that's why in the UK it doesn't really matter 'who's in power' where you live?

sorry if this doesn't make any sense - have just had weeks of exam marking and exam boards!!!!

4. JayWalk left...
Thursday, 15 June 2006 1:29 pm :: 
Pam: Honestly, you are not making sense... YET. But I can feel that you are heading somewhere with this.

Perhaps if you are able to further elaborate on this?

5. Pam left...
Thursday, 15 June 2006 7:32 pm
ok - i'm not sure where you think i'm not making sense but let's try and put it in the local context.

i live in what you may refer to as an 'opposition ward' (since Labour's in power now, and i live in a city where it's controlled by the Conservatives - ie we have a Conservative MP, and the things that are implemented are done with the Conservative Party's ideologies so to speak).

we have many tiers of taxes. the normal income tax goes to the central government. that i suppose pays for things like health, education, police etc.

then we have council tax which goes to the city or county council where you live. i pay approximately 300 SGD per month. this pays for things that happen locally, like the bin man, extra police patrol, improvement of local roads, bus stops, school buses for kids, old people care etc.

this is the tax that the local MPs and councils can use to 'improve' the area. So, it's like saying the people who live in Potong Pasir will pay their council tax money to Mr Chiam and he and his party will take this money to do the upgrading processes. If this works the way it works in the UK, then it won't really matter where you live (ie, opposition or not) because you still pay some amount of's basically up to the council how that money is spent. therefore there won't be this discrimination against those who live in opposition wards.

is this any clearer?

6. JayWalk left...
Friday, 16 June 2006 11:50 am :: 
Pam: If Singapore were to adopt this 2-tier approach to taxation then opposition ward residents will not be complaining about the lack of facilities.

Problem is that there is only 1 tax for all and as such, PAP does not have the right to segregate Singaporeans into PAP ward residents and opposition ward residents.

7. Pam left...
Friday, 16 June 2006 5:02 pm
oh completely agree on that... and it's amazing/interesting that over all these years, this 'tactic' hasn't worked! :)

8. JayWalk left...
Friday, 16 June 2006 9:04 pm ::
Pam: Due to their sheer over confident arrogance, they have stopped listening to people a long time ago.

No comments: