Yes to Evolution, No to Revolution?

While introducing the second batch of PAP new candidates, DPM Wong Kan Seng said, “We don’t bring new people here to conduct a revolution,” and that a revolution might have its place in other countries, it is not suitable for Singapore.

"I think Singaporeans, too will not welcome a revolution that will shake up everything and get them completely disrupted," Mr Wong said in response to a reporter’s query on how the new PAP candidates can make a difference.

"DPM Wong throws down gauntlet to Opposition" [24 Mar 2011 – TODAY] by questioning their motivation to contest and win a GRC. He added: "But what is this election about? Is it about the interests and ambitions of political parties and individual interest to create a legacy and make history? That is what voters should ask themselves."

His controversial statements seemed to be ‘out-of-sync’ with DPM Teo Chee Hean’s earlier opening conference, all with foremost intention to showcase the calibre of PAP new candidates. [Sugar Coating of New PAP Candidates Part 1]. His first salvo against the Opposition spiked a flurry of adverse comments in the blogosphere against himself rather than the PAP novice he was introducing. [Wong Kan Seng fires salvo at Opposition; 23 Mar 2011 – ST Online].

First it prompted a commenter on TODAY’s article to say, “DPM Wong shouldn't be throwing down the gauntlet. He should be throwing in the towel.”…“This country is in a terrible mess now because of so many wrong policies. However, when I see DPM Wong, the only thing that comes to my mind is how could you let Mas Selamat escape?” A blogger said “DPM Wong is firing blanks” [24 Mar 2011 – Temasek Review]. Another blogger coaxed, “Mr Wong Kan Seng, please don't score your own goal!” [24 Mar 2011 – FOOD fuels me to talk] , referring to the story of Dr Seet Ai Mee washing her hands on the eve of the 1991 general election and SM Goh’s ‘own goal’ which was re-visited in the MSM the previous weekend.

DPM Wong’s flurry of words was certainly enough to cause a “revolution” and not “evolution”. His pathetic response, so to say; must be a letter through his press secretary to say, “DPM Wong: Headline could have been clearer” [25 Mar 2011 - ST Forum] on the comments to a question on the PAP's Chinese-educated Members of Parliament who may be retiring.

Next, let’s pay some close attention to the PAP novices he had introduced. Had DPM Wong not caused a stir, the greatest attention must have been on the first female PAP candidate introduced, who is also a new citizen – Ms Foo Mee Har.

The Editorial in the TOC Blog said :-

"Ms Foo’s CV shows an impressive array of local and overseas experience at the top rungs of the corporate ladder….. Unfortunately for the PAP, the rest of the candidates put forward so far pale in comparison." [Foo Mee Har's strength highlights PAP's weakness; 24 Mar 2011 – TOC].

Another blogger said, “Not Another New Citizen Please!!!” [24 Mar 2011 – Personal thoughts of Singapore Political, Social and Immigration issues].

Will the Electorate judge a ‘new citizen’ candidate differently? We would not know as they are given a ride on our GRC system, especially if a heavy-weight Minister is tagged along. So is the young politically innocent Young PAP likely candidate Ms Tin Pei Ling who is very likely to contest. [Young PAP learning the ropes in MacPherson; 28 Mar 2011 – TODAY]. Should Parliament then become a training ground for PAP young candidates riding the GRC free ticket while experienced Opposition leaders are forced into NCMP seats? This is not evolution but retrogression.

DPM Wong had caused a stir. PM Lee now says that Singaporeans should ‘Think about long-term future’ and vote calmly [Think about long-term future; 28 Mar 2011 – TODAY]. In response to a reporter's question on whether there had been too much hype over the elections, Mr Lee noted that some newspapers were "getting a bit breathless" in their coverage. Are newspapers really getting “breathless” or is it a sign that the new media and the blogosphere are exerting great pressure to ‘spur’ on our state-managed MSM?

In our political system with the GRC as its anchor-weight, which already deprives many of a chance to vote, can Singaporeans really vote calmly with what PAP can simply wish to inject into our political system, such as new citizens and young immature candidates? Should we vote for the imaginary “long-term future” when the PAP is unable to deliver short-term goals, such as lowering the cost of living and to alleviate income stagnation? [Middle income worry over cost of living; 28 Mar 2011 – TODAY].

If this Election is not about “revolution” but “evolution” as what DPM Wong had said, should Singaporeans then vote calmly for “Revolutionary CHANGE” as called for by the Opposition [An Open Letter To Singaporeans; 28 Mar 2011 – Political Parties] and this worried citizen [PM Lee - Think of the future; 28 Mar 2011 – Letter to SGEP] or else would the PAP be 'short-changing' the Electorate?

THE People's Action Party (PAP) chairman Lim Boon Heng said today when introducing more new candidates that a key issue that the party will fight the coming election on is the kind of future Singaporeans want for themselves and their children. The headlines screamed "PAP will fight for Singaporeans' future". But it seems PAP has no clear imminent answers to issues the new media is crying about - affordable housing, foreigners and cost of living issues with income stagnantion. Unless these issues are promptly addressed, the PAP is just hiding under the "Singaporeans' future" banner.

To vote wisely and calmly visit SGEP for more good reads about GE 2011.