atans1

Comparing WP “failures” to PAP “failures”

In Political governance on 17/11/2016 at 5:23 am

I agree with this fair, impartial Facebook post that compared the “failures” of the PAP with that of the WP and judged them by the same standards. I’d add that unlike the PAP, the WP did not have the machinery of the state on its side. If truth be told there were many instances where govt depts or agencies were perceived to be carrying on a witch hunt against the WP town council. Yes, I’m thinking of the NEA.

Luke Wong
16 hrs ·
Had been thinking what a ‘government’ supporter had said on Singapore’s ‘lost decade’.
Lagging infrastructure development (HDB flats, hospital beds), incompetence (over allocation of COE for an entire decade, ponding), indiscriminate and loose foreign worker policy and no accomodation planned for them. These were called “individual cases”, “policy miss-steps” and not “failures”, and had “no major impact” on the people. Singapore is not perfect, system by and large works.
By this yardstick, how can the PAP and its IB label the WP as incompetent and a failure over their alleged TC mismanagement. Has the TC finances and daily operations been affected? Have the people in the GRC suffered? (Have their wages stagnated and they lost their jobs like some did under PAP’s policy miss-steps?)
When do policy miss-steps finally cross the threshold into failures? When systemic cracks appear in a system that “by-and-large works” and lay the foundation for more “miss-steps”, failure is just round the corner. Recall their “learning” culture, “no-blame” culture (“staff confidentiality” and “industry norm”).
Venezuela was “ok” until the depressed oil prices turned their economy upside down and the country into a “failure” right?

Advertisements
  1. local men have a 3rd choice – vote for sdp !

  2. Thought the name sounded familiar. Luke Wong, good grief. Professional IB hunter cum keyboard cybernut.

    But on the main issue, I do consider certain aspects of WP’s management to be a failure. But it is not a failure for which I wanted them to get voted for out. They deserved another term in my book simply because they still represent the most viable second party. Like wise, certain aspects of PAP’s management can be deemed a failure, but not a failure to deny them continued status as the governing party.

    Question next time is whether being the governing party means 70% or something much less. And for our dear WP, whether being the most viable second party has led to an improved level of hard hitting positions taken in the house. Or is it still relying on dear Leon Perrera, while the rest give answers like “Don’t get bogged down by details.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: