An AsiaYouthMedia Website 亚 青 传 媒
a diagram
made by
cherian
george, ex-
SPH
journalist
working at
HK Baptist
University.
The
conception
is good,
but his
forecast
for Tan
Cheng
Bock's new
party
seems too
rosy
NSP/Nicole Seah
It is said about Singapore opposition parties that they do nothing until there is an election, when they pop up, hold discussions about which party runs in which district, something that cannot be done till the electoral boundary report comes out, usually a couple of months before an election. Only then would actual candidates be designated for a district and start campaigning there, so in most cases they are strangers to the voters, who need to decide whether to like them in a matter of days. In fact, the leaders of some of the parties dont even live in Singapore: they have jobs overseas and rush back to organize a campaign after an election is called, or when it is about to be called.
National Solidarity Party is the most successful in this group, getting average vote percentages close to SDP. In 2011 its candidate Nicole Seah was the media superstar, displaying an astounding public presence for a political novice
Not long before that she was still with Reform Party, campaigning in RP yellow instead of NSP pink
In the presidential campaign later in 2011, she supported former SDP candidate Tan Jee Say, one of four running (Photo: Bugis shopping trip)
though she later described it as a mistake, without explaining why.
After several years doing different things including working in Bangkok, getting married and having child,
including acting in a movie 1965
but skipping the 2015 election, she was reported to have joined Workers' Party in Dec 2017; however I have not found any photo of her in WP blue yet.
About NSP, is there a party ideology? or even an organization? I actually do not know. The group of former RP members that went to NSP in 2011 have mostly gone to other parties and I have no idea who will be standing under its banner in 2020, but I do read this today
NSP will be standing in Sembawang and Tampines GRCs and Pioneer SMC in the coming election. NSP secretary-general Spencer Ng announced the decision to reporters as the party held its first walkabout in Sembawang GRC, which was contested by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) in 2011.
for what it's worth, I present this chart, showing the number of clicks each party received on a survey page of theonlinecitizen.com. I do not know what PVP has been doing to get its profile up, nor why PSP clicks are so low
When looking for nicole photos, I actually came across a forgotten comment I left on Kirsten Han's webpage; the lack of response from her, and earlier from Alex Au, partly explains oppo politics's poor state:
Ah.. nicole seah was only a fluke; since she took Tan Jee Say shopping for clothes during his presidential campaign, he was only part of a fluke too
however, a few months after Kevlyn Lim shed tears in her election rally speech, the government introduced new measure giving some benefits to single mothers; that too is a fluke? I asked Alex Au several times in article comments to discuss why single mothers were more successful in causing change than gays, but he has yet to respond; maybe you care to take up the suggestion?
another comment I made to Alex Au: the new generation play video games, watch online pornography, go to pubs, engage in promiscuous sex (homo and hetero), attend mass churches where services are like pop concerts and the message is you can indulge yourself and still go to heaven… obviously they are not in mood to read newspapers; this issue has nothing to do with political control, and your tendency to blame control for every ill, is not only simple minded, but very old so the new generation wont be paying much attention; you too need to come up with new messages, like media corp and SPH — again he did not respond but you might like to consider this
38 Oxley Road
The younger brother and sister of PM Lee have been carrying on a dispute with him concerning Lee Kuan Yew's old house for the past 3 years. The sister Wei Ling posted articles on facebook multiple times, with wide repostings; brother Hsien Yang spoke less frequently but his stand was just as clear
LKY's will gave the house to Hsien Loong the oldest son/head of family, but says his daughter can live in it as long as she chooses, thus limiting the owner's options regarding the asset: cannot sell with vacant possession, cannot rent out for income, cannot demolish while LWL lives there; since LWL is likely to outlive her older brother given typical female life expectency, and may even outlive her younger brother, it seems premature to argue about the eventual disposal of the property, but for almost a year the nation (and some international audience, e.g., SCMP was quite busy talking about it) was mesmerized
currently LHY owns it, older brother having decided to rid himself of the issue personally, but of course the idea of SG gov decreeing the house's conservation as a public monument, thus violating LKY's express wish, remains
with opposition figures speaking about abuse of power at the Hong Lim Park rally on 15 July 2017,
the matter had truly elevated from a family quarrel with political overtones (and entertainment value, though now exhausted) into a political issue.
First a simple question: are the speakers at the rally in favour or against demolishing the house? That is, if government prevents the fulfilment of LKY’s wish to demolish, it is abusing its power? That would be a difficult case to make, since the government clearly has power to declare any building to be historical and needing to be conserved. In any case, the government has not yet done so, and is respecting LKY’s wish to let LWL live in the house.
Preserving the house for political gain and image making, is a valid suggestion. In other words, not demolishing the house for history might be just a pretext. Again it would be a difficult case to prove, since there clearly is much history involved. Similarly, LHL choosing not to sue his siblings for defamation over their comments on him as a disobedient son, might be politically expedient, but he is not abusing any power in choosing this
A somewhat curious charge is lack of closure; another way of putting it is the three Lee siblings have bombarded the public with all that noise, and deserve some reprimand before they slunk away into silence. That might be a valid charge, but it would be hard to identify the specific power LHL abused for not providing good closure.
The speakers and audience obviously thought it worthwhile to hold a public rally in Hong Lim Park over this, but as is often the case with opposition politics, they have not explained clearly what they advocate. They are against PAP, and a citizen has the right to choose that. They need to be more specific about what action they want to see. Demolish now - LWL moves elsewhere and get wrecking crew in immediately? Demolish after she passes away - but would any of the speakers be around then? Conserve? Something else?
Since then the sibling conflict has spread beyond the house; Lee Hsien Yang has publicly associated with opposition figures, including donating money to Leong Sze Hian who was being sued by government for libel, and his wife's handling of LKY's will is being considered by Law Society for disbarment. I expect LHY to try for the presidential election in 2017 and the government to find some way to block him. One point: no LKY is not turning is his grave: he does not have one. He was cremated and his ashes are kept in a columbarium.
LKY morned by many
singer Sun Yanzi, with husband and child, standing in line to pay respect to LKY lying in state (she was offered special treatment but turned it down)
Nicole Seah in Bangkok Singapore Embassy signing condolence book
Lee Wei Ling in China: Yan An
Gui Lin
we can surmise she thought herself closest to dad among the 3 children and knows his wish best, and her older brother (or cabinet) does not defer enough to it
yuenco.com an asia youth media website
The PAP government has a big worry about the presidency: if in the next election Tan Cheng Bock runs one on one with incumbent Tony Tan, he is likely to win. In 2011 he lost only by a whisker, in a field of four candidates; since the other two were both opposition figures, if they had been absent their votes were likely to have gone to TCB who would have won handily. Many voters had the view that, with PAP as the majority party in parliament forming the executive of the nation, it would be nice to have a president with a history of different political affiliation to act as restraint. I dont think this attitude has changed
I always considered the elected president scheme to be a mistake arising from convoluted thinking; I outline the history at the bottom of the article. If PAP wants to ensure that the majority party also has its preferred candidate winning the presidency, then the present system need to be reformed. The scheme I suggest requires a significant constitutional change: an upper chamber or senate whose presidency is ex officio also the head of state, with the same “second key” power of the current presidency. The senate shall be elected by proportionate representation, in parallel with the first-past-post system for the lower house. Small parties that cannot win any lower house seats can still gain some senate seats based on their total national vote; e.g., if the senate has 20 members, then a party winning 5% nationally would qualify for one seat. In this sense, the new system is more representative than the current one, providing for smaller parties having a voice. (Note: if the opposition total vote is 30% as in 2015, then 5% is not really a small number, and a party with this level of support deserves to have a voice in an elected forum) For the 2015 election, PAP would have qualified for 14 senate seats, which presumably would be filled by retiring ministers and lower house members, so that they can continue to fulfil an advisory role.
For each general election, parties would nominate individual candidates for each lower house district, and a panel of 20 candidates for the senate, including one designated as the presidential candidate. After the national votes are counted, some of the candidates, including the presidential candidate, will be sent by parties as senators depending on their national vote percentages; in this sense, the president is elected by nationwide voting, since at the time the citizens cast their votes, they already know who are the presidential candidates.
note added on 8/5/2017 – a recent constitutional amendment imposes additional requirements on presidential candidates’ eligibility: the government may declare for each election the particular ethic group candidates must belong to; for the next presidential election candidates are required to be malay, so that tan cheng bock is not eligible; this might deal with the current situation, but in the long run I believe some solution along the line I suggest will be necessary 
historical note in the mid 80s when LKY, then just over 60, was exploring his next step, the expectation at the time was he would move to the presidency – under the then constitution, parliament would appoint the president by a simple vote; he being who he was, the position would not be merely ceremonial but he probably felt not comfortable with a position that legally carried no power and was subject to cabinet/parliament decision; so a move was made to change the constitution and enhance the position; the public discussion led to his undertaking not to be the first elected president; Goh Chok Tong then closed the option of LKY being the second elected present, with a decision to invent the post of Senior Minister to keep LKY in the cabinet; the subsequently elected president Ong Teng Chong found that the constitutionally prescribed new duties required certain information regarding government finances and asked for a complete set of data, which caused friction with cabinet and some civil servants.
Further, the 2nd and 3rd presidential elections never took place, because there is a provision that a candidate must possess adequate administrative experience, the assessment being carried out by a committee of three senior civil servants; in effect, the 3-men committee “elected” President Nathan twice, by rejecting other candidates as not being sufficiently qualified. if LKY had retired in 1990 and then started a newspaper column (modern idea would be blog) or a charity/research foundation, and he would have remained the most influential person in the country, taking into consideration that his son and his 2nd cousin (Tony Tan, currently the 4th President, elected in 2011 with with just slightly more votes than Tan Cheng Bok) were both in cabinet; if he had been a blogger posting articles daily, every important person in singapore, the cabinet ministers especially, would have eagerly read them as soon as they were posted.
Further, it would have been possible to make a different kind of constitutional change, by creating a senate with a proportionate electoral representation, e.g., if there are 20 members, a political party will send one senator for every 5% national vote it receives; this would have provided a good venue for retired ministers to stay around and have a voice on policy, without having to have power to pass or reject legislation, but merely being able to discuss and advise; by ensuring that small parties that cannot get any candidate elected in a first-past-the-post system, can nevertheless get some electoral representation, the system also makes the method of “unelected parliament members” unnecessary; undoubtedly,
if LKY had stayed on as a senator instead of cabinet minister, he would have remained the strongest public voice in Singapore without exercising ministerial power nor receiving ministerial pay.