23 Jun 2006

Single party rule ‘best for Singapore

Anyone remember George Yeo who made similar insensitive remarks that caused Taiwan to call us a "snot"? Looks like our dear leaders are making international news to make themselves look silly. As the Singapore saying goes, "You pay peanuts, you get circus monkeys... "

====
Single party rule ‘best for Singapore’
By John Burton in Singapore and Leora Moldofsky in Sydney
Published: June 22 2006 01:50
Last updated: June 22 2006 01:50

Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore’s prime minister, has criticised Australia and New Zealand’s liberal democratic practices, suggesting that Singapore’s system, under which a single party has ruled since independence, is more efficient.

Mr Lee made the remarks at the end of a nine-day visit to the two countries, which are attracting a growing number of immigrants from the Asian city-state.

Although the democracies of Australia and New Zealand made for “more exciting” politics, the national interest could suffer in a multi-party system, said Mr Lee.

The comments could provoke controversy, particularly as Mr Lee’s visit was meant to improve economic and defence ties in spite of criticism about Singapore’s human rights record.

“Endless debates are seldom about achieving a better grasp of the issue but to score political points,” said Mr Lee about the political systems in Australia and New Zealand.

He said John Howard, the Australian prime minister, “spends all his time dealing with this party politics. The result is you don’t have a lot of time to worry about the long-term future.”

Dominant party rule was the best system for a small, multiracial country like Singapore, Mr Lee said, as he prepared to leave New Zealand, whose population of 4m is similar in size and ethnic complexity to that of the city-state.

The People’s Action Party has governed Singapore since 1959 when Lee Kuan Yew, Mr Lee’s father, was elected prime minister.

Mr Lee blamed Australia’s multi-party system for his failure to persuade Canberra to open its aviation market to state-owned Singapore Airlines, which is seeking to fly the transpacific route from Sydney to Los Angeles.

He said Australia’s National party, the minority partner in the ruling coalition, was against opening up the route because Qantas could threaten in response to cut unprofitable routes to rural areas where the party is strong. Qantas has opposed Singapore Airline’s entry on the transpacific route.

The decision was “a net loss” for Australia because it hurt tourism, Mr Lee said.

His remarks appeared aimed at Mark Vaile, the National party leader and trade minister, who will lead negotiators next month in a review of the bilateral trade pact with Singapore.

Mr Lee was questioned about the treatment of Singapore opposition leader, Chee Soon Juan, who was charged this week with speaking in public without a police licence. He said all political leaders had to respect the law, adding that Dr Chee engaged in “destructive” policies that were meant “to impress foreign supporters”.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006

29 comments:

Anonymous said...

his view should not be ridiculed; it is the same view expressed during the election: if there are 20 opposition MPs, he would be too busy answering their criticisms to run the economy; it reflects the nature of Singapore Inc.; the CEOs at shareholders meetings have the same attitude

unfortunately, you cant assess this idea fully unless the alternative ideas are fully explored; you need antithesis before you can study thesis fully and try to achieve synthesis

Anonymous said...

PAP is so full of nonsense.

I feel they should all resign and give the people real democracy.

If only Singaporeans will wake up like the Taiwanese, South Koreans, Thai, Malaysians and Indonesians.

Inq said...

"As the Singapore saying goes, "You pay peanuts, you get circus monkeys... ""

But it is just as possible that when,

You pay wagon loads of peanuts, you get GREEDY circus monkeys...


And 'single-party' rule is always preferred by those who believe themselves to be enlightened AND Greedy Circus Monkeys.

How you distinguish between both is that the former never insist on wagon loads of peanuts as evidence of their good intentions but the latter ALWAYS do.

Simple logic actually. For The Corporation(PAP) to utilise such illogical nonsense in the face of the indentured labourers of singapore, mka(mistakenly known as) 'citizens', is the greatest testament to the cretinous state of the people.

Inq said...

"...if there are 20 opposition MPs, he would be too busy answering their criticisms to run the economy; it reflects the nature of Singapore Inc..."

If there are 20 opposition MPs, he would be too busy answering their criticisms to run the economy with that degree of fallibility that always afflicts the perspective of one who would rather busy himself in running the economy than answering criticisms.

Tis no wonder they brought back Chinese culture. It readies the population for subjection on the basis of might rather than reason.(i.e. rules, traditions, regimentation, subservience to authority, etc, etc, all hallmarks of Chinese history since 211 b.c.) Such nonsense arguments would not work in more intellectually enlightened and vibrant cultures, i.e. w.Europe, India.

It's hightime Chingaporeans considered a local variant of the Magna Carta.

Anonymous said...

Blind obedience to authority- this is the so-called "asian" values espoused by our Great Leeder. Dear Leeder is just trying to propagate his daddy's(Great Leeder) nepotic vision.

Anonymous said...

While he's at it, why don't he just come right out and say it- having hereditary rulers is even more efficient since we will not have to waste our time and resources holding elections. Instead all rulers and their descendents will rule over us the peasants in perpetuality since according to the beliefs our our Great Leeder- great genes are all that is needed.

Anonymous said...

Mini Lee has suceeded in making singapore the laughing stock of the politdical world. The man is a total abortion, but singaporeans's are also to blame for tolerating PAP for so long.

unfortunately the place is becoming a lost cause democratically.

Anonymous said...

elections are useful, like a regular "exam" for citizens to give the government a "mark" and the chance to improve before the next election

Anonymous said...

"Tis no wonder they brought back Chinese culture. It readies the population for subjection on the basis of might rather than reason.(i.e. rules, traditions, regimentation, subservience to authority, etc, etc, all hallmarks of Chinese history since 211 b.c.) Such nonsense arguments would not work in more intellectually enlightened and vibrant cultures, i.e. w.Europe, India"

Your reasoning shows a lack of contextual knowledge, full stop. I'll not correct you here. Please go to the nearest library to borrow books Chinese history.

rench00 said...

one assumes that we would definitely get opposition members who can ask sufficiently good questions. of course, there is no gaurantee for that. we might just get Ian Duncan Smith's.

and one assumes that Chee Soon Juan would do a better job at growing the economy. but given the way he mismanages his party, i doubt his organisational ability. (though i agree that he is a good speaker.)

so, if anything, if we really want to have alternative views, i'd say that we must grow ONE good opposition party (currently it seems that the WP's the best bet). also, we ourselves must be willing to engage the government, force them to engage us, opposition parties or not.

however, i so totally disagree with protests in the streets. i think anyone who does that ought to be shot for inconveniencing the rest of the majority of us who, though wanting an alternative, would prefer to have alternatives via other means than demonstrations and protests.

Anonymous said...

If Singapore is so good, and Aust and NZ are so bad politically as he
made it out to be, then why are so
many Sinkies migrating to both these countries and not the other way round?
No wonder Sylvia Lim called the PAP
arrogant, when the country PM can
make such remarks. He can kiss goodbye to SIA chances for a long long time.

Anonymous said...

LHL is trying to impress the world of his intelligence.The irony is that his words always sounded that of an imbecile.

Anonymous said...

that's the fault of his mentors and seniors; they should accept blame and take a pay cut

Anonymous said...

sg is such a small small world and yet we need one MM, one SM, one PM and two DPM to run the country as compared to the past, we only have one PM and one DPM!! it's so strange! what does this indicate....how capable is......???

Matilah_Singapura said...

What's this?

In most "robust" democracies it's an "either-or" choice, which is no real choice at all.

You get a "choice" of left or right, conservatives or progressives, tory or labour. Either which way you still get the iron fist of the state blugeoning the people—the "intolerable monster" Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, James Madison warned humankind about.

HL Mencken was iundeed correct: Reprensentative democracy is the rule of jackals by jackasses.

"To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so.

To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assesed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harrased, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored.

That is government; that is its justice, that is its morality."
--Pierre J. Proudhon, General Idea of the Revolution in the 19th Century

Anonymous said...

I am confused.

First he condemned Australian and New Zealand multi-party politics for short-sightedness that benefits individual parties and not national interest.

Then he said Spore dominant party politics looks after national interest and not party interest.

Then he said upgrading base on party interest is correct. But correct for PAP only.

Is LHL self contradicting himself on the difference between multi-party and dominant party in one interview?

Will he dare to say the same thing if it was to foreign newspapers instead of Spore reporters which renown Pro-PAP?

Very confusing statements from LHL indeed....

Anonymous said...

Is he beginning to show the REAL Lee Hsien Loong ?

I mean all along he was not really in leadership role under his dad and Goh Chok Tong plus the nice picture the media paint of him, we presume his character to be perfect for PM.

But now he has to show his "commander-in-chief" image and is force to say more than the past, he said so many silly words and make so many foolish statements.

Is he beginning to show the result of life growing up without any competition?

I mean from young until now, he never had to taste any suffering ,experience any hardship and fight for anything. Everything was on the plate for him.

From school, relationship, work, career and family. Everything done nicely for him. With such pleasant background, can he do the job of leader and commander-in-chief ?

He is lucky our local media cannot think or else journalists would have taken his words and scrutinise for all Singaporeans to read.

PAP is trying hard to convince Singaporeans and the world that dominant party politics is better than multi-party politics so he took New Zealand and Australia as chopping block.

Everyone knows natural logic that dominance is never better than equal competition and choices. Dominance will become domineering in long run.

PAP realise from GE 2006 that Singaporeans are beginning to understand dominance is no good for anything. This ranges from politics, soccer, business, cellphones to food.

So PAP is trying very hard to spread the gospel for next 5 years starting with making an example of Oceanian countries.

I beginning to have my doubts about Lee Hsien Loong.

Anonymous said...

the same happened with GCT's first election: he thought he would get more votes by being nice, but did not

Anonymous said...

Everyone should watch this

Only he dares to speak the truth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztlvJ04D52I&search=M%20Ravi

Anonymous said...

The Lee family firmly believe the world must follow Singapore style, one party politics.

Luckily we aussies believe differently. Singapore is a very small island with very small thoughts and ideas which they must keep to themselves.

I have friends and relatives in Melbourne and Perth who feel the time has come to cleanse our country of unwanted singaporeans who are shooting their nasty little chink mouths off.

I do not wish so see my grand children speaking Mandarin.

I am all for immigration, but please keep aussie heartland to the aussies.

Prime Minister Lee, keep your perverted ideas to yourself, and your unfortunate islanders who have been brainwashed into believing the Peoples Action Party is the best thing since sliced bread.

Anonymous said...

if you are worried about asian immigrants, china is where the big numbers come from; you are pissing into the wrong wind

Anonymous said...

ONE-PARTY STATE is GREAT? You must be kidding! READ about China Coomunist Party , ONE-PARTY STATE and PARTY SURVIVAL is the MOST IMPORTANT!


Evil deed of Chinese Communist Party to maintain its one party political power – including Organ Harvesting from LIVING Falun Gong practitioners in Labour Camp in China

http://chinacommunistparty.blogspot.com

http://chinesecommunistparty.blogspot.com

To download ‘9 ping’ 《九评共产党》- (writings of evil Chinese Communist party) http://www.epochtimes.com/gb/4/12/13/n746020.htm (Source: 9ping.com)


or tune in to 106.5 FM (radio) for the reading of 9ping everyday at Singgapore time 3pm and 10pm

Anonymous said...

falungong is everywhere

Anonymous said...

very simple solution to chinese in australia, close the doors to the whole race, and restrict the activities of the yellow bastards who have managed to move to our country.

remember it must be Australia for the australians.

Seph said...

Sry above anon but you sounded just like a freaking German Nazi.

*Sry for digression* I admit foreigners tend to be a sting in the eye. In a Singaporean context, Singapore has 1/4 of its population made up of foreigners. But then again, this foreigners include the maids that serve the modern Singapore family where most wives cannot cook, Bangladash construction workers, cleaners, and those who cut grass and trim the bushes by the road and many other jobs a otherwise regular Singaporean would not do. In addition foreign companies investing in Singapore has provided many jobs for Singaporeans. I'm sure many foreigners in Australia do have one way or other contributed to Australia's economy.

For you Australian racist bigot , I simply do not understand the need to target the chinese specifically.

Anonymous said...

still pissing into the wind?

unfortunately for guys like you, australia needs china's business; ranting wont change it

Anonymous said...

"... Singapore's system, under which a single party has ruled since independence, is more efficient"

Hmmm... that can be said about a dictatorship too, why don't we have that instead. Then we can do away with time wasting elections.

Anonymous said...

Regarding anon's raacial comments, I come from a Scandanavian Country, where people from the East, Indians Chinses etc, are not really welcome. We strongly believe in running our country for our people. This is not a racial statement, only a fact.

lee hsien tau said...

It's true that one man rule is the most efficient. But the problem is that one man could turn out despotic, or his 'crown prince' is despotic. And therein lies the problem. With one man rule, you cannot correct the situation without bloodshed. And here we have what is basically one man rule.
It's like cloning dolly the sheep. You clone dolly, use the clone of dolly to clone the clone of dolly etc etc. What you get is albino.