Lawrence Wong have not replied to Pritam's qns if CC can be used by opposition

[haremdevil]

actually pritam dam pro.

he like catch all the PAP fireball aimed at him and WP, then put more fire on the fireball and throw back.

dk if he step down liao will have someone else like him or not anymore for WP.

actually...Pritam this year rally performance is quite good...
if got chance...go catch ah gong rally in the 1950s to 1960s...
both of them got the same vibes...

 

[steven jialat]

actually pritam dam pro.

he like catch all the PAP fireball aimed at him and WP, then put more fire on the fireball and throw back.

dk if he step down liao will have someone else like him or not anymore for WP.

When LTK stepped down, ppl thought that WP will suffer but no they didn't and they grew stronger

LTK also only take part in walkabouts now, doesn't even talk much

Only PAP side keep say this person cannot lose that person cannot lose

With so much resources and "talents" behind them and for them to say this, PAP is just showing ppl they are getting weaker

 

[whatheheck]

Under LHL and GCT, they will deny to their last breath that no such negative politics was ever practised by the party. they will also claim that PA is not politically affiliated to PAP

 

[LetsGoBoys!]

he answer liao

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/ge2025-lawrence-wong-pritam-singh-dna-pap-5100381

Similarly, on the issues of community clubs and centres, which are managed by the People’s Association, Mr Wong said that policies regarding these have been debated, reiterating that the association plays a non-partisan role.
“But the WP and opposition parties will have a different view and we are happy to debate and make adjustments along the way, if we think it's necessary.”


as usual, answer maciam nvr answer, i interpret as not a yes and not a no, its a maybe

 

[haremdevil]

he answer liao

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/ge2025-lawrence-wong-pritam-singh-dna-pap-5100381

Similarly, on the issues of community clubs and centres, which are managed by the People’s Association, Mr Wong said that policies regarding these have been debated, reiterating that the association plays a non-partisan role.
“But the WP and opposition parties will have a different view and we are happy to debate and make adjustments along the way, if we think it's necessary.”


as usual, answer maciam nvr answer, i interpret as not a yes and not a no, its a maybe

send the WP punggol team in to debate...
got a star senior counsel to debate with LW will be a good debate to watch...

 

[jeffprobst]

Whose ET smoking ****.

 

[Damienic]

well, he can don't be PM then if he doesn't have the caliber to answer, or if he is incapable of answering

If he say can use, then he will have fallen into the “ruse” set by Pritam in getting equal treatment for their MPs. If he say cannot use, then he will have proven Pritam allegations of negative politics to be true. So maybe that’s why he intend to give a non committal answer and wait until the elections is over

 

[gaul_ads]

They smoke, you smell and accept..

Hard truth in SG now..

Whose ET smoking ****.

 

[Damienic]

he answer liao

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/ge2025-lawrence-wong-pritam-singh-dna-pap-5100381

Similarly, on the issues of community clubs and centres, which are managed by the People’s Association, Mr Wong said that policies regarding these have been debated, reiterating that the association plays a non-partisan role.
“But the WP and opposition parties will have a different view and we are happy to debate and make adjustments along the way, if we think it's necessary.”


as usual, answer maciam nvr answer, i interpret as not a yes and not a no, its a maybe

This was the answer I share just now in my earlier post.
its not a straight answer but as I mentioned, for PAP leader to say he willing to make adjustments along the way is unusual, reflecting a softer approach compared to his predecessors

 

[Itsnotfunny]

Pappies these days only give motherhood and wishy washy answers. At least last time LKY would tell it as it is. No mincing words.

 

[haremdevil]

This was the answer I share just now in my earlier post.
its not a straight answer but as I mentioned, for PAP leader to say he willing to make adjustments along the way is unusual, reflecting a softer approach compared to his predecessors

talk from 2011 till now...
if no pressure confirm no talk...不見棺材不落淚...
must vote WP in then u see real actual talk/debate begin...

talk from 2011 to now...

Let’s play fair at the grassroots level

"I pledge to work together with all Singaporeans to create a just and fair society," Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in his swearing-in speech at the Istana on 21 May.

While PM Lee may have been referring to Singapore and Singaporeans at large, to give "all citizens the best start in life, and leave no one behind", he should perhaps also note that a just and fair society applies to specifics as well.

Underlying the unhappiness over certain issues, as displayed during the recent general election, could be another layer of discontent. And this has to do with the uneven political playing field here.

For the longest time, those who are not of the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) have questioned the fairness and impartiality of the civil service, government departments, government policies, various rules and regulations in law — and the grassroots organisations (GROs).

The ugly head of discrimination, perceived or otherwise, when it comes to the GROs, has given rise to disenchantment among certain segments of our society. It can be argued also that such sentiments have crossed over to the larger public sphere.

When the story of Mr Chiam See Tong, opposition Member of Parliament (MP) for Potong Pasir, had to conduct his Meet The People sessions (MPS) at the void deck of a HDB block in his ward was reported, many were dismayed and even upset that he was not accorded due respect in carrying out his work as an elected MP. (See story here.)

It was felt that it was unfair that while PAP MPs were offered premises, which were air-conditioned and with adequate facilities, to conduct their MPS', Mr Chiam was not made the same offer. Ditto the other opposition MP, Mr Low Thia Khiang of the Workers' Party (WP), in Hougang.

The WP won six seats in the May elections and, since then, its other MPs have had to conduct their MPS's at the void deck as well.

The focal point of unhappiness is that the premises used by the PAP MPs are made available to them by the People's Association (PA), a statutory board formed in 1960 which oversees some 1,800 grassroots organisations. PM Lee, who is the current secretary general of the PAP, is also the Chairman of the PA. Its board consists of several PAP MPs too.

The PAP has held an iron grip on the grassroots since Singapore's independence and opposition parties face almost insurmountable obstacles in establishing its own network of such outreach channels. Mr Low, in one of his rally speeches during the recent elections, raised the issue. He said "the PAP has made it almost impossible for the opposition to have a grassroots foothold, a physical venue to launch activities in PAP constituencies."

Referring to the PA, Mr Low told the rally crowd on 30 April:

"It is funded by the government, headed by the PM and its Board of Directors is made up of PAP appointees. They run all the grassroots organisations, including the Resident Committees and Community Clubs, making sure that the opposition is kept out of the grassroots in terms of the institutional structure.

Opposition MPs are not allowed to make use of Community club facilities to organise courses or activities for residents but PAP MPs are free to do so. I thought Community Clubs are meant for the community, not to propel the PAP's interests?"

Elected PAP MPs are made advisers to the GROs. And even PAP candidates rejected by the electorate are also made advisers. This gives them a huge advantage in reaching and tilling the ground for the next elections. Victorious opposition MPs, on the other hand, are denied access to these organisations. Neither are they made advisers.

A grassroots which is politicised does not serve the larger interests of Singapore society. Funded by all taxpayers and run with help from volunteers who give of their time and effort, GROs should remain free from any political influence. This will enable them to achieve the PA's goal of "strengthening the community and nation-building." A politically partisan PA cannot but fail to meet the challenges it has set itself for the simple reason that it will cater to only those on one side of the political fence. Far from being the conduit for "strengthening" our community, it may instead be the source of polarizing it.

The results of the recent elections and the PM's speech indicate that Singaporeans now want a more level playing field in the political arena. The PM himself has pledged that a fair and just society is his goal, going forward.

Perhaps it is time our elected leader puts his money where his mouth is and begin to level the political playing field — starting with the GROs.

To paraphrase Mr Low, to play a game of soccer, lets not make goal posts smaller than the ball.

Otherwise, the PA's partisan role will increasingly come into sharper focus especially if more opposition members are elected as MPs in future.

Lets play fair.

 

[steven jialat]

Pritam asked him to just answer YES or NO but Lawrence cannot answer

Very disappointing

 

[LetsGoBoys!]

This was the answer I share just now in my earlier post.
its not a straight answer but as I mentioned, for PAP leader to say he willing to make adjustments along the way is unusual, reflecting a softer approach compared to his predecessors

oh pls, come on la, this is not call soft approach, this is call election coming, cant say no directly so beat ard the bush 1st

PS say wanted to use CC for things like food drive for low income families for the good of singaporeans, like this also cannot?

anyway i didnt know of this until watching WP rally, another reason to vote WP

 

[Damienic]

oh pls, come on la, this is not call soft approach, this is call election coming, cant say no directly so beat ard the bush 1st

PS say wanted to use CC for things like food drive for low income families for the good of singaporeans, like this also cannot?

anyway i didnt know of this until watching WP rally, another reason to vote WP

I say softer approach because during LHL and GCT time, they will say no such thing as PA being politicised and no negative politics being practised. This unfair treatment have been around for the longest time and they have always deny it

 

[LetsGoBoys!]

I say softer approach because during LHL and GCT time, they will say no such thing as PA being politicised and no negative politics being practised. This unfair treatment have been around for the longest time and they have always deny it

ok you have your point, gnite

 

[Damienic]

LKY is the only PAP leader who will say things straight to our faces. On unfair treatment to opposition held wards, LKY once said that why should he make life easier for opposition? And being LKY, people accepted it.

 

[gaul_ads]

actually...Pritam this year rally performance is quite good...
if got chance...go catch ah gong rally in the 1950s to 1960s...
both of them got the same vibes...

Pritam is real PM material..

 

[ahnyaahnya]

I remember Chiam was saying that they diverted some buses that was plying the route of Potong Pasir and eventually only like one bus serving PP residents when he won in the 80s.

When he first stood for election (~1970), they immediately did a personal attack on him.
Just cos he wasn't a U grad

 

[askxyz]

Since last night radio silence

So can use or cannot use??

he needs to discuss with his bosses first then need many approval before giving the official answer

 

[ahnyaahnya]

LKY is the only PAP leader who will say things straight to our faces. On unfair treatment to opposition held wards, LKY once said that why should he make life easier for opposition? And being LKY, people accepted it.

Nobody told him that those facilities were paid for by the people's taxes, not PAP funds. And that included taxes paid by residents of those constituencies