Can our MPs debate (Part II)
-
Here is the exchange which took place after Ms Yu-Foo Yee Shoon had answered Dr Neo’s original question, and the Speaker was ready to move on.
Mr Speaker: Dr Lam Pin Min.
Dr Lily Neo: I am sorry, Mr Speaker. Can I be allowed to come in here, because I was asked a question? Therefore, I should be given a chance to reply.
Mr Speaker: Your question was not answered?
Dr Lily Neo: No, Sir. One, my question was not answered and, two, I was asked a question.
Mr Speaker: Yes.
Dr Lily Neo: Mr Speaker, I like to object to the fact that I was asked a question on what I wanted. Was assistance for 20% or 30% enough? No, that was not what I was asking for. I was asking for 100,000 households which are only 3% of the population. I could not be asked a question. We have already given 20% of ComCare, and may I just qualify that ComCare was temporary assistance, and that was really out of the question.
Mr Speaker: To cut it short, your question was not answered then?
Dr Lily Neo: Sir, the questions I asked were:
(1) Was it correct to say that there were 100,000 households that require long-term assistance, whereas the assistance schemes we have at the moment are all temporary?
(2) Can they be helped with long-term solutions to get them out of the poverty trap; and
(3) Can their children be given a better chance?
But I have definitely never asked for assistance for 30% or 40% of Singaporeans, and I object to being asked that kind of question.
Mr Speaker: Mrs Yu-Foo, would you like to answer that question?
Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not say that Dr Lily Neo asked for 30%. I just said that, generally, we have one million households. If we say 100,000, it is about 10% of the households. After we have the ComCare scheme, actually the Government covers the bottom 20% of households in Singapore. My question to Singaporeans is whether we want to cover beyond the bottom 20%. I am not saying that Dr Lily Neo asked for more than the bottom 20%. I just want to clarify that.
Another point is that, for the very, very poor, it is about 3,600 persons who are under Public Assistance. Some are under the interim ComCare scheme while others are under the Workfare Scheme. Together, if we add the 4,000 or 5,000, those are the really poor cases. But those with income beyond $1,500 who can manage but have difficulty when their children go to school.
Mr Speaker: Mrs Yu-Foo, you are actually repeating your replies.
Source: TOC
-
those MPs are far worse than secondary schoolkids....................
in PAP, where got debate one......................
all reading from scripts wriiten for them before parliament................
-
my god it is call debate? it more like Q and A. debate are those that are like taiwan political show, where legislative members, mayor go to TV and challenges by caller, oppostion members.
-
Most PAP "politicians" don't have experience competing in a real political arena, that is why that are useless in debating, public speaking etc.
Most are really just agents of Lee Kuan Yew and recruited by him for that purpose, they are not real politicians at all.
They are completely worthless as political leaders.
They have no political ambitions, political ideas, political skills or followers.
They are not politicians.
-
Originally posted by reyes:
my god it is call debate? it more like Q and A. debate are those that are like taiwan political show, where legislative members, mayor go to TV and challenges by caller, oppostion members.
We should have live debate before General election like Taiwan.I watched USA presidential election debate too.
-
These croonies were selected through their teenage result and obedience.
The speech that were given by them on all the events are all scripted.
Majority of them do not even attend the house diligently for the past three years and not much issue was discussed.
As to whether they can debated, it is as illustrated above from the moronic script writers that they have employed and the result it have produced.
For being cheap, they have made a fool out of themselves.
-
Put them in PRC and they will learnt to debate and protect their rights, in the hard way and paying school fees.
-
I thought it is a known fact that they have prepared speeches for all questions asked in Parliament?
MPs submit their questions, then the minister will send these questions down to the relevant ministry staff to research the questions and then prepare the answer.
The minister just regurgitates whatever is in the written piece of paper during Parliament.
By the way, are MPs even allowed to ask impromptu questions?
-
The way the questions and answer are delivered word for word even though they sound stupid indicate the total obedience of the croonies.
If an impromptu question is asked, the croonies will look bad if they cannot address the questions with impressive statistic.
So, it will be beneficial to invite more different party into the house to test and question the policy before they are approved.
Or else the pain will be on our wallet as they just silently approved the 21% pay increase for a rubber stamp prata man living in orchard road.
-
I think impromptu questions on submitted topics, yes. Impromptu topics...no. Well, fair enough if they need stats and research. Just that if we had 40 opposition MPs in parliament instead of 2, don't you think it'd be a more boisterous affair? lol. And will Nathan's salary be increased just like that?
His kind of increment is the kind of "shut me up" incentive. Spill no beans about the govt.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
I think impromptu questions on submitted topics, yes. Impromptu topics...no. Well, fair enough if they need stats and research. Just that if we had 40 opposition MPs in parliament instead of 2, don't you think it'd be a more boisterous affair? lol. And will Nathan's salary be increased just like that?
His kind of increment is the kind of "shut me up" incentive. Spill no beans about the govt.
Speculation is that the salary increase is not for him. Some people noted that he will be stepping down soon after his term ends. The salary is meant for the next president.
As to who the next president will be, again there has been interesting talk on the ground.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
Speculation is that the salary increase is not for him. Some people noted that he will be stepping down soon after his term ends. The salary is meant for the next president.
As to who the next president will be, again there has been interesting talk on the ground.
I hope we can vote for the next president. -
Who else but Mr Peanut ?
The old man may not last that long.
They are spending so much people money to fatten their purse and refusing to use the money to help the people that need the money.
As to voting for the next prata man, there will not be voting as it will not be contested.
-
Originally posted by Medicated Oil:
Who else but Mr Peanut ?
The old man may not last that long.
They are spending so much people money to fatten their purse and refusing to use the money to help the people that need the money.
As to voting for the next prata man, there will not be voting as it will not be contested.
Mr. Peanut? are we goin to get a monkey as the next President?
hmm.... let me check which monkey has the higherest IQ or they r just the same?
-
You are right about monkey.
See No Evil, Hear No Evil and Speak No Evil.
With $4 267 500 dollars per year for one term, you just need to be blind, dumb and deaf and be a puppet and become rich.
Why we are paying so much a guy who dun even fulfil his basic responsibility of checking where is the money ?
-
Puppets no mind of their own , cannot debate.
-
It strikes me how worthless and impotent our parliament is.
Got parliament, no parliament, doesn't make any difference whatsoever.
Any politics by PAP is just a facade in Singapore.
We live in a one party dictatorship.
Vote the PAP out in coming elections and restore power back to parliament.
vote for representative government, not PAP dictatorship.
vote PAP out.
-
Originally posted by Vote PAP OUT to Save SG:
It strikes me how worthless and impotent our parliament is.
Got parliament, no parliament, doesn't make any difference whatsoever.
Any politics by PAP is just a facade in Singapore.
We live in a one party dictatorship.
One party dictatorship forever. Singaporeans love familiarity and living within the fence. -
Originally posted by afan:
Singaporeans love familiarity and living within the fence.but if they are politicised?
Will they still vote PAP?
PAP rally 2006 GE:
Worker's Party rally 2006 GE:
-
Originally posted by Vote PAP OUT to Save SG:
but if they are politicised?
Will they still vote PAP?
from what I observe the majority are not ready to have a change in govt. There are still many who fear and stop people from talking about local politics.
-
Originally posted by afan:
There are still many who fear and stop people from talking about local politics.
they are still not yet politicised.
-
Originally posted by Vote PAP OUT to Save SG:
they are still not yet politicised.
The old people I talk to keep telling me LKY PAP doing very well to get rid of gangsters. They are thankful about this. They don't like the opposition party existing during that time when gangsters were around. They prefer to pay and pay. I believe they will vote to pay and pay again this election. -
I hope to have live debate before General elections.
-
Originally posted by Singapore AFOL:
I hope to have live debate before General elections.
Chee, PAP also don't dare to invite on state TV.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
I think impromptu questions on submitted topics, yes. Impromptu topics...no. Well, fair enough if they need stats and research. Just that if we had 40 opposition MPs in parliament instead of 2, don't you think it'd be a more boisterous affair? lol. And will Nathan's salary be increased just like that?
His kind of increment is the kind of "shut me up" incentive. Spill no beans about the govt.
clap clap. that is exactly my own sentiment. he look like a drunkie more than a president.