Bots, editors
810
edits
2006 General Election: Difference between revisions
AWB change plaintext to link, replaced: Low Thia Khiang → Low Thia Khiang (6)
m (AWB prepend template navbar-elections) |
(AWB change plaintext to link, replaced: Low Thia Khiang → Low Thia Khiang (6)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{Navbar-elections}} | ||
{{DISPLAYTITLE:2006 Singapore General Election}} | {{DISPLAYTITLE:2006 Singapore General Election}} | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
=== Political parties === | === Political parties === | ||
Besides the ruling PAP, the other major political parties were the Workers' Party of Singapore (WP) led by Low Thia Khiang, the Singapore People's Party (SPP) led by Chiam See Tong, the National Solidarity Party (NSP) led by Steve Chia, and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) led by Chee Soon Juan, who himself was ineligible to run in this election because of a 2002 conviction. | Besides the ruling PAP, the other major political parties were the Workers' Party of Singapore (WP) led by [[Low Thia Khiang]], the Singapore People's Party (SPP) led by Chiam See Tong, the National Solidarity Party (NSP) led by Steve Chia, and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) led by Chee Soon Juan, who himself was ineligible to run in this election because of a 2002 conviction. | ||
Four parties, including the SPP and the NSP, contested the election as members of the Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA). | Four parties, including the SPP and the NSP, contested the election as members of the Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA). | ||
| Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
On 17 February 2006, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who was also Minister for Finance and Secretary General of the PAP, delivered the country's Budget Statement to the Parliament. He released details of a S$2.6 billion "progress package" including S$500 million for Central Provident Fund top-ups, S$400 million for workfare bonuses, and S$200 million bonuses for national servicemen. Largely due to this package, the 2006 Budget incurred a deficit of S$2.86 billion. | On 17 February 2006, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who was also Minister for Finance and Secretary General of the PAP, delivered the country's Budget Statement to the Parliament. He released details of a S$2.6 billion "progress package" including S$500 million for Central Provident Fund top-ups, S$400 million for workfare bonuses, and S$200 million bonuses for national servicemen. Largely due to this package, the 2006 Budget incurred a deficit of S$2.86 billion. | ||
Low Thia Khiang (WP) came out strongly against the progress package which he said was no more than a vote-winning tool for the PAP. Low called for greater transparency on how the government intend to finance the package and to compensate for the budget shortfall. Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng (PAP) later dismissed claims that the progress package constitutes a form of vote buying. | [[Low Thia Khiang]] (WP) came out strongly against the progress package which he said was no more than a vote-winning tool for the PAP. Low called for greater transparency on how the government intend to finance the package and to compensate for the budget shortfall. Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng (PAP) later dismissed claims that the progress package constitutes a form of vote buying. | ||
=== Workers' Party manifesto === | === Workers' Party manifesto === | ||
| Line 203: | Line 203: | ||
The Workers' Party had put up their strongest team, consisting of its more prominent candidates led by chairman Sylvia Lim, to contest Aljunied GRC challenging the PAP team led by Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo. The constituency eventually had the fiercest GRC contest in the election. The strongest GRC team for the SDA was one contesting Jalan Besar GRC. It was led by Sebestian Teo and its members include former MP Cheo Chai Chen. | The Workers' Party had put up their strongest team, consisting of its more prominent candidates led by chairman Sylvia Lim, to contest Aljunied GRC challenging the PAP team led by Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo. The constituency eventually had the fiercest GRC contest in the election. The strongest GRC team for the SDA was one contesting Jalan Besar GRC. It was led by Sebestian Teo and its members include former MP Cheo Chai Chen. | ||
The hotly contested Single Member Constituencies include Chua Chu Kang SMC where incumbent MP and Minister of State for Education and Manpower Gan Kim Yong was challenged by NSP's secretary-general and then-NCMP Steve Chia. Low Thia Khiang (WP), the incumbent MP for Hougang SMC faced a strong challenge from PAP's Eric Low Siak Meng. Nee Soon East SMC was hotly contested with Senior Minister of State for Law and Home Affairs Ho Peng Kee against Poh Lee Guan (WP). Potong Pasir SMC, another opposition seat held by Chiam See Tong since 1984 was also hotly contested by PAP's Sitoh Yih Pin. | The hotly contested Single Member Constituencies include Chua Chu Kang SMC where incumbent MP and Minister of State for Education and Manpower Gan Kim Yong was challenged by NSP's secretary-general and then-NCMP Steve Chia. [[Low Thia Khiang]] (WP), the incumbent MP for Hougang SMC faced a strong challenge from PAP's Eric Low Siak Meng. Nee Soon East SMC was hotly contested with Senior Minister of State for Law and Home Affairs Ho Peng Kee against Poh Lee Guan (WP). Potong Pasir SMC, another opposition seat held by Chiam See Tong since 1984 was also hotly contested by PAP's Sitoh Yih Pin. | ||
Workers' Party fielded a very young team in Ang Mo Kio GRC, with candidates mostly born after 1965, to compete with the flagship PAP team led by Lee Hsien Loong. On 29 April 2006, Lee referred to his opponents at Ang Mo Kio GRC as "敢死队" (suicide squad) adding that even the bookies would not take bets on the outcome in that constituency contest. In response, Low Thia Kiang said that it was better to be a "敢死队" (suicide squad) and not a "怕死队" (squad that is scared to die). WP's candidate Yaw Shin Leong added that his teammates and himself were mentally prepared to lose but they were not push-overs. | Workers' Party fielded a very young team in Ang Mo Kio GRC, with candidates mostly born after 1965, to compete with the flagship PAP team led by Lee Hsien Loong. On 29 April 2006, Lee referred to his opponents at Ang Mo Kio GRC as "敢死队" (suicide squad) adding that even the bookies would not take bets on the outcome in that constituency contest. In response, Low Thia Kiang said that it was better to be a "敢死队" (suicide squad) and not a "怕死队" (squad that is scared to die). WP's candidate Yaw Shin Leong added that his teammates and himself were mentally prepared to lose but they were not push-overs. | ||
| Line 447: | Line 447: | ||
On 7 May, Gomez was detained by police at Singapore Changi Airport when he was about to take a flight to Sweden for work. The police were investigating an "alleged offences of criminal intimidation and providing false information". The Elections Department had earlier filed a police report regarding the incident during the election period in which Gomez spoke to an election official in a threatening tone, an episode that was caught on closed-circuit television. Gomez was brought to the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) at Police Cantonment Complex for questioning and to file his statement, after which he was released at midnight.[62] His passport was impounded by the police to prevent him from leaving the country and his air ticket was forfeited as it was non-refundable. He also suffered a loss of income due to his absence from work. | On 7 May, Gomez was detained by police at Singapore Changi Airport when he was about to take a flight to Sweden for work. The police were investigating an "alleged offences of criminal intimidation and providing false information". The Elections Department had earlier filed a police report regarding the incident during the election period in which Gomez spoke to an election official in a threatening tone, an episode that was caught on closed-circuit television. Gomez was brought to the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) at Police Cantonment Complex for questioning and to file his statement, after which he was released at midnight.[62] His passport was impounded by the police to prevent him from leaving the country and his air ticket was forfeited as it was non-refundable. He also suffered a loss of income due to his absence from work. | ||
On that night, Sylvia Lim and Low Thia Khiang were also asked to give statements at the CID. On 9 May, Gomez was called again to CID for a questioning session that lasted five hours. Gomez later told the media that he was giving the police "the fullest cooperation." | On that night, Sylvia Lim and [[Low Thia Khiang]] were also asked to give statements at the CID. On 9 May, Gomez was called again to CID for a questioning session that lasted five hours. Gomez later told the media that he was giving the police "the fullest cooperation." | ||
After three questioning sessions, Gomez was let off with a stern warning by the police who issued a statement stating that the public prosecutor was satisfied that Gomez had committed the offence of using threatening words towards a civil servant but the police decided to release Gomez as he had no prior criminal records. His passport was returned to him and he left for Sweden on 16 May. | After three questioning sessions, Gomez was let off with a stern warning by the police who issued a statement stating that the public prosecutor was satisfied that Gomez had committed the offence of using threatening words towards a civil servant but the police decided to release Gomez as he had no prior criminal records. His passport was returned to him and he left for Sweden on 16 May. | ||
| Line 475: | Line 475: | ||
Political analyst Cherian George noted that the regulation would hinder the development of citizen journalism in Singapore. A number of bloggers and political commentators had noted that the rules are too broadly defined and were unsure how they would be enforced. They protested that this was a violation of freedom of speech. A candidate Goh Meng Seng (WP) refused to register his blog, saying "I don't see the need to do so as an individual citizen. We have our rights to our political views." | Political analyst Cherian George noted that the regulation would hinder the development of citizen journalism in Singapore. A number of bloggers and political commentators had noted that the rules are too broadly defined and were unsure how they would be enforced. They protested that this was a violation of freedom of speech. A candidate Goh Meng Seng (WP) refused to register his blog, saying "I don't see the need to do so as an individual citizen. We have our rights to our political views." | ||
In a parliament session on 3 April 2006, Balaji Sadasivan, the senior minister of state for information, communications and the arts, made some clarification on the regulation in response to a question by Low Thia Khiang. Balaji said that podcasting and streaming of videos were prohibited during the election. On the other hand, pictures of election candidates, political party histories and manifestos were allowed to be used as election advertising on the Internet. He added that bloggers who persistently promoted political views had to register with the MDA. During elections, only political parties, candidates and election agents are allowed to advertise. Balaji warned that those who violate the rules would face prosecution, and said "In a free-for-all internet environment, where there are no rules, political debate could easily degenerate into an unhealthy, unreliable and dangerous discourse, flush with rumours and distortions to mislead and confuse the public." The regulation of political content on the Internet had previously led to the closing down of a popular discussion forum website Sintercom in 2001, after the owner refused to register with the authority and voluntarily shut down his website. Additionally, publication of election surveys during the election period or exit polls was banned. | In a parliament session on 3 April 2006, Balaji Sadasivan, the senior minister of state for information, communications and the arts, made some clarification on the regulation in response to a question by [[Low Thia Khiang]]. Balaji said that podcasting and streaming of videos were prohibited during the election. On the other hand, pictures of election candidates, political party histories and manifestos were allowed to be used as election advertising on the Internet. He added that bloggers who persistently promoted political views had to register with the MDA. During elections, only political parties, candidates and election agents are allowed to advertise. Balaji warned that those who violate the rules would face prosecution, and said "In a free-for-all internet environment, where there are no rules, political debate could easily degenerate into an unhealthy, unreliable and dangerous discourse, flush with rumours and distortions to mislead and confuse the public." The regulation of political content on the Internet had previously led to the closing down of a popular discussion forum website Sintercom in 2001, after the owner refused to register with the authority and voluntarily shut down his website. Additionally, publication of election surveys during the election period or exit polls was banned. | ||
[[Category:Elections]] | [[Category:Elections]] | ||