In my work I have to evaluate economies and the text book is a terrible and wrong place to begin. Quickly, the USA is no longer a AAA country but that means nothing. My point? Context is most important. To evaluate the AGO's report you have to grasp the political context, which is naturally missing in the document.
If you assume the WP is the equal to the PAP in resources then the WP don't look good. But if you feel that Singapore need to nurture credible and viable alternatives to the PAP because recent history have shown that when they have too much power, they treat us badly then for our own sake, cut some slack but not too much to the alternatives.
I have learned when not to and to trust the PAP. Anything that threatens their position they cannot be trusted and do not hesitate to bully others. You can trust them for kicking out any MP for committing adultery, but many other issues are more difficult to judge.
They cannot afford any alternative party to appear whiter than them. It is imperative especially after the AIM saga that if they are pot, others must be made to look like black pots too. They cannot do in their competitors this way but at least level the playing field.
I urge the CAD or CPIB to charge those responsible for AHPETC. If they can't then don't waste my time.
I have no time to look at this matter in detail. Will wait for the GE to come around and start digging up and review all these troublesome matters. If in the end I feel that the PAP is wasting our time taking us to run among the bushes, I would do my part to make them pay for this nonsense. I am still not convinced they put our welfare ahead of theirs but they can no longer play the "heads I win, tails you lose". They were terrible when they could avoid skin in the game.
Update: Feb 10, 5:40am
One ST's brightest young stars was tasked to write this which I read late last night. She couldn't do a better job than Bertha Henson and basically asks you to go read the report yourself.
A good reminder from Andrew Loh. I was also looking for this. Like I said in the main post, the PAP couldn't do better was looking to make the WP look no better - all are pots. Like suggesting better the devil you know than the one you do not.
I repeat myself. If this is not a CAD or CPIB case, don't waste our time. It only shorten the distance toward contempt for the ruling party. One thing is absolutely clear, the PAP cannot be allowed to dominate parliament. I wished it could be otherwise given Singapore's unique circumstances, but they are not good enough.
The pot will continue to call the kettle black. Look they are also pots! Says who?
Update: Feb 12 9:10pm
I have not bothered to read what MSM said about the debate in parliament especially when you can go and get it from the horse's mouth.
At the end of the day, voters must decide. I just hope people do their homework and act accordingly.
I am of the view that the PAP are bullies when it comes to dealing with the opposition. We don't have enough opposition in parliament and in a way, opposition exists outside the chamber in the various blogs, social media postings. and now often brutal reaction during public feedback sessions. In a more focused way, NGOs also kind of serve that role by providing alternative and often compelling views and action.
The MIWs aren't white unless we keep them on their toes.
Update: Fen 12 9:20 pm
An excellent summary by Mothership Belmont Lay for people like me who couldn't spare the time.