New electoral boundaries don’t benefit PAP: SM Goh

Dear SM Goh,

You said if a chilli crab stall is very well known, it matters not where the stall is located. You also said that electoral boundary changes disadvantage the PAP more than the opposition because your MPs have to do more work whereas the opposition has no roots and can go anywhere. You then gave advice to the opposition to build up reputation in order to win seats.

Is it easy for a new chilli crab stall to establish its reputation by going from place to place every day without a fixed base to operate from? Or is it easier for the chilli crab stall to establish its reputation at one particular location first before venturing to other locations? Many food chains started from a fixed location, not by travelling from place to place.

Hence, if your advice to the opposition is to build up reputation first, then you should give the opposition the permanence of base from which to establish their reputations. If you force them to run around from place to place like a refugee, are you helping them or preventing them from establishing their reputations?

On the other hand, the PAP has an established reputation. It is the PAP which can go anywhere. Therefore, boundary changes which force candidates to go from place to place benefit the PAP more to the detriment of the opposition.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: