A thinking voter's manifesto

I was going to take a break from electioning matters but PM Lee's focus on the A-team issue -- with an excerpt of his Tuesday night speech published in today's ST (7 April) -- continues to stick in my mind.

The PAP, willy-nilly, has dominated politics here since the 1960s and it has delivered materially, time and again. But is there such a thing as the Singapore Dream, and has the PAP helped to shape and realise this albeit elusive term? The Singapore Pledge arguably comes closest to this aspiration, this collective hope:

"We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion, to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation."

If I recall correctly, it was an opposition party -- the Workers' Party -- that, during an election rally in the last general election, used this pledge to awaken a sense of a Singaporean destiny when it got the people at its rally to recite this pledge emotionally. It is a powerful ideational unifier, and the pledge has since been given a new lease of life by the PAP government too.

What I am trying to flesh out, as the general election approaches, is what I shall dub "The thinking voter's manifesto". I want to ask questions of both the PAP and the opposition that give me hope of a future that is emotionally satisfying, even if circumstances turn so badly against this little red dot that we are at risk of disappearing from the face of the earth.

I want to add here that I do believe we have vulnerabilities that will not go away, but our immigrant legacy brings up images of resilience, resourcefulness, pragmatism (yes, this too, importantly) and dignity.

So, to the PAP:
* This argument that there can only be one A-team is a bleak assessment, predicated on a supposed scarcity of talent. It is unproven, or at least not convincingly proven. Worse, it suggests that we are a "Humpty Dumpty" country. Only the PAP can keep this fragile egg from falling off the wall?
* If the PAP argues that a two-party system is unworkable, then how does it envisage the future of the election process?
* Does the PAP have a Plan B should the opposition win more seats in future? What I am thinking of is a recognition that talented opposition MPs (talented as so defined by the PAP) may even have a role in government.

*To the opposition parties, please study the PM's speech and tell us -- the voters -- how you can rebut the points where you should, and agree where you should too. Importantly, if you think the Singapore Dream is more than material security (important as it is), share it with the voters.
* Clearly, unlike the nearly monolithic singular voice of the PAP, different opposition responses will be expected. For instance, some parties will say they are not ready to form a government; others may be more coy on this. But there has to be a road map, and voters will want to know more.
* Key issues: are your long term plans to abolish the GRC system, the NCMP system, the NMP system, to keep the Presidential safeguard on the reserves, the ISA, etc. It boils down to this: on which key areas do you agree with the PAP, and on which do you fundamentally disagree?
* Last of all, can you subsume your rivalries and work more in unison. I do not believe the plethora of parties is workable.