[Thoughts on the changes to the NMP scheme]
In an interview with a reporter a few days ago, I was asked if I would consider running as a Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) under the new scheme which would include a new sector - the people sector.
Since the NMP scheme is non-partisan, it would mean that I would have to quit the People's Action Party. I have been in the party for almost four years and I feel that my voice has not been drowned in the party and I am still in the position to provide feedback. My views on the PAP and engaging citizens on new media platforms have also been considered.
I was also asked about my views on whether young people should join the PAP or be nominated as an NMP under the new scheme. The advantages of being in the party would include the strong support of party comrades and the reputation. Being an NMP would mean that the individual would be independent and not have a huge resource base.
NMPs would also not have constituents to serve. The NMP scheme also allows for people with experiences in niche areas to have a voice.
3 Comments:
NMPs are not elected in by the people...as with a lot of MPs nowadays.
What is your purpose of joining PAP?
What would your purpose be if you go for NMP? Any diff? or which is better (for u? for the party? for the people?)?
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 2:23:00 pm
Ultimately the interests of the people come first. That is why politicians exist for in the first place.
Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:46:00 pm
You should work and experience more. Politics working for the people. You will only be able to serve people if you are amongst the people.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009 4:49:00 pm
Post a Comment
<< Home