19 February 2009

Is a general election this year now confirmed?

In what appears to be a slip-up, we can see Mediacorp at work preparing its election website. Full essay.


The said...

Ha ha, they have removed "2009" from the contents, but they forgot to change the page title at the top which still says "General Elections 2009".

Dumb and dumber...

Anonymous said...

Agreed a GE this year and not later than June or July 2009 cos APEC meeting is scheduled for Nov 14-15 in Spore when Presidend Obama of USA is in town. Shortie Wong needs to get his ministry mobilized for Obama's visit months in advance. He cannot spare his security personnel for election at the same time in the latter half of the year when the resources will be constrained. That's the talk going around in forums.

Also, the PAP will have alerted the big honchos of the news media to get ready their pro-PAP editorial team to put their best face forward on their behalf. They need to know who will head these editorial teams in advance.

yuen said...

the PAP has an elaborate personnel process, with advance selection of new MP candidates, putting them to do community work in designated electorates, then being written up in the press; if some of these are highlighted as having ministerial potential, it means a few current ministers need to make way and the affected ones will be discreetly informed; some movements in group constituency candidates may also be needed in anticipation of cabinet changes

such a process does not appear to be ongoing at this moment

HanSolo said...

I just checked CNA web site and the page is still live.

But how did you click through to the SGE page in the first place? I didn't see any links on the home page.

Only the page title was changed, so it could simply be the handiwork of a cheeky webmaster!

Yawning Bread Sampler said...

I see that the mainstream media (and a comment or two here) are pointing out that the PAP's succession process is not (yet) in high gear, so an election is not imminent.

In fact, when I spoke to a leader of one opposition party in early January, in hope of giving the party some advance warning of an early election, that was the same reaction I got. The PAP's succession moves are not yet in full swing, I was told.

My reply to that party leader is the same as I would give now. While it may be ideal for the PAP to have a crop of candidates for an election, it is not essential.

If they think that by waiting to 2010 or 2011, the voters may punish them at the polls for a long recession, then the calculation may well be that it's better to have an election now and have the old faces re-elected for another 5 years, than to wait to 2010, 2011, and have (a) old faces retired and (b) new faces defeated at the polls!

Alternatively, another reason for lack of new faces doing the rounds may be that they simply can't find anyone. Having an MP set on fire is hardly good recruiting PR. So if the PAP has concluded that new faces can't be found, then again they may choose to go for a snap election with the old faces. Make the best out of what one has in hand.

So, the lack of new faces doing the constituency rounds does not prove that an election won't be called suddenly. I'm not saying it will be - I don't have that inside knowledge, but I'm saying, hey guys, consider all possibilities.

yuen said...

>if the PAP has concluded that new faces can't be found, then again they may choose to go for a snap election with the old faces

one reason they prefer to have new faces is: it justifies displacing some old faces that have for one reason or another fallen out of favour; telling someone to go because of below expectation performance, is not just bad for the person, but admits that they made a mistake in choosing him/her; if it is to make way for new blood, then things look positive for both sides

Anonymous said...

They have changed back to 2006..check it out !!


The said...

Okay - now they have changed the page title at the top as well...

Dumb, but they do read your blog Alex.

Anonymous said...

sigh. what a big hoo-har over nothing.

check the wayback machine:

the webmaster had used some code which uses the current year in the title, which means the page when viewed in 2007 shows 2007 in the title and now shows 2009 (before they changed it).

do ur really think the cna webmaster will actually know abt elections AND studiously update the website??