About time to rethink about our scholar selection mechanisms

Photo courtesy of UNLV Rebel Yell

Mr Eddie Teo, Chairman of the Public Service Commission gave a lengthy, but insightful presentation on the government scholarship system entitled “Defending Scholarships but not all Scholars” some time ago at the Singapore Seminar 2009 held in London. What was eye-catching about the presentation was a particular segment with the sub-title “Young Scholars – Some cause for concern”.

Source: The Public Service Commission website
Most of the current generation of young scholars are responsible and dedicated, but a few have a poor attitude and misplaced expectations. Some are very choosy about their postings and tend to place their personal interest above organizational interest. Many Management Associates or MAs want to go to MTI or MOF for their first postings and get upset if they are posted elsewhere. One was so upset that he resigned, breaking his bond. When some young MAs were asked to go to NTUC to observe retrenchment exercises and learn about what impact the current economic recession is having on ordinary Singaporeans, one MA asked “What is a retrenchment exercise?”.

Why should the Public Service be worried that some scholars are like this? First, if our scholars seek to advance only their self-interest, it indicates that they may be unable to work in a team. Much of public service work today involves teamwork because Singapore’s problems are becoming more complex and involve many Ministries, and no single individual can solve them. Besides, public policy making is always the product of a group effort, of repeated discussions and revisions. From the first idea to the Cabinet paper, proposals will involve many people and countless drafts. Some young officers are not used to this and do not feel a close enough sense of ownership with the final product. This is the way government works and is in fact a strength of our system because this is the way we gather different perspectives and considerations into a well thought-through solution. Second, if fewer and fewer young scholars desire ground postings, more and more of them may become divorced from ground issues and will start to lose their empathy for ordinary Singaporeans. The problem is not yet so widespread that it cannot be rolled back. There is still time for the Public Service to correct the trend. – Mr Eddie Teo

It is indeed a worrying trend if fewer young scholars desire ground level postings and Eddie’s concern about this potentially leading to a divorce with ground realities resonates with that of the many observers who are interested in the topic. Yet, his concluding statement about the Public Service correcting the trend can be seen as a form of admission that reforms to the Scholarship system are long overdue.

Hence, the pertinent question is what are the reforms that can be possibly implemented to ensure that we select the right scholars who are in it to serve the public, even if it means that they should immerse themselves at the ground level?

Some time ago, I have advocated having having an internship phase in the selection system in a separate article, and now having read Eddie’s concerns, the idea of having such a phase should be seriously considered. The idea is really to assess the prospective scholar’s level of fit with the Public Service. In a certain sense, it is an added mechanism to ensure that scholars who harbor the right qualities are selected, which are assessed from a period of internship that gives the scholarship selectors much more information about the prospective candidates that what a mere interview can achieve. The time frame for such an internship will usually stretch over four to five months before the academic term commences between June to August.

Having read Eddie’s concerns about scholars desiring postings in certain ministries such as the Ministry of Finance or the Ministry of Trade and Industry, one possible form of internship can be considered is one which requires the prospective scholar to go through not only the government ministry of his choice, but also two others. It is a little bit like medical internship during the Housemanship years where new medical graduates undergo rotations through broad level medical disciplines such as Medicine, General Surgery and Paediatrics or any other selected disciplines. In a sense, rotational internship experience will expose him to the realities at the current ministry of his choice, and also allows him to sample the working culture at the other two ministries. At the end of it all, he can make an informed choice about the choice of his destination.

It will definitely be interesting times ahead for the Public Service Commission is concerned as it ruminates on how to correct the current trend of problems that was highlighted. After all, what everyone wants are talented government officials who are in it in the name of Public Service.

Towards a more understanding and appreciative education system

Streaming has always been part and parcel of our education system. Those whom are in the know of secondary education in Singapore would understand the terms “Special”, “Express” and “Normal”, which describes the academic abilities of students from “best” to “worst” as determined by our National Examination, the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE). For the crème de la crème who did well, their paths are open to entry into prestigious academic programmes locally or overseas, and government scholarships. And unfortunately for those who didn’t perform as well, they are staring down at the abyss in what is popularised as “It’s The End” (ITE an acronym for the Institute of Technical Education) in Jack Neo’s movies.

Students who eventually enter Junior Colleges will take pre-university courses and subjects and many will eventually enrol in a university, locally or overseas. For those who eventually enrol at ITE, they would take technical-based courses which will prepare them for a vocational career. However, it is not really the end of the road for some, who will eventually do well in ITE to secure a place in the polytechnic, and subsequently earn their diplomas that will qualify them for entry into the universities in a process that will take a longer time, but nonetheless, earn the same qualifications as their special or express peers (those who eventually earned their degrees).

One of the damaging effects of streaming is that it would obviously lead to segregation of students according to academic performance, and subsequently, a lack of understanding and empathy among different segments of the student population, such as that between the Integrated Programme and the Normal Technical stream students. Indeed, there were teachers who have raised their concerns that the students from the Gifted Education Programme rarely mixed around with the rest of their peers.

I had an enjoyable exchange recently with a top executive who currently works in the educational industry and the latter remarked that engineers at MIT and other top schools were good in terms of theoretical knowledge and hands-on work. Hands-on work in the context of this article refers to the performing of technician-related tasks such as soldering or operation and/or repair equipments used in our daily lives. This executive later went to lament that our engineering graduates aren’t up to par with their top school counterparts in terms of technical skills.

How can we move towards an education system that breeds greater understanding and appreciation between various segments of the student population? An obvious approach would be to promote student exchange hailing from different categories of institutions. It works according to the same principle of student exchange programmes in our universities where students typically spend a semester (or two in some cases) overseas so that they can expand their horizons.

How will such an exchange programme work? Students from ITE, especially the School of Applied and Health Sciences cluster can spend part of their curriculum in the polytechnics or even junior colleges if they desire to understand more about the theoretical aspects behind a technical subject. Students from Junior Colleges can be made to undergo technical courses at ITE so that they will be able to learn technical-related subjects and understand the technical applications of the theoretical knowledge that they have picked up previously.

The end result will be a win-win situation for all. The ITE students will pick up theoretical knowledge from their exchange programmes and combined with their technical knowledge will make them better in their field. The Junior College students will supplement their theoretical knowledge with technical skills that will come in useful even in their later lives, e.g. when they need to do soldering or repair equipment. Above all, such exchange programmes promote inter-mingling of students from different categories, and this will lead to greater empathy and understanding among them, which bridges the ‘academic divide’.

Fear factor that gets really bad

Photo courtesy of whi1e

Our Internal Security Department (ISD) has really pervaded into the mainstream public consciousness for good or bad reasons, depending on which perspective you are coming from.

Even though Operations Spectrum and Coldstore occurred decades ago, they still instill a certain proportion of fear within our populace, even among those whom are not born within the era when those two operations were in effect.

How can the fear of ISD be invoked? Most of the time, it has to do with political opposition. And how can such a fear be manifested? A member of the opposition once related to me how a friend of his didn’t contact him for a long time when he joined an opposition party. The other case was even more extreme. A peer of mine kept looking over his shoulder out of paranoia when he met a friend of his who met Dr Chee in person. Apparently, he was afraid of being tailed.

It isn’t surprising that the opposition experiences the cold shoulder in places like academic institutions or other establishments. Guess there are those in such institutions and establishments who ‘look over their shoulders’ the moment they entertain the opposition. To save themselves the trouble, they simply shun the opposition by slamming the doors shut on the latter.

Little wonder they say it takes nerves of steel and some say balls of brass to take the leap into the opposition camp.

Sociopolitical education for our students – doing it the right way

There used to be a predominant belief that our social studies syllabus represents a form of political education for our students, albeit for our ruling party. Well, if students are taught to accept whatever that is given on the plate and not question, perhaps that can be seen as a form of indoctrination.

Yet, when I caught up with a former colleague of mine who is currently in the teaching service, it did raised my hope that the current social studies program can ironically be a good source of sociopolitical education. The learning material is one thing, and much depends on the facilitator or educator. Why is this so? Well, if the educator simply tells the students to digest whatever textbook material that is printed, then that is really indoctrination, NOT education. However, it came as a comfort when I heard my colleague’s account on how social studies are taught at the ground level. Basically, students investigate the sociopolitical phenomenon and realities in other countries and compare them with Singapore, and then come to their conclusion regarding the realities in Singapore. Thus, it is a form of inquiry and investigative-based learning whereby students are encouraged to explore nations outside Singapore, and then compare the benefits and drawbacks of different systems.

As with the current science syllabus that promotes inquiry-based learning, teachers do try and achieve the same for social studies.

There is indeed room for improvement in the way educators conduct sociopolitical education for students. As with science where there is a field studies component in which students go outside and collect data, the same can be done for social studies. For instance, students can take on a project, where they can sample the sentiments of different demographics of voters. They can interview each unique age group of voters and obtain data on their views towards various political parties and the policies advocated by the latter. Or they can capture the views of ruling party and opposition voters.

Detractors who do not agree to the inclusion of such field studies components may cite the fact that such an approach will lead to partisanship. Ironically, that form of reasoning in effect shot these detractors in their own foot. Partisanship arises from the fact that students are exposed to only one version that is advocated by the textbook authorities within our education ministry. Hence, discouraging students to explore versions other than that of the ministry’s is in itself a promotion of partisanship. Such field works or projects encourages students to explore multiple versions of sociopolitical realities in Singapore and come to their own conclusion. Thus, in a way, it is a form of inquiry-based learning that defeats partisanship.

There is a belief among some that our youths nowadays are politically apathetic. Others are more optimistic and believe that youths are capable of more. Regardless of their level of political knowledge, educators have an important part to play in sharpening the intellectual tools of our young to raise their “political intelligence quotient” to a new level.

Charming the voters

Yulia Tymoshenko, Ph.D., former Prime Minister of Ukraine widely considered to be among the ranks of the hottest politicians
Photo courtesy of Elparadiso19

Usually our local elections revolve around bread and butter issues, track record in office for the ruling party candidates and other mundane political issues. Very rarely, do the topic of the most charming and photogenically appealing politicians ever gain media limelight, save for the occasional coffeeshop chatter or street market gossip. Yet, an interesting question we can ask ourselves is whether the candidate’s ability to charm the sexes can make a difference between victory and defeat here at the polls in Singapore.

The results of electoral polls in other countries have shown us that sex appeal do make a difference. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair was able to attract female voters in his landslide victory of 1997 and the return of his party to power in 2001. Media celebrities turning politicians is a rarity here, but it is a common occurrence elsewhere. Former media celebrities and even pornstars have made their transition to the political world, with varying degrees of success. Indeed, the hugely popular MAXIM has a section speculating on and selecting the hottest politicians around. Prominent names include Sarah Palin (US) and Maria Cafagna (Italy).

The ability of a candidate to charm voters wasn’t lost on the PAP. Teo Ser Luck is perhaps one who appeal to female voters, judging from the sentiments and feedback gathered online from female netizens. Featured on Singapore Tatler, the latter is also a hit among gay forummers at a prominent gay forum. Such eye-appealing candidates are also available within the opposition rank. Justin Ong, from the Reform Party is one, who attracted rave reviews from females who attended the party’s dinner just last year. So is Jaslyn Go from the Singapore Democratic Party, who proved to be a hit among some of the male voters.

Will appeal to sexes make a difference? Some believe that our electorate is a conservative one and eye-appeal count for nothing; yet there are others who believe otherwise. During a contest between a suave candidate and another well in his senior years, the conservative ones will believe that the former’s suaveness will count for nothing if the policies he offers on table is inferior to the latter. The others who believe in the power of sex appeal will opine that the suave candidate can make up for his shortfall in policy-making with his eye-appeal.

With a number of criticisms raised against the nature of GRC contests, seen from the opposite angle, it also provides us with an opportunity to test a potent combination – political astuteness with eye-appeal, a team of politically astute candidates strong in policy-making up in arms with colleagues possessing great eye appeal. The question is whether the eye-appeal part of the team will charm the voters sufficiently to make a difference.

Significance of a contest at Tanjong Pagar GRC

Photo courtesy of Stinkee Beek

A political contest anywhere and its results would have its fair share of significance and symbolism ascribed to it. It goes without saying that a contest at Tanjong Pagar GRC, in which its current incumbent is the PAP GRC team helmed by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, during the elections will have its natural ramifications. The last contest at Tanjong Pagar was when it was still a single member ward that has been held by Lee for a long time. Lee’s last opponent was MG Guru, and the former garnered 81.6% of the votes. Ever since Tanjong Pagar was merged with other constituencies into Tanjong Pagar GRC, none has contested there so far.

If someone decides to contest there, what is the significance behind such a contest?

One obvious significance is that the jury will be out on whether Lee’s presence within the parliament is wanted, and in the larger picture, if his mode of governance is still needed and currently relevant to Singapore. Thus, the spotlight will be on Lee and not the opposition up against him and his team. And the voters at Tanjong Pagar will have to decide whether he should continue or not. The inevitable question that these voters have to grapple with is – can Singapore do without Lee?

During elections, there can be a few factors that influence the voter’s decision. Some may vote willingly, others unwillingly out of fear or a grudging acceptance (because he believes he may have more to lose if he voted otherwise). For a reasonably intelligent voter at Tanjong Pagar who votes in support for Lee and his team, the significance is clear-cut. The former believes there is still a role for Lee to play in the governance of Singapore, in whatever capacity of his appointment in office. In fact, some may go further to say that Lee is really so indispensable that the PAP government cannot run without him. In other words, he is seen as the vital cog and gear within the PAP machinery. However, the reinforcement of Lee’s indispensability through the polls may not reflect positively on the PAP’s efforts to renew its ranks with young blood in the sense that the younger generation of ministers are perceived to be unable to take on the task of running the Singapore ship in Lee’s absence. Thus, when voters believe that Singapore cannot do without Lee, it is also a form of admission that the next generation of ministers are not able to run the Singapore ship independently of Lee.

If it is a loss for Lee and his team, the writing is clear on the wall – the residents at Tanjong Pagar have decided on behalf of Singapore that the nation is set to be piloted by a new generation of leaders at the helm, albeit independently of Lee. The voters who are likely to vote against Lee can be classified into the staunchly anti-Lee at one extreme end to those who aren’t against Lee but feel that Singapore is in need of a change in direction independent of Lee.

However, one thing remains clear. The power invested in the residents at Tanjong Pagar in charting Singapore’s course provided there is someone else besides the PAP to contest in the ward. They will be deciding between a Lee-guided Singapore ship or a Singapore independent of Lee. All eyes will be on this one in the event of a contest.

NMP as the harbinger of controversial and divisive issues

Photo courtesy of Bryan aka Numnumball

Amidst debates over the validity and appropriateness of our NMP scheme, a trend has emerged with regards to a potential role played by our NMPs in parliament – the harbinger of controversial and divisive issues such as race, religion and sexuality that any political party wouldn’t touch with a barge pole.

The most recent episode was NMP Viswa Sadasivan’s opinion that Singaporeans have become very race-conscious, and such a phenomenon pervades even the most formalized of procedures such as form-filling. Even our Identity cards bear the the racial groups we belong to. Viswa further alluded to the fact that the establishment of self-help groups along ethnic lines such as Mendaki (malay), SINDA (indian), CDAC (chinese) and Eurasian Association has exacerbated this problem. Viswa contended that such a conscious practice of racial segregation and categorization due to the nature of how the government collects data is inconsistent with the “regardless of race” tenet enshrined in our national pledge.

You will certainly not find Viswa’s views on race in any electoral manifesto or speeches. Mr Low Thia Khiang, an opposition MP, response was the most telling; the latter stated that he didn’t want to have anything to do with the debate.

The one other divisive issue raised by an NMP revolved around sexuality issues, particularly with the criminalization of gay sex. Mr Siew Kum Hong tabled a petition to the parliament in support of the repeal of section 377A on 22nd October 2007 when he was an NMP. What later transpired was a clash of ideals between the conservative and liberal camps on sexuality. A political party will never include such an issue in its agenda due to its divisive nature. Support the interest of the liberal camp, and there will be a backlash from the conservatives, and vice versa. Hence, one wouldn’t find it surprising if political parties refuse to take a stand on the issue. Miss Sylvia Lim, a non-constituency Member of the Parliament from the Workers’ Party refused to adopt a stand on the issue.

Hence, where the current political parties dare not go due to the inherent risks of a political fallout, it has emerged that the NMPs are left to pick up the pieces since they didn’t have an electorate to answer to. Circumstances has indeed resulted in making our NMPs the harbinger of controversial and divisive issues. One of the good things of having such harbingers is that these divisive issues will see the light of the day in public, instead of going unnoticed.

Why the term Young PAP is considered a misnomer

In the sports arena, there is a need to replenish the ranks of current sportsmen, and hence, the focus on youth development. The raw diamonds are polished today into the gems of tomorrow. It is the Young Lions of the England National Youth soccer team who will form the nucleus of future Lions team years down the road. That is the natural process of the young who will replace the old, be it in sports, business and elsewhere.

Now, let’s ask a person who has little conception of Singapore politics what does he understand by the term Young PAP. You will most likely get a reply that the function of the Young PAP is to replenish the ranks of PAP, which is a common-sensical one in any sense.

The Young PAP website shows a list of interesting objectives based on 3 Es – 1) Establish, which is to expand the network and footprint of the YP ethos. 2) Embrace which is to capture a diversity of members and views to represent Singapore’s demographics; and in doing so to spur change from within. 3) Evolve which is to create a sphere of influence for members to grow and deepen their understanding of politics and how they can personalize politics to shape Singapore’s future.

A fourth E, and the most important one directly related to the idealized concept and name of Young PAP is missing. ELEVATE, which is to replenish PAP’s ranks with members from Young PAP. And one really wonders why.

It is ironical that the actual PAP itself has its own mechanisms that allows the latter to select its own candidates. The first step of the selection process is an invitation to tea party on the recommendation of Ministers, Member of Parliaments, senior civil servants, corporate leaders and party activists. Thus, this means that the PAP itself casts a wide net, and any member of the public can be a potential PAP candidate if the latter successfully negotiates the selection hurdles. Thus, it doesn’t come as a surprise that nearly the entire crop of the current PAP Member of Parliaments didn’t rise through the Young PAP ranks, but were parachuted into PAP candidature directly nonetheless. Thus, one wouldn’t find it surprising if the Young PAP isn’t even considered a platform to replace the PAP’s ranks by the PAP itself. However, information on the PAP’s stand on Young PAP is not known at the moment. There is an even deeper dose of irony considering the fact that Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, former chairman of Young PAP was never from Young PAP himself.

It is apparent that Young PAP’s role, with its current 3 Es, is to serve a complementary function to the PAP. One would would suspect that party renewal may not be an important priority (relative to the 3 Es) for the Young PAP. However, if its role is to serve a complementary function on other fronts and its raison d’etre is not about party renewal, then its label “Young PAP” is indeed a misnomer.

Virtues of releasing the party’s electoral manifesto early

This article was written some time ago.

Photo courtesy of whi1e

The opposition has always raised the issue that there is not enough time between nomination day and Polling Day that is dedicated to campaigning. The opposition has a point there – insufficient campaigning time will mean that the party will have difficulty reaching out to the masses. Hence, the issue is whether it is strategically advantageous for a political party to release its manifesto early.

A manifesto usually contains the party’s position on a wide array of issues. The Workers’ Party manifesto for the 2006 General Elections contains the party’s position on Government and Civil Liberties, Justice, Law and Order, Economic Policy, Society, Healthcare, Education, Public Housing, Public Transport and finally, the Arts, Media, Information and New Technology. The Workers’ Party released its manifesto three months before nomination day on April. An early release of the party’s manifesto should preferably take place eight months to one year before elections proper.

Thus, why is it strategically advantageous for a political party to release its electoral manifesto early?

Capturing the public’s attention and imagination early
A political party that releases its manifesto early shows its clear intent, strong desire to win public support and confidence. The benefit is that it is able to capture the public’s attention at an early stage. If the manifesto is released very late, around three months before an election, it is very difficult for a party to capture the attention of a wide demography of voters. A manifesto typically covers a whole range of issues. Thus, a long stretch of time before elections allows the party to clearly elaborate and explain its position on every individual issue in the manifesto. For instance, the Workers’ Party manifesto for the General Elections 2006 covered issues from government to housing, education and public transport. Three months is not sufficient enough to communicate the whole range of issues to voters.

Voters from a certain demographic group would have a pet topic. Hence, an early release of the party’s electoral manifesto will give the party sufficient time to communicate and elaborate on its stand pertaining to issues concerning the topic. A late release of manifesto will mean that the party will not have sufficient time to completely address certain topics. As a result, they will lose out on the support of certain groups of voters.

Thus, the obvious benefits behind an early release of a manifesto is first and foremost, an official early kickstarting of the party’s electoral campaign, and more importantly, the party will have ample time to communicate its outreach to different groups of voters who may have their own pet topics.

Early defense and response to criticisms
A party who released its manifesto will inevitably be subjected to criticisms from its rivals. A late release will mean that the party will have less time to respond to criticisms through its press releases.

For the neutral observer interested in policy debates, an early release of electoral manifesto is the most ideal. In a sense, the first movers will create an initial setting that will kickstart a series of policy debates. For instance, if an opposition party releases its manifesto comprising reforms on certain government policies, the politicians and lawmakers associated with the ruling PAP is likely to respond. Thus, an early release is the ideal setting for policy debates.

Perhaps, the hesitation to release the manifesto early may be attributed to the fear that the party’s rivals will be given more time to mount an attack on the manifesto’s contents. However, as mentioned earlier, if the manifesto is released later, although other rivals may have less time to mount an attack, but it also mean that the party in question will have less time to respond.

Public engagement and positive feedback
As mentioned earlier, releasing the manifesto early allows the party to communicate its stand on various issues. This also means that the party can reach out to distinct members of the public who may have different interests. Radiating air waves that correspond to the unique frequencies harbored by different members of the public will lead to the subsequent positive step of public engagement because voters with different pet topics can relate to the party.

The positive feedback will come from members of the public who adopt an agreeable stand to certain issues highlighted within the manifesto. These members may submit their views to the newspaper forums of our mainstream media or the alternative media. Such positive responses will be propagated, which further reinforces the party’s support.

A way around the short campaigning time
A short campaigning time does little to the party’s ambitions of growing its outreach. This bottleneck can be circumvented by releasing the manifesto early. It allows the party more time to sell itself to the public. Besides, a late release will mean that the volume of propagation characterized by total media exposure will be less than an early release. It is like trying to sell a brand by advertising in the papers. If the advertisement lasts three months, the number of people who would have heard of the brand is definitely less than the same advertisement lasting eight months. Releasing the manifesto early followed by elaboration and reinforcements of the latter during exposure to the mainstream and alternative media will give the party ample time to permeate the public’s consciousness with its selling points. In a way, this strategy reduces the disadvantage imposed by the short campaigning times.

Does the issuance of electoral handouts contravene our electoral laws (for arguement’s sake)?

Photo courtesy of Ian Timothy

The New Singapore Shares and Progress Package, better known as electoral handouts were well in excess over $2 billion. The total count of Singapore citizen population in 2008 is 3.164 million. This will mean that each Singapore citizen may receive up to more than $632 each if the handout is disbursed evenly.

However, if one looks carefully at the website of the Singapore elections department, there is a law which imposes a limit on the level of spending by or on behalf of every candidate in the conduct and management of his/her election. Known as the elections expenses unit, the law was implemented to ensure

“a level playing field between candidates. Without such a limit, parties with greater resources will gain advantage through spending more for publicity and awareness. This leads to distortions in the democratic process.” – Quoted from the Elections Department website

One interesting aspect of this law is the such a spending cannot be incurred by the candidates before, during or after the elections. The spending limit is $3 per elector for a single member ward. For a GRC, it is $3 per elector divided by the number of candidates (5 or 6). With this information, an interesting question can be asked – can the issuance of electoral handouts ($632 per person if divided evenly) be considered a violation of the elections expenses limit?

The ruling party has always been accused for a long time for issuing electoral handouts by the opposition and other observers alike. Perhaps, the defense that the ruling PAP can put up is that the handouts are not issued under the party’s auspices, but rather in the capacity of the Singapore government. Technically, the political party is not allowed to spend past the required limit. However, the handout is not issued by the party, but by the government so to speak.

To counter, one may consider the truth behind the statement that the Singapore government is equivalent to the PAP. For the record, only 2 seats out of 84 went to the opposition. Thus, if one convincingly argues that the Singapore government is synonymous with the PAP and in essence is known as the PAP government , then to assert that the ruling party dishes out handouts is a fair statement.

But then again, much of the debate will also revolve around the term “spending”. The ruling party’s defense would perhaps be based on the fact that the handouts are considered re-distribution of our nation’s wealth as opposed to spending by the party. The counter-argument is that a ruling party that is synonymous with the national government can spend its budget, which in our case is budget surpluses, to re-distribute wealth.

So, does the issuance of electoral handouts contravene our electoral laws? The debate continues…