In his recent interview with the Minister Mentor of Singapore, Simon Elegant & Micheal Elliott, both of them concluded by saying that "Lee's little nation is a testimony to what hard work and discipline can do to improve lives. That, perhaps, is legacy enough. But what a place in history there would be for Lee if his successors prove that Singapore can marry continued economic prosperity to a more open, tolerant, creative, and, yes, messy society—and hence create a new miracle, from which other nations, bigger, more powerful and more potentially frightening than Singapore, could one day learn anew."

"Lee Kuan Yew embodies a uniquely Asian approach to governance that has often been at odds with the democratic principles espoused by many Western politicians. For decades, he has spoken in favor of what has come to be termed "Asian values" (he prefers "Confucian values"), a political philosophy that might be loosely summed up as respect for authority and order, while putting the good of society above that of the individual. His criticisms have focused on the excesses of unfettered democracy—particularly freedom of speech—and the impact they have on the search for economic growth."

This brings me to the issue of how extensive are Singaporeans allowed to voice their views openly, freely and without any fear of persecution.?

Let's turn out attention to the Speakers' corner. When it was 1st set up by the existing government to allow Singaporeans to speak out on any issues, the government would somehow or other expect no dissenting voices from the public with regard to political freedom and expression, notwithstanding the traitor Chee Sonn Juan. It's worth mentioning that one has to report to the police what he/she is gonna say before being granted permission to do so. Where's the freedom in this case? I term the above scenario, censorsed democracy .

Singaporeans are full of ideas, creativity and would love to freely express themselves on any issues or topics, but sadly any issues with regard to race(the racist bloggers), politics, foreign affairs is taboo !

The PAP government should not restrict our desires to speak out; esp. on political reforms, why?

1. The public exchange of ideas with the government serves the purpose of highighting any deficiencies that the existing government have and this would in turn aid the government to initiate changes to improve the current situation.

2. Singaporeans are sensible and independent enough to voice thier views in a responsible manner.

3. The PAP's hold on power is by far too complete(dictatorial?, nepotism?) to be toppled by just mere words.

4. By allowing Singaporeans to speak out freely will provides a sense of belonging to Singapore and what they hold dear and they see themselves very much involved in the process of nation-building.

The government risked creating a boiling cauldron where opposition and dissention threatens to boil over, putting in process a violent change of guard. In this worse case scenario, change will then become inevitable.

Much could be said on this issue, but if the government still do not believe in providing a platform for Singaporeasn to speak out on any particular issue, this could very well signal the death-knell of this regime that we termed as the People's Action Party.