He notes that SDP's "style and modus operandi is not reaching out to the people."

If the writer has any evidence that this is indeed the case, we to invite him to share the information with us and suggest ways that we can be more effective in our efforts to campaign for and on behalf of the people.

The SDP does not claim to have a monopoly on ideas on how best to reach out to the people. We only know, through the years of learning from our mistakes and picking ourselves up whenever we stumble, that we are doing our utmost to be a voice for the people and to encourage them to stand up for themselves.

The writer also states: "No wonder they (the SDP) have a membership problem."

Of course, we do. It is no secret that people are afraid to join the opposition. I do not have the records and I don't claim to speak for any of them, but I suspect that opposition parties on the whole have difficulty in recruiting members. Otherwise, we would not have such an enormous problem finding candidates to stand for elections. This is why the SDP is in this struggle to bring democracy to Singapore so that Singaporeans are free to support any political party without fear of reprisal from the ruling party.

Salleh goes on: "So they managed to rope in a couple of young people…And these young people are being invited to stand for elections under the SDP ticket! Don't treat the electorate as fools. They deserve better."

First, the SDP is very proud that young Singaporeans are stepping forward to join opposition parties. We should encourage more of our youth to come forward instead of making disparaging remarks about them. Despite the present climate of fear, these individuals have found the courage and conviction to identify with the goals and objectives of the SDP. Through their efforts, the SDP now has the Young Democrats as its youth wing.

Second, Salleh seems to be disenchanted with the fact that our young members may stand for elections. Is this not a decision for the party to make? And if we do decide to field them, is it not an opportunity for Singaporeans to decide if they want to vote for them? I fail to understand why the writer gets so annoyed at the fact that young Singaporeans are joining the SDP.

Again Salleh disparages: "But they (the SDP) can do no more than shout and sell newspapers."

Again, I offer to Salleh the opportunity to meet us so that if he has any suggestions on how we can find new ways of communicating with our fellow Singaporeans, we would be most interested to learn.

Whether its lunch time at Raffles Place, after-work at MRT stations, Saturday afternoons at Orchard Road, or Sunday mornings at hawker centres, my colleagues and I are out almost on a daily basis to sell our party newspaper The New Democrat. None of the newspaper vendors dare to sell it. We have stood under the sun, been drenched by the rain, and sacrificed time which we would have loved to spend with our families. We do this because we continue to believe that it is vital to keep Singaporeans informed of some of the issues that our local media refuses to publish or highlight.

We also open our doors to Singaporeans who face problems with the government. Some of these cases have been highlighted in our newspaper. We have published our manifesto, which we are in the process of revising and updating, and we have published in-depth reports on issues such as the transportation system, the economy and cost of living. Yet if we could do more, we would.

I wish Salleh would have read the New Democrat before excoriating that, "At the height of the issues of ministerial pay hikes, bond breakers, the divide between the rich and poor and the rise of unemployment, all Chee could muster was to organize a forum about the state of the opposition in our region."

If the writer would care to read recent editions of the newspaper, he would see that the issues he mentioned have been the focus of the SDP. If he doesn't have the newspaper, we would be happy to mail them to him.

As for the diatribe against my "exploits in the international circuit of human rights and democracy" I can only say that it is an honour for me to be invited to speak and participate at international conferences. We live in an age where businesses, governments, and NGOs are forming networks and interacting with each other to further their causes and interests. It would be negligent of the SDP if it did not plug itself into the process of globalisation.

Nevertheless, I thank Salleh for his concern that the SDP should not forget the real concerns of Singaporeans. Let me assure him that human rights and democracy are real concerns for our nation. Without them we cannot even begin to hold the government accountable for its actions whether they are about the retention of our CPF savings, ministers' salaries, the foreign talent policy, or income disparity.

The writer then turns on the Open Singapore Centre (OSC) and declares the Centre is "a total failure."

The OSC is only a little more than a year old and Salleh is already writing its obituary. The centre's activities have been recorded in various websites and reported in international newspapers. Its work has only just begun. Why does the writer feel the need to denigrate efforts carried out by people who want to see more transparency, accountability and democracy in this country?

Even the Singaporeans for Democracy website has not been spared Salleh's denunciation, who now claims: "It is open knowledge that the site is controlled by the SDP."

Would the writer care to elaborate on this and document how the SDP controls this website? It is one thing to have an opinion, however misguided, but quite another to present it as fact. The remark is most uncalled for and unworthy.

I can only hope that websites that give Singaporeans the opportunity to read alternative news and views as well as to participate in discussions and debate will continue their important service to the our nation.

It is not possible to address all the allegations that Salleh has made due to constraints of time and space, and also because some of them are assertions of opinion rather than fact. However, I would like to leave the writer with this comment: criticise us if you will, assail us if you must but, please, do it intelligently and in a civilised manner.

A political discourse cannot be intelligent if facts are disregarded and if all one is interested in is to indulge in propagandistic mudslinging. A debate cannot be civilised if we degenerate into name-calling and personal attacks, a skill which, I might add, has been honed into a science by the PAP.

Salleh uses derogatory terms to describe SDP leaders and its supporters. The irony is that in the same breath he accuses the party of being "vitriolic."

He also labels the SDP as "combative." The writer must be reminded that it is the PAP which has repeatedly branded its opponents as charlatans, skunk, mangy dog, chauvinists, alcoholics, womanisers, traitors, communists, Marxists, etc, who have to be destroyed and demolished.

When we fight back and defend ourselves, we are being "combative." Heads the PAP wins, tails the Opposition loses.

How are we going to raise the maturity and intellectual tone of politics in Singapore if we carry on in this manner? I have always encouraged my members to speak up, loudly and vehemently, on the various issues that affect the people. But I have also always cautioned them against the foolishness of labeling our opponents with unseemly epithets.

Let us be bold enough to make a stand and do battle for our views and beliefs. But let us also be mature enough not resort to unnecessary personal attacks because in doing so we demean the democratic process and, more importantly, we demean ourselves. In soccer terms: Play the ball, not the man.

Let me end with a quote from a former US President, Theodore Roosevelt, which I have found inspiring and relevant to our struggle:

"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again because there is no effort without error and shortcomings, who knows the great devotion, who spends himself in a worth cause, who at best knows in the end the high achievement of triumph and who at worst, if he fails while daring greatly, knows his place shall never be with those timid and cold souls who know neither victory nor defeat."