I read with interest the diversity of views expressed in the letters with regard to last week’s General Election.
Like many others, I am happy that the People’s Action Party returned to power. Its sound policies have benefited Singaporeans as a whole.
At the same time, I feel disheartened that Opposition parties, despite having fielded credible and qualified candidates, fared poorly in the election. I strongly believe that given the opportunity, they can provide an alternative voice in Parliament.
Singaporeans have given a clear mandate to the ruling party to serve them, but I hope the party does not lapse into complacency due to its landslide victory.
On Cooling-off Day, a good friend invited me to lunch with a group of eminent Singaporeans. I decided to use them as a focus group and asked them to predict whether the PAP’s popular vote would go up or down.
The majority said it would go down. I asked them whether the PAP would lose any more seats to the opposition. The majority predicted that the PAP would lose one group representation constituency (GRC) and one single-member constituency (SMC).
Like the pundits and the bookies, my friends at lunch were wrong in their prognosis. The following are 10 of my reflections on the People’s Action Party’s surprising and extraordinary victory.
SG50
First, 2015 is not an ordinary year. It is our Golden Jubilee year. Singaporeans from all walks of life, and of different political persuasions, are very proud of what we have achieved in the past 50 years.
ST ILLUSTRATION: MIEL
The SG50 Steering Committee has adopted a low-key, bottoms-up and people-centric approach to the year-long celebrations. The positive mood was boosted by the excellent performance of our athletes at the SEA Games, and by the conferment of World Heritage status on our beloved Botanic Gardens by Unesco.
Anyone who attended the National Day Parade would have been inspired by the pride, patriotism and unity of the occasion. I am sure that SG50 increased the popularity of the PAP at the polls.
THE LEE KUAN YEW FACTOR
Second, I think that the Lee Kuan Yew factor played a part in the electoral success of the PAP. Mr Lee’s passing triggered a spontaneous outpouring of love and respect for him by Singaporeans. The people of Singapore acknowledged that the success of Singapore was due, in large part, to the vision, courage and determination of Mr Lee and the other founding fathers.
I am sure that some of the goodwill for Mr Lee was transferred to the political party that he founded and led. The combination of the first and second factors made 2015 an exceptionally good year for the PAP. Tactically, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was right to hold the election this year, instead of next year.
FEAR OF A FREAK ELECTION
Third, the opposition made a big mistake in contesting all 89 seats in Parliament. Although many of the candidates, from parties other than the Workers’ Party (WP) and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), had no prospect of winning, the fact that all seats were contested made it possible for the PAP to warn against a freak election.
The bottom line is that, while the electorate wants a credible, constructive and responsible opposition in Parliament, it also wants the PAP to continue to form the government. If the opposition had been wiser, it would have refrained from contesting 45 of the 89 seats so that, on Nomination Day, the PAP would have won enough seats to form the government. In such a scenario, the electorate would have been more at ease in voting for good opposition candidates.
THE SILVER VOTE
Fourth, since 2011, the Government has done several very significant things to win the hearts and minds of senior citizens. The Pioneer Generation Package, MediShield Life, and the Silver Support Scheme have been very well received. The belated recognition of the pioneers and their contributions to Singapore has touched the hearts of many older Singaporeans.
The SG50 Steering Committee has adopted a low-key, bottoms-up and people-centric approach to the year-long celebrations… I am sure that SG50 increased the popularity of the PAP at the polls.
My hypothesis is that the majority of the half a million voters, over the age of 65, would have voted for the PAP.
REMEDYING THE PAIN POINTS
Fifth, the PAP has brought relief to three of the pain points that emerged in the 2011 General Election. These are housing, immigration and transport. National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan has increased the supply of public housing, and cooled the overheated property market.
The Government has also reduced the intake of foreign workers. Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew worked very hard on both the bus system and the MRT system. He has brought relief to the bus system. The problem of the frequent breakdown of our train system has, however, not yet been solved, in spite of his best efforts.
On the three pain points, the PAP has brought relief to two-and-a-half of them. The electorate, which is fair-minded, has therefore decided to reward the PAP for having listened to its concerns and for responding to them.
THE CHALLENGE OF INEQUALITY
Sixth, the PAP has also responded to the growing concerns about inequality in Singapore. It has introduced schemes like Workfare and the Progressive Wage Model.
It has opened two schools for students who failed their Primary School Leaving Examination, or PSLE. It has upgraded the quality of technical and vocational education offered by our Institute of Technical Education. It has introduced a new educational initiative called SkillsFuture, based on the successful apprenticeship system in Germany and Switzerland. It has expanded its support for early education.
It has also reassured the public that social mobility is well, and stronger, in Singapore than in Europe and America. Therefore, although Singapore continues to be a very unequal society, and life is hard for the bottom 30 per cent of our population, the Government was given credit by the electorate for the many initiatives it has taken to address the problem.
CREDIBILITY OF THE WORKERS’ PARTY
Seventh, the ascendance of the WP was seriously affected by the PAP’s allegation that it had mismanaged the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council, and that it had exposed an integrity issue.
Although the WP rebutted the PAP’s allegation and had, in turn, accused the PAP of bullying and using the town council system to impede the progress of the opposition, the exchange left some voters in doubt about the competence and integrity of the WP. This factor could have explained the loss of Punggol East, the drop in the support for the WP in Hougang and Aljunied GRC, and its failure to capture East Coast GRC and Fengshan SMC.
Going forward, it is important for the WP to clear its name, and to restore the electorate’s faith in its competence and integrity.
PAP’S ELECTORAL STRATEGY
Eighth, the PAP did a better job managing the electoral campaign this year than in 2011.
PAP organising secretary Ng Eng Hen proved to be a capable campaign manager. Although the PAP was outgunned by the opposition in the staging of rallies, it devoted more manpower and resources to door-to-door campaigning and retail diplomacy. The party also decided to capitalise on the popularity of PM Lee by putting up his poster in every constituency.
It was like a referendum on him, and it could have backfired. Fortunately for the PAP, the strategy seemed to have paid off.
AN INSECURE WORLD
Ninth, the sentiments of the electorate have always been affected by the external environment. The 2001 GE is a case in point.
Following the Sept 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, the electorate rallied to the PAP, which has a good track record of keeping peace at home, and a strong defence against any external threat. In that election, the PAP’s popular vote was 75.3 per cent.
In this election, the PAP’s narrative about the terrorist threat from ISIS and the uncertain global economy worked to its advantage.
VOICE OF REASON
Tenth, I am glad that the PAP leader whose team scored the highest popular vote of 79 per cent was Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam. He was always calm and measured.
He never uttered an insult or a threat.
Instead, he explained the PAP’s policies and rebutted the alternatives put forward by the opposition in a clear and rational way. He was intellectually brilliant but came across as humble and open-minded.
I hope other politicians would seek to emulate him.
The writer is a Special Adviser at the Institute of Policy Studies, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore.
You must be a very big and stupid moron. Why do you want Singapore citizenship? This is a very small island with no natural resources and limited space. Maybe you have been influenced by the good publicity the government has projected. Do you enjoy living like sardines in a tin can?
The cost of living is very high. A simple Japanese car costs S$130,000, the most expensive in the world and you only own it for ten years. It is very stressful living on this tiny island. Why let your children and grandchildren suffer and curse you in future?
Be realistic, ask yourself how long can Singapore sustain its economic achievement? We are at the mercy of big nations like China, USA and Europe. Anytime, we may sink.
If China decides to build the Kra Canal in Thailand or a highway across the Kra region, we are finished. Even if they open the sea route in the Northern Hemisphere around the North Pole, we are finished.
If the US and other European countries decide to move their MNCs back home or to other cheaper countries which are catching up fast, we are also finished.
We cannot compete with India or China or even Indonesia or Philippines in terms of labour for manufacturing. Technologically, we are just poor copycats with no real inventions of our own. The only thing we can boast of right now is building oil rigs but once the Chinese or South Koreans decide to undercut us, we are finished.
And to add to that we have no freedom to express ourselves. We cannot protest in public. Some Singaporeans have been jailed for 32 years without any trial at all for disagreeing with the government, longer than Nelson Mandela in prison.
Actually most of us locals realise our weaknesses and hope to have a chance to migrate to larger countries where the cost of living is lower overall and there is plenty of living space.
I think you have been conned by the PAP Ministers who draw salaries which are higher than President Obama’s and who can easily relocate to larger countries like the US, Britain or Australia when the time comes.
You have indeed made the biggest mistake in your life by becoming a Singapore citizen.
Editor’s note: Mothership.sg called for young Singaporeans to step up and provide their voice in written form for GE2015. The aim of such an endeavour is to provide our readers a means to view GE2015 through the lens of young Singaporeans, warts, sparkles and all.
The election results have been shocking, to say the least, in the Workers’ Party (WP) not gaining more seats and even losing an incumbent MP in Lee Li Lian of Punggol East SMC. And it happened in what many claimed to to be a watershed election, a turning point and change of the status quo after 2011.
Here are some possible reasons why the WP didn’t do as well as expected.
1. Their performance in Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) and how it was harped upon by everyone and their mothers.
Photo by Pandora Wong for Mothership.sg
The WP probably felt besieged as People’s Action Party (PAP) politicians went on the offensive with the WP’s management of AHPETC. Sylvia Lim, chairwoman of WP and sitter of a self-proclaimed “hot seat”, hit the nail on the head when she said:
“Voters everywhere by now should be convinced that any Opposition town council will be well-scrutinised to ensure proper management.”
Low Thia Khiang, secretary-general of WP, was forced to (in a very showy manner), show that Punggol East SMC’s accounts were in a deficit before it was passed over to the WP after the 2013 by-election.
This was then rebutted by PAP candidate for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC Zainal Sapari, when he said Punggol East SMC was in “good financial health when the whole set of accounts handed over to AHPETC is read together”. According to him, although there was a deficit in the accumulated routine fund of $282,009, the same set of accounts also showed an amount of $303,372 claimable as reimbursement from the CIPC fund, which PRPGTC had already secured for Punggol East SMC, which would result in a actual net surplus of $21,363.
Even the most benign or indifferent voters would have second thoughts on WP’s ability to manage town councils with that major back and forth on AHPETC between the WP and PAP, as well as AHPETC’s ongoing case against the Ministry of National Development (MND). The MND had brought an application to court to appoint independent accountants to AHPETC. Although their application was rejected by the High Court, MND has appealed before the Court of Appeal and the judgement has been reserved (ie. the result is yet unknown).
2. The (largely) false perception of WP’s lacklustre performance in Parliament debates.
The late Lee Kuan Yew said of Chen Show Mao in his book:
“Chen, however, has not turned out to be so brilliant. In Parliament, he makes good prepared speeches, with a written script, but in the follow-up, he is all over the place. It simply does not gel for him. The weight of public expectation of the man, given his rather impressive résumé, has probably added to the disappointment.”
Criticism of that level, from Singapore’s founding Prime Minister (PM) would eat at any self-respecting man’s self-esteem.
Nonetheless, even Chen Show Mao has spoken at 45 out 108 parliament sittings attended, with a 93.9% attendance rate. This is in comparison with the perennial absentee PAP MP Raymond Lim, who stepped down from being Transport Minister in 2011 and retired from politics in 2015. He spoke up for 0 out of 82 parliament sittings attended, with a 71.3% attendance rate.
Of course, in addition to attending Parliament sitting and speaking up, the WP MPs are not toothless in Parliament debates either, as seen from Low Thia Khiang’s fiery exchanges with PM Lee Hsien Loong in Parliament. Those who look forward to more opposition in Parliament would probably savour the tense dialogue between the 2 party leaders on May 28, 2014.
PM Lee: Madam Speaker, I am very grateful for the extremely reasonable explanation from the member. I hope he takes an equally reasonable approach when he comes to election rallies because the Workers’ Party approach has been to be extremely reasonable, indeed low-profile in Parliament, but come election time to turn into tigers and heroes.
Low: Madam Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for praising the Workers’ Party’s ability to fight in the elections. We have no intention to hide ourselves in Parliament. We seek the mandate for people to come to Parliament to check against the Government and we have done it honestly and sincerely, we have not turned this place into a theatre — that shows we are responsible and we will behave continuously as a rational and responsible party and members should.
I believe members will agree that the Workers’ Party has been rational. We have not come here with some wild policies or wild suggestions. We debate the policies, we came out with some suggestions but these are not bankrupting the government coffers or suggesting to use the reserves.
Elections — I think we are also rational, we don’t accuse the PAP of something that we cannot substantiate or I know we will get sued. So I think we are fair. And elections (are) elections and I thank the Prime Minister for noting that we can fight elections. I am sure the PAP can too. You are the Government and you have been the governing party for 50 years and you have got more, much people, talented people than the Workers’ Party! How can you say that we are tigers and we are something else in Parliament? I am sure the PAP can equally be tigers or lions.
Those few rare instances of excitement in Singapore’s Parliament are a tempting glimpse into what may occur with more seats to the Opposition in Parliament.
In 2011, Low Thia Khiang created a buzz when he left his stronghold of Hougang to attack Aljunied GRC with an ‘A’ team along with chairwoman Sylvia Lim and then star catch Chen Show Mao. This gamble paid off as they won Aljunied with 54.72% of the vote.
In this election, despite Sylvia Lim teasing that she may run in Fengshan SMC with her orh luak photo, all the incumbent MPs stayed to compete in their seats. Even though star candidates such as National University of Singapore (NUS) sociology associate professor Daniel Goh and business consultancy CEO Leon Perera ran in East Coast GRC, perhaps voters were unconvinced by how party bigwigs like Low and Sylvia Lim did not venture out to unchartered territories.
There was perhaps a slight commotion around the poison pen letter attack on Daniel Goh, but other than that, the remaining WP candidates did not face a baptism of fire.
Instead, the focus went back to AHPETC, along with many analogies on ships- gambling ships, cruise ships, the Titanic, sampans.
4. Perceived arrogance as the leading opposition party in Singapore.
Here’s The Workers’ Party chairperson Sylvia Lim addressing the media on their absence from the opposition horse-trading meeting on Thursday night. #GE2015
The WP might have been perceived as arrogant when they skipped the second round of horse-trading talks between the opposition parties, intended to avoid 3-cornered fights.
Low Thia Khiang then poured metaphorical salt into the wounds of the other opposition parties by saying that the multi-cornered fights in Punggol East SMC in both the 2011 GE and a by-election in 2013 were a “waste of resources”. He added: “I suppose we can better use … resources to focus on giving a choice to the people.”
Screenshot from video
ESM Goh also weighed in on WP’s supposed arrogance when he said: “They (Workers’ Party) are stronger than the NSP (National Solidarity Party), there’s no doubt about that. There’s a certain arrogance in them… Will that same arrogance be able to replace me in Marine Parade? Let them try.”
This perception of arrogance may have swayed voters from voting for WP as they fear that if WP has more MPs in Parliament, they would become more confrontational towards the PAP, disrupting the smooth running of the nation.
5. Voters can’t relate as well to the new candidates.
The die-hard supporters of WP seem to mostly be heartland uncles and aunties. For them, they can relate better to the Teochew and Hokkien-speaking Low and Png Eng Huat, rather than the “Oxbridge-educated” candidates like He Ting Ru and Leon Perera. One could say that the WP’s fielding of candidates with PAP-like credentials was to boost its reputation as a “credible, responsible opposition”.
Photo by Mindy Tan
However, that may have come at the price of not attracting certain segments of the population, particularly voters who perceive these credentials as a mark of elitism, similar to the PAP. WP candidates like academics (Associate Professor Daniel Goh) and lawyers (Dennis Tan, Terence Tan, He Ting Ru) cannot really be differentiated from the usual PAP crop of lawyers and doctors as of now.
Photo by Sean Yeo for Mothership.sg
To their credit though, the WP has tried to assuage concerns that their new candidates may be elitist. Dennis Tan, candidate for Fengshan SMC and former Raffles Institution boy, in his rally speech, emphasised that WP MPs, along with the rank and file of the party, worked to stack chairs after community events. He said: “Being a product of a good school does not mean that one has to be an elitist. It all boils down to a person’s attitude towards other people.”
In a way, with the lack of differentiation between the similarly-credentialed WP and PAP candidates, some voters may just decide to go for “the real deal” in the PAP, who have the added advantage of mentors with experience in running town councils and the vast grassroots machinery of the PAP as support. Therefore, these swing voters may just choose to stick with the status quo in the PAP, rather than to take a risk with untested opposition MPs.
Professionals, managers, executives and technicians (or PMETs) may also have not been fully convinced by the new candidates fielded by WP. After all, they come in untested, without mentoring in running town councils or with the vast grassroots machinery of the PAP as support. Voters might think that credentials, after all, do not necessarily translate to competence.
SAYA merujuk kepada laporan di Berita Harian semalam bertajuk: Sokongan Melayu jelas pendirian teguhkan lagi perpaduan.
Keputusan cemerlang bagi pihak Parti Tindakan Rakyat (PAP) dan Menteri Melayu menunjukkan bahawa mereka diberi kepercayaan untuk menerajui Singapura.
Ini juga mencerminkan kepercayaan yang kuat datang daripada masyarakat Melayu/Islam.
Walaupun ada beberapa perkara yang masih belum dapat dihuraikan, masyarakat telah membuat keputusan, sebagaimana warga kita membuat keputusan 50 tahun yang lalu, bahawa masa depan untuk kita adalah di tempat ini yang kita panggil Singapura.
Walaupun memang ada beberapa perkara yang harus dihuraikan, ia baik jika dilakukan dengan kebijaksanaan dan teratur.
Masyarakat telah memilih dan menyokong PAP, yang juga menunjukkan yang ada semacam pertalian erat di antara masyarakat dan pemerintah.
Ayuh kita bekerjasama dalam menghuraikan masalah yang ada.
Kepercayaan yang kukuh menunjukkan bahawa masyarakat memberi isyarat yang terang bahawa ia mahu terus bekerjasama dengan pemerintah.
ST ILLUSTRATION: MIEL
