Tag: PAP

PAP Does Not Have A ‘Strong Mandate’

There appears to be a “swing” towards PAP in votes compared to the last election in 2011. Some Singaporeans are disappointed because the outcome seems to contradict the evidence on the ground.

The turnouts for opposition rallies, especially those of the WP, were much bigger than the last election. Social media also reflected the sentiments of the majority of Singaporeans months and years leading to the election. Almost everyone in coffee shops and among friends had a bone to pick with the PAP, and the ranting has gone on since the last election.

Singaporeans have been ranked the world’s unhappiest people and we all know the cause of this. Even new political opportunists jumped onto the campaigning bandwagon this time round. Internet videos show Singaporeans booing and avoiding PAP candidates while they campaign. Yet, the results fail to match the sentiments on the ground. This sentiment is further confirmed by the size of the turnout of people at PAP’s winning speeches last night.

This morning I saw a large group of men wearing white standing at Bedok market, as if waiting for residents to come up to congratulate them. But none went up to them. Lim Swee Say had to go and shake the hands of a few foreigners who work at the shops. The MIW left in a jiffy.

On first reaction, it seems that there must be some rigging going on with the results. Why are there so few supporters at the winning speeches? Why have a new counting system? What are they up to this time round? However, on further reflection, it is quite obvious that the “swing” came from the following groups of Singaporeans:

The Pioneer Generation: This population segment was an easy target for the PAP. These elders were literally won over with generous subsidies and personal selling. This group is unlikely to come out and support their heroes.

New Citizens: Needless to say. Why jeopardise a future in “paradise”? Why show their faces at PAP rallies when they know they are hated all over the island?

Government Employees: Like most Singaporean voters, they desire to vote for the opposition but despite their unhappiness with the PAP, they are obligated to vote for them. Same reason as new citizens – why jeopardise my position at work?

The Poor: Many of these have been “won” over by government subsidies and are dependent on monthly handouts. Even though the desire is to vote for the opposition, they see a threat that their lifeline might be cut off.

Government Contractors: Many businesses and proprietors are making a living as a result of government contracts and projects. The HDB upgrading programmes engage thousands of contractors and sub-contractors. I doubt any one of them would want to put their livelihood at risk. What about other industrial sectors? There are many more in the same situation.

Other Government-Reliant Persons: Would they vote for the opposition if they are waiting for a housing loan from the HDB or a medical subsidy or a scholarship? Or for that matter would they vote for the opposition if they have just received such benefits?

Now, all these groups of people may sit at coffeeshops, attack PAP policies and attend opposition rallies instead of PAP rallies. However, they will eventually vote PAP because of the fear of losing their benefits.

The conclusion is this: the PAP has leverage over the voting of the above groups of Singaporeans. Also, the election system has been designed by the PAP for PAP to win the majority of seats: GRC, electoral boundary redrawing, revealing campaigning date with little forewarning, etc. They have a two-pronged winning strategy.

So, do not read PAP’s win as a mandate from the people of Singapore. If it were so, Singaporeans all over the island would be jubilant this morning but their faces are clearly depressed and disappointed. Clearly, PAP does not have the heart and the mandate of the people.

So, who are PAP’s real supporters?

RC Members: Every few blocks has an RC chairman and members, with a hierarchy of chairmen and members across each precinct. All of them are benefitting from their associations. This is a large group even without including their family members who are also voters. They are the ones in white supporting the PAP at rallies, but they alone cannot make up the winning votes.

Who are the Opposition’s supporters?

The only group that PAP has no power over is the educated, working adults. These are the most economically active Singaporeans. They are those who are waiting for jobs, building families and have school-going children and can see that the government policies are not benefitting them and their future. This is the vocal and eloquent group you find on social media. Unfortunately, this group is now outnumbered by the above groups as the election outcome shows.

Being vocal and eloquent is the last thing the government wants Singaporeans to be. This is why they dissuade Singaporeans from taking degrees. They learnt about this a long time ago in the persons of Francis Seow, Jeyaratnam and now, Chee Soon Juan. It is better for the government to give more seats in tertiary institutions to foreigners than Singaporeans and keep Singaporeans lowly educated.

The most intelligent and most important population group for Singapore’s future is being marginalised because of their collective criticism of the PAP – just like the marginalisation of the professionals 15 years ago because of their critical views of PAP. As a result, the PAP allowed “FTs” to come in overnight to take over their jobs resulting in a large group branded as the world’s most educated taxi drivers. The children of these professionals are now suffering the same fate as their parents. The Opposition can serve only this group. So, how?

Politics is about leverage and the PAP has it. What leverage has the Opposition got?

I think the picture is clear. And the problem too.

Savvy Artist

Source: www.tremeritus.com

September 14, 2015
Ang Yong Guan: Transferred Gratitude May Explain Vote Swing

I have been reflecting on this big swing towards PAP in GE2015. There is one factor which stands out in my mind: giving PM Lee and PAP a massive mandate as a way of honouring his late father. I call it transferred gratitude.

This swing of 10% happened in spite of 1) cooperation amongst opposition parties to avoid 3-cornered fights, 2) opposition fielding quality candidates, 3) huge turnout at opposition rallies and 4) post 2011 momentum towards having more Opposition MPs in Parliament? Many have also spoken about the positive impact of SG50, LKY legacy, goodies, PAP making changes in response to GE2011, fear of opposition taking over at this stage and the impending worsening of the world economy.

The attempt to separate father (SG40; the first 40 years) and son (SG10; the last 10 years) to show their differences did not work either because it was not adequately publicised in the main stream media or it did not resonate well with voters. An overwhelming sense of transferred gratitude thus prevailed. Seeing PM Lee’s photograph all over the island aroused nostalgia and strong emotional feelings in the voters towards his late father who had passed away less than 6 months ago. Hence, the transferred gratitude: a vote for him was a vote for his father.

If transferred gratitude is indeed the main factor, then all other factors pale in comparison. Is there a need to analyse too deeply why opposition fared so badly in the presence of the emotionally-charged transferred gratitude which defies logic? That is why this nation-wide massive swing took everyone by surprise.

Given another 5 years, in GE2020, will people give PM Lee and PAP this advantage of transferred gratitude?

Source: Ang Yong Guan

September 14, 2015
Singaporeans Congratulate Tharman Shanmugaratnam For Single-Handedly Winning GE2015 For PAP

Singaporeans from all walks of life who suddenly found themselves covered in white have come out to congratulate and commend Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

This after Tharman’s Jurong GRC team beat Lee Hsien Loong’s Ang Mo Kio GRC team for best result by clinching 79.28 percent of votes. The national average is 69.9 percent.

One Singaporean, Hen Ai Ni, said Tharman’s showing is proof that PAP’s talent distribution is uneven: “Even though his official title might be DPM, in my heart and mind, he is my prime minister.”

“He is the only reason there is still hope for the PAP.”

Other Singaporeans said Tharman’s statesman-like demeanour and intellect is what makes up for whatever shortfall and dead weight the party is facing.

Another Singaporean, Jiak Leow Bee, said: “The PAP with Tharman Shanmugaratnam inside is like Geylang United signing Wayne Rooney.”

“The PAP won 83 out of 89 seats in total, so it is the duty of the 82 others to thank Tharman personally. They must not and cannot be so ungrateful.”

At press time, other Singaporeans said they wonder how is the PAP going to resurrect Lee Kuan Yew and put him to sleep again to recreate the same mood five years from now.

Source: http://newnation.sg

September 14, 2015
8 Reasons For Surge Of Support For PAP

On Sept 11, 2.3 million voters inGE2015 returned thePAPto power, giving it 83 out of 89 seats and 69.9 per cent of the popular vote – a swing of almost 10 percentage points from GE2011.

Why did this happen? Jeremy Au Yong and Tham Yuen-C find out.

1 The SG50 factor

Observers had expected Singapore’s Golden Jubilee to weigh heavily in the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) favour.

And it looks like the all-year-round SG50 festivities, with the biggest National Day Parade on Aug 9, did have a feel-good effect on voters.

But, more than that, celebrating Singapore’s 50th year of independence and harking back to the country’s early, more turbulent days, could also have reminded Singaporeans of just how unique their country is – a little red dot that not only existed, but also thrived against all odds.

During the nine days of campaigning, PAP leaders had attributed this exceptionalism to voters themselves, calling on Singaporeans to “keep Singapore special”.

In the end, it could have been a message too seductive to ignore.

FAITH IN THE SYSTEM

I think many people can feel and associate with how Singapore has moved forward over the past 50 years, and are willing to put their stake in this Government to bring them forward for the next 50 years. ” MR EUGENE CHEW, 49, travel industry manager.

2 The LKY effect

The death of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew in March reminded Singaporeans of his key role in the country’s progress.

While it evoked a sense of gratitude and sympathy, some pundits were unsure if it would translate into votes for his PAP.

But what is certain, though, is howthe week of mourning galvanised Singaporeans, especially the silent majority, who turned up in the hundreds of thousands to pay respects outside Parliament House, at tribute sites around the country, and on the streets as his hearse passed by on the day of his funeral.

The sense of solidarity and patriotism could have swung votes the PAP’s way. And the story of how he and his pioneer generation of leaders built Singapore could have driven home the importance of a good leadership, which was a key plank of the PAP’s campaign this election.

PATRIOTISM IN ACTION

We should see it as a tribute to the late Mr Lee and all that he has done for Singapore.” PAP MOULMEIN BRANCH VOLUNTEER, VICTOR ANG, 50, self-employed.

3 Policy changes

The Workers’ Party (WP) had campaigned on it, telling voters that the Government’s policy “U-turns” over the past four years were the result of a stronger opposition presence in Parliament.

It turns out though, that voters could have given the PAP credit for the policy changes instead.

In areas such as immigration and property prices, the Government took quick, decisive actions to tighten the tap on foreigners and bring down property prices.

These policy changes have, possibly, defused a number of hot button issues that turned up the heat in the 2011 elections and given voters fewer reasons for protest.

Over the past four years, the leftward shift that the party had taken had also become more obvious, drawing praise from opposition parties and activists alike.

GOOD TRACK RECORD

The PAP has effectively responded to many of the complaints people had over the last decade. There has been a significant restriction on foreign immigration in recent years, a massive campaign to build BTO flats,and cooling measures have also brought down the resale prices of HDB flats by 10 per cent from the peak in 2013; and the economic record is objectively quite good… I think the electorate seems to have agreed. ” SENIOR LECTURER AT UNISIM COLLEGE, WALTER THESEIRA.

4 The AHPETC controversy

The issue of the WP’s Aljunied- Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) dominated the first half of this election’s campaign for both the opposition party and the PAP.

On the one side, the PAP had attacked the WP for lapses at its town council, saying it exposed a deeper integrity problem at the party.

On the other side, the WP had painted itself as a victim of the ruling party’s bullying, saying the PAP was using the town council system to hobble opposition parties.

But, in the second part of its campaign, the WP had moved away from the issue, seemingly confident that voters would not care.

As it turns out, voters may not have bought the opposition party’s story – that the whole issue was just being stirred up unnecessarily by the PAP.

Perhaps the surest sign of this is the party’s results in Aljunied GRC, most associated with the town council issue. The party barely clung onto the constituency, polling just 50.95 per cent of valid votes.

SEEDS OF DOUBT

The AHPETC issue played into the PAP’s hands and this affected the WP. The ground also shifted away from the opposition due to the saga. ” DR NOR SHAHRIL SAAT, fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.

5 Fear of the ‘what-ifs’

At the final Workers’ Party (WP) rally of the campaign period, Hougang MP Png Eng Huat made a call for sweeping change.

He said a fundamental overhaul of Singapore’s political landscape was needed and that it could only be realised with a wave of support for the WP. Singapore needed “big change” at the polls, he said, or “nothing else will change at all”.

Those comments – taken in the context of this campaign and opposition leaders openly talking about the need for at least 20 opposition MPs – may have presented undecided voters with too much of a change all at once.

While it was unlikely that anyone seriously bought into the PAP warning that it might fail to form the government, the opposition might have offered a vision of the future they were not yet ready to embrace.

LIKE A BIG AND SMALL BET

I think when they start to see such a great response to opposition rallies on the Internet, all the rah-rah about voting against the PAP, people got worried. People that sit on the fence say, better don’t play-play. It’s like a big and small bet.We want to make sure there’s always checks and balances.Then I think, what if people start to think like me and we have more opposition in Parliament and things don’t get done efficiently any more? ” PUNGGOL EAST RESIDENT TAN YEE KEONG,47, a regional sales manager.

6 Quality of the opposition

While the 2011 General Election was marked by excitement over a series of “star-catches” by opposition parties, there was a comparatively muted response to this year’s slate.

Part of it was simply because the voters had seen it all before.

Highly qualified former government scholar with stellar academic credentials? There were four in 2011, not including WP’s Chen Show Mao. Young, fresh-faced, articulate female candidate? There was National Solidarity Party’s Nicole Seah.

It is unclear if these star catches made all that much difference. PMLee’s criticism that the opposition was a “mouse in the House” may have found agreement with some voters.

Opposition parties seemed less prepared for battle in 2015 than four years ago,when they presented a more thought-out strategy.

The NSP was hurt by its constant flip-flopping on its decision to contest MacPherson SMC;the Singapore People’s Party and Democratic Progressive Party could not agree on a joint team until the 11th hour; and the Internet had a field day with two separate Reform Party candidates who accidentally called on voters to support other parties.

NEED TO MEET STANDARDS

Voters want more checks and balances but were not willing to have opposition for opposition’s sake. They do expect opposition MPs to be of a certain minimum standard. ” SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY LAW DON, EUGENE TAN.

7 PM Lee’s likeability

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong may be one of the PAP’s most popular politicians, but many observers still felt that his decision to place himself at the heart of the campaign was a risk.

Posters of his smiling face were everywhere during this campaign, much to the chagrin of the opposition candidates.PM Lee also made campaign stops in various constituencies and sent e-mail to voters that was signed by him.

The results are evidence that the gamble paid off. The PAP made gains across the board and PM Lee ended up with one of the best-performing wards in the election. Voters also rewarded him with the strongest mandate of his tenure.

GIVING PM THE SUPPORT

The PM is seeking a strong mandate and support. People are responding to that call, for him to take Singapore to the next stage of development.We worked very hard. At the national level, people vote PAP because they want that direction, they want to givePM the support. ” HOLLAND-BUKIT TIMAH GRC MP, LIANG ENG HWA.

8 External environment

In a departure from recent years, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spent a significant chunk of this year’s National Day Rally talking about global issues.

“We have to be alive to our external environment, that’s a fundamental reality for a ‘little red dot’,” he said, as he explained how instability in Singapore’s neighbourhood could affect the nation.

For voters who had kept up with global affairs, they might have seen that all is not well with the world at the moment.

Even as Singapore’s election campaign was picking up steam, its closest neighbour, Malaysia, was contending with growing unrest over corruption allegations involving the prime minister and China’s massive stock market crash captured headlines around the world.

FEELING SECURE

Economy uncertainty, global security concerns – these problems have always been there. It’s just that this year, voters have opened their eyes, able to dissect further to say, OK,why didn’t these things happen to us? They’re asking the right questions now. I’m happy as a Singaporean that they’re thinking that way because it makes me feel secure. ”

Source: http://news.asiaone.com

September 14, 2015
Mohd Khair: PAP Should Commission Independent Study Of GE Results

Congratulations to All Parties, Candidates and the Population of Singapore who took part in GE2015. It’s an important democratic process that affords the country to check itself periodically, whatever outcome it may be.

On the night when results were annouced, it was evident that the outcome came as a surprise even with the ruling party PAP. The commentators on live TV were also surprised of the margins and eventual swing. The mandate was clear. Almost 70% of voters wanted PAP to be back in power. However, what drove the swing that resulted in the landslide victory was still speculative, at best.

That night during the Press Conference, when Dr Yaacob spoke of a solid Malay support, we were not sure where the source of that information came from, given that voting was suppose to be secret. Was the swing a result of solid Malay support or was it due to other factors. The commentators on Channel 5 tentatively attributed the swing to other non-racial factors. And we can all agree with a suggestion by a TV panelist that night that a more thorough study was needed to understand the voting pattern in GE 2015.

There were also mentions by the panelists on how the victory speeches by the PAP were different. Probably many could also observe that the victory speeches this time sounded more humble. There were relatively more humility than ever before. And there were also not a few of the victory speeches which touched on the need to appeal more to those who had not voted for the PAP. Those speeches made promises to work harder not only for those who voted for the PAP, but also to attract or appeal more to those who did not vote for the party.

That night, while the PAP and its supporters were in for a pleasant surprise, there were quarters among the voters who were quite perplexed by the results. Leaders of the Opposition parties were also shocked with the results. Kenneth Jeyaratnam was clearly dejected. Other Opposition leaders expressed similar sentiments and said they needed time to fully understand the underlying reasons for the outcome.

With a solid mandate for the PAP amidst strong showing of support for the Opposition at rallies as well as on social media, and the promise to work harder by the ruling PAP, probably it is not too much to ask for an independent study to be done to understand the underlying factors that contributed to the landslide victory.

As voting is secret, we are still unsure if the landslide victory was a result of solid Malay voters’ support, as mentioned by Dr Yaacob that night, or could it be due to other reasons. Given the high decibel levels on long-standing issues like the tudung or hijab controversy, it is important for the ruling party to fully understand if there are the possibilities of a relatively larger proportion of the Malay voters actuallly voted for the Opposition.

The question to ask and answers to uncover is, “Could there be a possibility that the slightly more than 30% who voted for the Opposition comprised a relatively larger number of Malays?”, given the fact that many Malays were unhappy with the way the tudung issue had been handled and dragged on for more than 20 years. Of course, there are other issues that Singaporeans in general have made known of their unhappiness about, and yet voted for the PAP.

With all the humility demonstrated during the election victory speeches that night, commissioning an independent study to understand what actually happened on Sep 11, 2015 will be a noble act on the part of the PAP to not simply gloss over the victory as one resulting from its prowess to govern. This study, if conducted well and independently, will enable the PAP to better understand the polity and put to rest all the speculations that have been circulating to discredit the victory as only technical, and not substantive. But more importantly, the results of such study will help the PAP to deliver better all its promises to those who voted for it and to those who did not vote for the party. That independent study is for the PAP to keep its promises made during the victory speeches that monumentous night.

Source: Mohd Khair

September 14, 2015