Many residents in Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC) seem to be unable to decide which party to vote for in the upcoming election, said Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, who urged voters in the Opposition-held ward to consider their own interests when casting their vote.
“My sense of the ground is that many are caught in a dilemma. They told us quite openly they want to support the People’s Action Party (PAP), but at the same time, they are afraid that if they vote for the PAP, then the Workers’ Party (WP) may be out. And therefore, there’ll be no Opposition party headed by Mr Low Thia Khiang and Ms Sylvia Lim in Parliament,” he said after a visit to Bedok North and Hougang Central, his second visit to the GRC in three weeks.
To solve their problem, Mr Goh advised residents to consider their own interests as voters.
“Because when you vote for somebody, you must vote for candidates whose values you appreciate — values like humility, sincerity, hard work, integrity, honesty,” he said.
Apart from that, residents should also vote for their own as well as their children’s future, he added. “Who can help you better in the future? If you rationalise and look at these two (criteria), then you can come to a decision.”
Mr Goh, who is contesting in the neighbouring Marine Parade GRC, likened the choice between the PAP and the WP to one of choosing which cruise ship to take.
“If you go with the PAP, you’re actually embarking on a cruise ship with a definite destination. You know the destination, you know the journey, the path taken by the cruise ship. You know the captain, the crew members, you know the quality,” he said.
“The other choice you’re given is, ‘Take my cruise ship (that is) going nowhere’ … These are gambling ships (with) casinos, very exciting. They say, ‘Take my ship, you can gamble, but we go nowhere, just go round and round,’” he added.
Mr Goh said: “If you’re a gambler, then of course, you take the casino ship. But if you’re not a gambler and you worry about your children’s future, you’ll take the other ship.”
On voters’ concern that the Opposition would lose its presence in Parliament if residents voted for the PAP, Mr Goh said the WP can “have their cake and eat it”, referring to the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament scheme, which gives the top Opposition losers seats in Parliament. If the WP loses the election, it will still have a strong voice in Parliament, but not have to run a town council.
The WP’s management of Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council’s finances has been the subject of a series of heated exchanges between the PAP and the WP during the hustings.
“They would be more free to write more great speeches, to make more great rhetoric in Parliament,” Mr Goh said.
The PAP’s team in its contest for Aljunied GRC consists of Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, who is a four-term Member of Parliament, as well as four newcomers — lawyer Muralidharan Pillai; Mr Victor Lye, chief executive of an insurance firm; Mr Chua Eng Leong, a private banker; and Mr Shamsul Kamar, a former head of department at a school.
They will face WP chief Low Thia Khiang, party chairperson Sylvia Lim, Mr Pritam Singh, Mr Chen Show Mao and Mr Faisal Manap, who are incumbents.
Mr Goh’s visit comes a day after Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong visited the Opposition-held ward.
Asked if his and Mr Lee’s visits could sway residents to vote for the PAP, Mr Goh said that for the people whom they have met, it would. But he added that those who were not present at their visits were the ones whom the party needed to reach out to.
“We can’t take things for granted. It is still very much an uphill task for the team over here. It’s not easy … They’ve got to work for every vote,” he said.
We now regret this unfortunate event, for my, were we impressed with Perera’s latest speech at the WP’s East Coast GRC rally on Sunday night.
Perera was the eighth speaker to take to the podium that evening, following candidates from Nee Soon and Jalan Besar GRC, and also after running teammates Daniel Goh and Mohamed Fairoz Shariff — but what he said in his speech made any concern about him being dwarfed by Goh or his succeeding speaker Gerald Giam combust quicker than a cartoon character being fried to a crisp.
Now, the Oxford double-first-class degree-holder spoke for 15 minutes, so we understand it might not be easy to sit through it all. But just like how we said DPM and Finance minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam’s video was totally worth watching (and it’s double the length), we’re going to strongly recommend you hear the words directly from him too.
(He even calls you “friends”; wouldn’t you want to be his friend too?)
Perera (far right) with his teammates (R-L) Daniel Goh, Mohamed Fairoz Shariff and Gerald Giam. Photo by Gerald Chan
Nonetheless, we shall once again be helpful (as always) and share the key points he made in his speech:
1. He said the PAP needs to stop praising itself.
– He said in the numerous countries he’s been to (especially for his company, which is based in eight countries), he never hears
“a never-ending barrage of statements about how superior they are to everyone else, about how things are so much better than everywhere else. But in Singapore, we hear this, all the time.”
– Sharing a story about how he heard a Korean documentary presenter say their state of tourism is something to be ashamed of, he said it’s rare to hear such talk here.
“Has anyone in the PAP ever said that we should be ashamed that so many elderly Singaporeans have to work in food courts, or collect cardboard boxes and that we should solve this problem?”
– He said even when it seems like there are problems with something, the party’s way of “admitting” it is by saying it’s good, but they will make it better.
“We hear statements like for example the CPF is a good system but we are going to make it even better. Our education is among the best in the world, but we’re going to make it even better. Do you think that the PAP admits frankly when it makes a mistake?”
2. It also doesn’t know how to admit it made mistakes, he says.
– He said they attempted to explain away the resale market rocketing out of control as “unanticipated” and us being “in a bad place in the property cycle” and the government’s foreign manpower policy as being “right for that era”, with the current measures to tighten inflows being “right for today”.
Really? When you control the number of foreigners given work passes, when you own most of the land in the country, when most housing is public housing, when you know the rate of new household formation every year, is this the fault of the property cycle?? Or is it a failure of government-forward planning?
– Even the most clear “policy failure” on the part of the PAP that happened in what Perera calls “the lost decade before the 2011 General Election” was resolved with just one apology from PM Lee Hsien Loong at the party’s lunchtime rally, days before the end of the campaign.
“Did the PAP admit these mistakes squarely? did they explain in detail how such a massive failure of planning could happen? did they explain why the ministry in charge of granting permits to foreigners did not plan with the ministries in charge of building infrastructure? Did the ministries talk to one another or did they just bochap and do their own things? … Friends, up to today they ahve not explained how exactly they will ensure this will never happen again to the country that we love.”
3. He reminds us that the PAP likes to say things are “perfect or close to perfect, because we are in charge. So keep voting for us”.
My friends, this is going to breed complacency. Ultimately it will lead to the decline of Singapore… A few days ago I represented the Workers’ Party in a TV debate. I started by thanking the PAP for its contributions to Singapore.
Ms Denise Phua replied by thanking the WP for acknowledging the achievements of the PAP.
…
Friends, the PAP likes to accuse the Workers’ Party of claiming credit. But honestly my friends, they are number 1, they are the Olympic gold medallists when it comes to claiming credit! They have claimed credit for everything that goes right in this country. When something goes wrong it is airbrushed from history, or it’s the fault of the world economy or some other anonymous force, or it’s the fault of the Workers’ Party. The PAP slogan is “with you, for you, for Singapore”, but actually it’s all about them, not you!
4. The ever-accomplished student reminds us of his book-smarts by critiquing the PAP’s manifesto as “backward-looking” (because admit it, you didn’t read it, or at most skimmed through it.)
It’s not just the manifesto, the PM’s national day rally last week; the entire PAP campaign in this general election, friends, is all backward-looking, designed to make you think that this election is about the past 50 years. But you are voting for the PAP leaders today, not the PAP leaders 50 years ago.
What is the PAP’s vision? What is the PAP’s programme for the next 5 years? They have outlined no specific programme, they expect your blind faith. But the WP has a manifesto with a coherent vision and specific plans. You can disagree with our proposals, you can say it is boring. But when you look at the WP manifesto there is a vision and there are plans. What are their plans?
5. And here’s where he wins our vote (alongside that of possibly-frustrated mainstream media journalists): he talks about actual things the WP plans to champion in parliament.
Balance instead of dominance. Passionate striving for improvement instead of complacency, admitting mistakes and preventing their recurrence instead of pretending that there were no mistakes, humility instead of arrogance.
Our way is not to depend only on a strong state dominated by an entrenched party. It is to rely on a strong civil society, a strong private sector, an active citizenry, a strong responsible opposition.
Our way, my friends, is about all stakeholders in Singapore finding solutions together. Not just ramming policies down our throats through speed-reading bills in parliament. We want to ensure free and fair debate about Singapore’s problems and Singapore’s solutions, not a debate where we only hear the good stuff.
In our manifesto we propose a public consultation select committee and standing select committees in parliament to debate bills before they become law, and to scrutinise each ministry’s spending policies and operations. We propose freeing up our newspaper and braodcasting industry to open, regulated competition.
And we call for an end to the requirement that internet news websites need to comply with cumbersome registration requirements. (woohoo! -our addition)
From the looks of social media reaction, it seems like we aren’t alone in our assessment. Here are the top Twitter trends for the night, for instance:
Twitter trends don’t lie. (Screenshot from Twitter)
Sounds like a pretty solid team the WP is fielding for East Coast. Tough choices ahead, East Coast voters…
Yaacob is the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs since 2002.
The Malay community hates him because allegedly he never stood up for their rights, especially on wearing the tudung.
It matter not, the number of mosques he has helped built or the work he has done with MUIS and MENDAKI to help the community progress.
Maybe we do know the good work that we has done but we are deliberately turning a blind eye on them and focusing only on his negative things.
It is tough to be Yaacob.
The community did not choose him. We did not elect him. Yaacob knows this, yet he continues to do his job….
There are now more Malay first class graduates, more professionals… blah blah blah.. But you already know that because you can see our community progress with your own eyes. You saw how the mosque has evolved from just a place of worship into a space that functions as support pillars for families with quality teachers and facilities. You have seen the lives of the less fortunate being transformed after being given a second chance.
Yet, we criticise him all the same. We even cast doubt on his faith and that he is not fit to lead us because he is not the Muslim that we think he should be.
Who are we to judge if an individual is more Muslim than others.
We want Muslim ladies to be able to wear the tudung without prejudice but how do we get about doing that?
We have been asking the government to allow our Muslim ladies wear the hijab for the past decades. Yet here we wait.
Singapore is a secular society and by definition it is not connected with religious or spiritual matters.
Yet we have a Minister-in-charge of Muslim affairs fighting for our rights with whatever power he has in him.
It is tough to be Yaacob Ibrahim.
But he is a tough man because as a Muslim he knows that it is his responsibility to keep persevering in his fight for our rights – some call it a lost cause, we call it is his Jihad.
For the record, I condemn what has been made of Yaacob Ibrahim’s photo at a Laselle College of the Arts function. It was mischievous and tried to paint him, the Minister-in-Charge of Muslim Affairs, in a very bad light. It was in very bad taste and is very unbecoming of a Muslim, if the person or people behind the photo is or are indeed Muslims.
Yaacob has been quick to condemn the photo and had even called on WP’s Faisal Manap to condemn the act.
He should be reminded of the saying, there is no smoke without fire.
As a Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs,he should not have been caught in that situation. There are many confetti poppers so why does one that looks like a wine bottle had to be used? If it hadn’t been used, it wouldn’t give people the opportunity to milk it for political mileage. I’m sure his assistants or even he himself would have been briefed about the programme. Or maybe they weren’t thorough enough?
Then you also have the event organiser Laselle. It is a secular arts school but it does not mean that they cannot be aware of the sensitivities of a Muslim politician holding a wine bottle(even though it is a fake). Again, confetti poppers come in all shapes and sizes so why the need to go for one that looks like a wine bottle? Are they really that ignorant?
What this incident shows is that there are people who are still unaware of racial and religious sensitivities, We cannot take for granted that everyone undersands Islam and the obligations of its adherents. As a Muslim, it is our duty to be mindful of such matters and advise the people of a better way to do things.
Getai, which literally means “song stage” in Chinese, refers to variety performances which entertain both the living and the dead staged during this month.
The police had issued a statement on August 14 which said:
Getai performances and other forms of stage performances and entertainment are strictly not allowed before, during or after election rallies.
It also placed a burden on organizers of getai performances not to allow candidates to canvass for support.
Festival event organisers should ensure that no speeches intended to canvass support for election candidates and/or political parties are delivered (at) Seventh Month Festival events.
Last evening, at a getai Show organised by YYD Tuition Center, PAP candidates Teo Ser Luck, Gan Thiam Poh and new face Sun Xueling were present.
An invitation to the event
A reader sent in photos of their faces being projected on the stage.
The PAP candidates’ faces projected on stage
Not long after their faces were shown, the PAP candidates appeared in person.
In what appears to be a clear breach of the warnings by the police, the candidates were then seen to make their way around the hall to meet the audience.
Canvassing for support around the hall
They were also on stage to give away prizes to a crowd of at least a thousand people.
The audience for the event
The event had all the making of a 7th month Getai show with altars set up behind a a large crowd coming to watch a free show.
TOC has written in to the police to notify them of a possible breach of law and we are currently awaiting their response.
On 4th September, another PAP candidate, Lee Bee Wah, also made an appearance at a getai in Nee Soon, where she is contesting in the elections.
Ms Lee was photographed on stage, and was reported to have been promoted by the emcee of the event. A member of the public who was there told TOC that the emcee had urged the audience to vote for her in the election. This would be a clear breach of election rules and police warning issued in August.
