S'pore's Sham Political Reforms - Asia Sentinel
-
http://asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1921&Itemid=181
Asia Sentinel, 8 Jun 2009
Singapore's Sham Political Reforms
Given the Singapore government's oft-repeated mantra that multi-party politics is not appropriate for a small city-state, it might have surprised outside observers when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong recently unveiled plan to boost the number of opposition MPs in parliament.
Only last November at the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) annual conference, Lee insisted that a "two-party model cannot work in Singapore" and that "the country is much better off with one dominant party".
Just seven months later, Lee seems to have changed his tune somewhat. Now, he acknowledges that "Singaporeans want national issues to be fully debated" and that the government should "improve our political system to encourage a wider range of views in Parliament, including opposition and non-government views".
The government thus plans to change the constitution to ensure that there are at least nine opposition MPs in Singapore's supine Parliament (currently just three of the 85 voting MPs are not PAP apparatchiks) by expanding the existing system whereby the best-performing electoral losers are awarded parliamentary seats with watered-down powers.
Coming after recent decisions to permit public protests (albeit only in one specified location) and allow the release of some political films (subject to government vetting), it almost appears as if the prime minister and his PAP allies have undergone some sort of damascene conversion to liberal democratic principles.
But, in reality, the latest reforms are nothing more than Trojan horse politics, designed to head off the growing clamor for more alternative voices and to sow discord between Singapore's spattering of brave but fractious opposition politicians. The PAP has maintained an iron grip on power since Singapore won independence from Britain in 1959 not by locking up its opponents, although it does occasionally resort to such tactics, but by dominating public discourse, castrating opposition politicians through libel proceedings and manipulating the electoral system to its advantage.
Lee junior's proposed parliamentary reforms are just the latest example of this approach.
From its once-impregnable lock on power, the ruling party's share of the popular vote has declined steadily, from 75 percent in 2001 to a still-formidable 66.6 percent in 2006 and, with Singapore facing the worst recession in its history, the PAP is concerned that support could fall even further at the next general election, which is due by 2011.
While most political parties around the world can only dream of winning such support, the PAP remains nervous because it knows that the rapid rise of the internet has eroded its ability to control public opinion through state-owned newspapers and broadcast news outlets.
Although many of the city-state's bloggers and citizen journalists dedicate as much time to bashing each other as they do to taking on the government, the PAP fears that the next generation of Singaporeans, who are internet-obsessed, will be much less craven than their parents.
By guaranteeing a limited amount of greater opposition within Parliament, the PAP hopes to defuse the growing calls for more debate without giving up any control. For the real bulwarks of PAP rule – control of public debate and gerrymandering – remain fully intact.
To illustrate the first bulwark, you need look no further than Amnesty International's latest annual report, which concluded that "a climate of fear and self-censorship discouraged Singaporeans from fully participating in public affairs".
With regard to the second pillar, the bizarre system of Group Representative Constituencies (GRC), in which the party that wins the most votes in a single constituency sees their whole slate of candidates elected, remains intact despite some minor tweaking.
Although officially intended to ensure that ethnic minority (i.e. non-Chinese) MPs are elected, the GRC system provides a massive boost to the PAP as the embattled opposition parties cannot risk losing five or six of their best candidates in a single battle where the odds are tilted heavily against them.
While the reforms do nothing to weaken the PAP's electoral position, they will further undermine the public credibility of the opposition, which has already been damaged by persistently negative government spin and a tendency for internecine warfare.
The election of "best-losers" – who are known officially as non-constituency MPs (NCMPs) – began in 1984 and led to bitter divisions among opposition politicians, who differed about whether it was better to feed off the PAP's crumbs or take a principled stand and turn down the opportunity to gain a rare seat in Parliament.
The proposed expansion of the NCMP scheme will only deepen the tensions between Singapore's handful of opposition politicians, who are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Accept the NCMP scheme and some activists will criticize them for being unprincipled, self-aggrandizing lackeys. Reject it and the government can once again paint the opposition as irrelevant, ungrateful and uninterested in the real machinery of democracy.
Sylvia Lim, an existing NCMP from the Workers' Party, has welcomed the latest reforms cautiously while others in her party remain opposed to them as do competing opposition groups such as Chee Soon Juan's Singapore Democratic Party.
Opponents point out that NCMPs are second-class representatives, without the right to vote on amendments to the constitution, motions of no confidence or issues relating to public funds. Devoid of a physical constituency, it is also extremely difficult for NCMPs and their parties to build the support bases that they will need if they are to be anything more than isolated voices singing in the wind.
Those who reject the scheme also insist that the government guarantee of nine opposition MPs in Parliament will only add to the PAP conceit that there's no point in voting for the opposition.
Singapore's voters are habitually threatened by the PAP that upgrading projects for their shabby housing estates and other manifestations of government largesse are solely dependent on their support for the ruling party in general elections. The opposition, by contrast, can make no such promises or threats.
With the presence of nine alternative parliamentary voices guaranteed, Singapore's cautious and brow-beaten electorate will have even less reason to cast their compulsory vote for anyone other than the PAP.
----------------------------
Latest updates at Singapore News Alternative:
1. Singapore's Sham Political Reforms
2. Singapore Preparing for Shorter GP Season
3. Singapore kicks off eco-awareness show
4. SIA eyeing acquisitions in China and India
5. China to require PCs with software to block sites
6. Singapore's CapitaLand gets 25 bln yuan credit lines
7. Private eyes hired to check on dads
8. Art proves recession proof in Singapore
9. SIA CEO: Business Environment Remains Challenging
10. SIA CEO says Airbus A330 is a safe plane
11. North East CDC used taxpayers' money to sponsor golf event
. -
WTH!!!
I have been suckered again.
They are good at suckering people.
-
I would rather go and vote for a dog than vote for PAP.
-
NB
I always tio snook by them.
-
why do we need?
We sleep help,work well,live well.
also we can migrate pretty easy,thanks to SG citizenships and English.
There are many people also speak English.But their citizenship/passports
make them very hard to migrate.
Thanks to stupid LKY gave us a Great Leap Forward within 50 years under PAP
ruling!!We are currently half socialism and half capitialism(without sub prime
or Fanne Mae etc stupid ideas)
Change?We dunt need lah.....
-
lionnoisy, I thought you were anti-establishment?
What happened?
-
no country welcome a immigrant from a country with lower GDP per capita.
But almost every one welcome a country with top 10 GDP per capita!!
We are not economy refugee.We are just seeking a better life when we migrate!!
-
What else? There is not going to be any fairness accorded to the oppositions. Saw LKY spoke on TV about election, he stated there is no fairness to oppositions. Let's just keep in mind, whatever they do , they do with motive for their own selfish interests.
-
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
I would rather go and vote for a dog than vote for PAP.
Uncle, I thot u are ban from voting?? u r a patient of... -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
no country welcome a immigrant from a country with lower GDP per capita.
But almost every one welcome a country with top 10 GDP per capita!!
We are not economy refugee.We are just seeking a better life when we migrate!!
Why don't u put yourself to sleep? WE don't need u here to make noise which is so irrelevant to what the thread is all about.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Uncle, I thot u are ban from voting?? u r a patient of...
don't be mean, go get yourself ready for your mamasan job. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
no country welcome a immigrant from a country with lower GDP per capita.
But almost every one welcome a country with top 10 GDP per capita!!
We are not economy refugee.We are just seeking a better life when we migrate!!
you believe in GDP ar?? Zimbalwe declare a GDP of 6% but look at their countrymen...worst than dog. -
Hello, U all really think PAP is asking for 9 oppositions in the parliament ar?? U must be dreaming,...be wise abit lah, think about it..there is an ulterior motive to it.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Hello, U all really think PAP is asking for 9 oppositions in the parliament ar?? U must be dreaming,...be wise abit lah, think about it..there is an ulterior motive to it.
U copy me ah? -
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
I would rather go and vote for a dog than vote for PAP.
Please, dogs do not deserve the injustice of being in comparison.
-
Originally posted by ditzy:
Please, dogs do not deserve the injustice of being in comparison.
-
Originally posted by Fantagf:
U copy me ah?
no lah, i dun do thing without copyrights, can get sue you know. Last time i use other people's design on my pub also kenna sue..lucky can settle outside. -
Singapore's policy of - 'image counts for everything and reality for nothing' Is nothing New But i see they are becoming more sly.. Not Bad..
-
Time out for a reality check.
How often had opposition politicians been voted into Parliament as MPs?
And why not?These are questions you must ask, after spewing forth the raw emotions, if one truly cares about the nation and its people.
If MM Lee had been in the helm as PM, rest assured, there would be no such thing as NMPs or even NCMPs.
Look at the situation seriously and consider intelligently - are any of our opposition politicians ready to be elected as MPs to serve the people capably? We, as a society, are even questioning the calibre of the ruling party's MPs, how more can we be assured of the calibre of the opposition's?
Be realistic. The current crop of opposition political wannabes STAND NO CHANCE of being elected, simply because they offer no better alternatives nor any ounce of intelligence in outwitting the ruling party to reach out legally and peacefully, intelligently playing within rules, to the masses.
Thus the only hope that they have NOW is the olive branch offered freely by our PM, a chance for the opposition politicians to prove their worth within a democratic republican parliament, a national stage whereby they can voice their opinions or constructive suggestions ( or the lack of it ) to improve our lives.
Nothing is fair in life, more so in politics. Thank heavens people like me are not in politics, otherwise, nothing of such offers would even be allowed for consideration.
No one is perfect but Politics are best left to the more wise and those who wish to serve with a sincere heart, a ear for the people and a genuine desire to uplift the lives of our fellow citizens, such as what our PM is doing.
Bad mouth such efforts more, and it will earn the ire of the masses, who may make representations to scrap such attempts as an ungrateful waste of time - a loss for opposition representation as well as for the People, whom are to be served, to judge them as potential leaders of constituencies and our nation.
Worse still if we the republican citizens of an independant nation are to let ourselves be told and taught what is deemed 'right' by foriegn nations or its people of differing cultures and historical values. Even worse is to stand on their side and take swipes on one's fellow citizens.
-
If MM Lee had been in the helm as PM, rest assured, there would be no such thing as NMPs or even NCMPs.
The NCMP scheme was introduced in 1984 to provide a voice for the opposition in parliament.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N
The Nominated Members of Parliament scheme was introduced by Goh Chok Tong and approved by Parliament in March 1990.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No
1st Prime Minister of Singapore In office 5 June 1959 – 28 November 1990
-
Hey, the incumbent party is genuinely concerned about the lack of opposition in Parliament.
Really.
-
PM Lee in a rally speech at Raffles place, 3 May 2006 just before the General Election:
“Supposing you have a Parliament with 10, 15 or 20 opposition members out of 80, then instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, I will spend all my time, I have to spend all my time thinking of what is the right way to fix them, what’s the best way to buy my own supporters over”.
http://wayangparty.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/
I think now Lee Hsien Loong will be too busy with schemes on how to fix opposition.
Poor PM Lee.
-
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
PM Lee in a rally speech at Raffles place, 3 May 2006 just before the General Election:
“Supposing you have a Parliament with 10, 15 or 20 opposition members out of 80, then instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, I will spend all my time, I have to spend all my time thinking of what is the right way to fix them, what’s the best way to buy my own supporters over”.
http://wayangparty.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/
I think now Lee Hsien Loong will too busy with schemes on how to fix opposition.
Poor PM Lee.
He wants a more vibrant and challenging Parliament.
These days, mistakes are made by own people.
No mistakes from the opposition.
So by increasing opposition voices, he can at least admonish them in public.
-
He wants a more vibrant and challenging Parliament.
A good move. It probably stems from the PAP's deepening sense of boredom. But anyway it's a good move for Singapore.
Would you not be bored, if 95% of the time, you were just talking to yourself, nodding your head at yourself and agreeing with yourself? Yes, you would grow bored. You would run short of ideas, and get lost in your own stagnating mindset, and secretly wonder what was the point of all this. And eventually you might even long for some genuine discussion, engagement and feedback.
That is what has been happening in Parliament for many years. 95% of the time, the PAP is just talking to itself, nodding its head to itself and amiably agreeing with itself.
Well, at least the PAP will now have a few extra Opposition MPs to talk to. -
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
PM Lee in a rally speech at Raffles place, 3 May 2006 just before the General Election:
“Supposing you have a Parliament with 10, 15 or 20 opposition members out of 80, then instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, I will spend all my time, I have to spend all my time thinking of what is the right way to fix them, what’s the best way to buy my own supporters over”.
http://wayangparty.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/
I think now Lee Hsien Loong will be too busy with schemes on how to fix opposition.
Poor PM Lee.
Pay him so much to spend much time to fix opposition, no care for the people