Why can't the Opposition Parties compete at every wards?
-
Originally posted by ~PEPPER~:
Hard to see singapore voting for oppostion. My grandson generation maybe possible.
i think yr grandson are more clever than you -
granted some industries really lack of singaporeans filling up the job fast, yes foreigners are welcome to take them up. but many companies are exploiting this to employ foreigners due to their lower pay and on a contract. but then the influx of so many foreigners overwhelming the system. I dun see any reason why the post of call centre agents for banks need to employ foreigners. I dun think singaporeans are avoiding or did not apply for call centre agents. if one day not a lot of singaporeans apply to join police, SAF, Navy and air force, will the government considering hiring foreigners to join our uniform groups?
-
when that day arrive, there maybe no more police or army work needed, all will be computerised, everyone will have to wear a necklace sealed to identify themselves, if one commit crimes, the seal will explode and finish you off...
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
when that day arrive, there maybe no more police or army work needed, all will be computerised, everyone will have to wear a necklace sealed to identify themselves, if one commit crimes, the seal will explode and finish you off...
u watch too much sci fi. -
no, but school taught us to be creative, imaginative and innovative, "think of anything, in the box or out of the box and you will see the brain juice in it" my teacher said..
She is kind of right, if you dun think or be creative...you go bersek
-
Originally posted by Rooney9:
granted some industries really lack of singaporeans filling up the job fast, yes foreigners are welcome to take them up. but many companies are exploiting this to employ foreigners due to their lower pay and on a contract. but then the influx of so many foreigners overwhelming the system. I dun see any reason why the post of call centre agents for banks need to employ foreigners. I dun think singaporeans are avoiding or did not apply for call centre agents. if one day not a lot of singaporeans apply to join police, SAF, Navy and air force, will the government considering hiring foreigners to join our uniform groups?
in fact many might end up rooted here.2nd gen PR has to serve NS in any case.
-
Disunity & being uninformed are primary factors in PAP’s long rule
TEMASEK REVIEW
Over the last few years there has been an increasing sense of frustration openly expressed by Singaporeans on the internet about their inability to end PAP rule. The primary reasons for the weak position of Singaporeans are the disunity amongst them and the lack of knowledge. Until these are resolved, there is no way any major change can be expected.
TYPICAL REASONS GIVEN
Two main reasons often put forth have been the disunity of opposition parties. The disunity amongst opposition parties are always cited as the main reason. This is an idiosyncratic expectation since political parties in other countries are not united either. In fact they form unity coalitions based on certain strategies only. That unity coalition is just an electoral platform / mechanism. However in Singapore there is a wierd expectation that opposition parties have to function in the same manner. Some argue that there is no unity coalition platform in Singapore either. The truth is even if there is one, they will not be able to win the majority of the votes.The other reason that is often given is the passiveness of Singaporeans who are indifferent to PAP when coming to the voting booth even though they are full of criticisms before reaching the voting booth. Some say this is due to fear and so on. Again the truth is, even if Singaporeans have the courage, they will still be voting the same manner.
DISUNITY AMONGST SINGAPOREANS
The core reason for the weakness of Singaporeans is their disunity. Any two Singaporeans of any contrasting background rarely unite in the area where they are different. Rich Singaporeans do have friends or relatives amongst poor Singaporeans. How often do you see the rich Singaporeans endevouring to uplift the economic status of their poor friends or relatives. The disunity amongst ethnic groups is so pronounced and disguised under the pretext of cliches. The Chinese Singaporeans still stick to the game of blaming the minorities for their underperformance instead of admiting to the serious flaws in the system that marginalises the minorities. The Chinese Singaporeans have plenty of expectations for the minorities but none are about uplifting the economic status. The same form of disunities can be found amongst religous groups, groups of different literacies and so on.In such a divided population, the PAP can indeed rule for another 50 years. To create unity amongst Singaporeans, they themselves have to be the drivers. Firstly they will have to bury the mistrust they carry for the last 50 years. They also have to stop the blame game. Most importantly they must dream for their fellow Singaporeans what they want for themselves.
UNINFORMED POPULATION
The majority of Singaporeans remain uninformed about the realities of PAP and Singapore. It is this lack of knowledge that gives them blind hope when they vote for PAP. In fact there are so many Singaporeans who have unwavering conviction that PAP will turn any desirable economic situation around and that nobody can create a better Singapore than PAP.
Indeed the Chinese population in Singapore never enjoyed a higher economic status in previous rules from 1819 till 1959. It was only in PAP rule that they enjoyed the highest level of economic outcomes. This is what the Chinese supporters of PAP tend to think will be eternal. Nothing in this world is eternal, especially whatever relating to mortal humans. The PAP model is in serious decline. The Chinese population have slumped in their overall economic outcomes from earlier decades due to skewness in income growth whereby the rich is getting richer and the poor is getting poorer. This however is little understood. What is much further less understood is the fact that unless they vote out PAP, there is no reason to expect their overall economic circumstances to improve.
Even amongst the minority voters, a large majority of them do not realise that their economic status has never been any worse in the last 190 years except in the PAP era. Private home ownership rate of the Malays was extremely high in Singapore till 1959, which has slumped since then. The Indian and Arab community had significant control over the economy till 1959. Minorities fail to realise that the PAP simply excluded the minorities to the margins in their economic equation. What is interesting is that some of the biggest supporters and organisers of PAP grassroots are the Malays. For every minority henchmen and token representative PAP uses to tie down the minorities,there are a hundred waiting ernestly in the queue to replace him / her. They are driven by both greed and ignorance.
Andrew Thiam
-
sure.. blame everyone.. society is at fault for not sharing your view...
sheesh!
this is why the opposition keeps losing..most of the idiots haven't a clue, and when they lose, they blame the MIW, the processes, the walkovers (who caused the walkovers??), the people...
yes! the people!! the very ones whom they are supposed to win over and serve!!
now.. if the asshole thinks his whole essay through, he'd learn quickly that he's suffering from "supermassive black hole syndrome".. the whole universe revolves around him...
if he thinks the people are not united, that's where a leader of substance needs to stand up and be seen, be a uniting force.. not to kpkb about "the disunited people".. HELLO!!! THAT'S WHERE THE LEADER COMES IN!! TO UNITE THE PEOPLE!! you have put the cart before the horse you idiot!!
if he thinks the people are not informed, dammit inform them! go talk to the people, meet the people, walk the ground, win their hearts.. not be like the goddamned asshole MIW in their ivory towers talking AT the people instead of talking to the people...
this, is the long and short of why the opposition has mostly failed the people... the people have not failed them.. they failed themselves, and the people, smart enough to recognise it, don't want anything to do with most of them...
now, the next elections? we're between a rock and a hard place.. we have a bunch of uncaring assholes in MIW, and on the other side, a bunch of uncaring assholes in the opposition...
which is why i say to the people, screw the politicians... make your own lives a good one... do not depend on them, coz trust in them is trust in vain... you don't need them, they need you...
go live your lives, be happy... screw the politicians..
-
Strategies for the next election 2010/2011
TEMASEK REVIEW
By Lawrence Pek
With the looming GE slated in 2010 / 2011, there are plenty of issues that need to be reviewed by any respectable Opposition Party. Playing the role of a Campaign Manager, I would like to add value with Election Strategies, rather than the issues itself.
1. A Clear and Concise Message
a. Pick 3 to 5 Issues and Hammer Hard – People cannot remember so many things, 3 to 5 things will do, It is important to keep repeating these issues and use clear BUZZWORDS. People remember these key words.
b. DO NOT ATTACK THE PAP – 2 reasons here – 1stly, PAP will NOT attack unless provoked (because they want the moral high ground), with SPH (with all its newspapers and CNA) under their control, you cannot win this battle. 2ndly, If you attack the PAP, this will cause the electorate to deviate on your message. For this election, the PAP will be on the defensive, they will spend a lot of resources in explaining their unpopular policies.
c. Know the IN and OUT of these issues so that you will never be blindsided by any response from the PAP – Be ready with clear and strong responses from the PAP camp – “if they say this, we need to say this…” Let PAP attack you, then respond robustly, engage the issue. Make sure your audience gets these messages clearly. The MSM will have the burden to carry any Opposition responses, since it has to carry the initial attack from the PAP camp.
2. Sympathy Votes:
In Singapore’s political landscape, it is strange that none of the Opposition used this tactical advantage. If the opportunity arises, Opposition needs to play the Underdog card, a lot of swing or undecided votes can be curried over.
3. INTERNET:
The Opposition cannot depend on SPH (newspaper and CNA) to give you the same space and time support. You will need to expose your message to your audience via the various online platforms – you will need to choose carefully as choice of online platform will associate you accordingly i.e. you will be branded accordingly.
a. Videos and Audio – the strongest trend recently in political reporting is On Line Journalism – e..g. “CNN’s I-REPORT” – have an armada of student activists that will record your rally messages, carry interviews from Opposition Leaders and Public responses (kopitiam comments are critical).
b. Time to Air – this is a critical strategy, you need to deliver your content faster than the PAP – usually, you can win mindshare faster and you will be seen more credible with 1st to Market. Put the PAP on the back peddle.
c. Create “Talking Heads” videos of key Opposition Leaders – video clips which will delivers key points about the issues, about their party and what is happening daily during the campaign period. Email these opposition supporters and make sure that they forward to as many people as possible. Stay away from traditional print media – they are too expensive and many legal issues.
d. Create a “Jingle” – similar to Buzzwords – easy and catchy. Create a simple jingle – this can be a simple 10 sec jingle to a full 3min song – which can reflect the entire the pissed off mood of the local Singaporeans. There is a song on you tube from Dick Lee that uses Billy Joel’s “we did not start the fire”…I thought that was catchy and sticks on people’s minds.
4. Measure the responses from the ground:a. Prior to the Election, even now, there are so many raw sentiments on the grounds – regarding the various issues. What they think, Why they think that, and What should be done. Carefully, you need to understand that this is different from what YOU think, why YOU think that and what YOU think should be done. It is important to understand that it is NOT YOU, the Opposition Party against the PAP, but rather – it is the PEOPLE against the PAP. Carry the people’s messages effectively, and you will be OK. Position yourselves as the People’s Alternatives Voices.
Summarize what they are thinking, saying and use key Buzzwords to position your summary. If possible, use local dialects to carry these responses effectively. If financial resources, it is important to do a simple poll for these issues and these buzzwords.
b. After each rally, it is important to know what the attendees think about the speeches, the speaker and most interviewees will be more than happy to provide their responses as well as their recommendations.
Preparation is key – know what resources you have and how you can use them effectively, clear roles and responsibility should be assigned. Campaign Manager should not be just that, managing the resources as well as measuring the responses and tweaking the strategies.
The election boundaries are such that period of campaigning will be short so effective use all avail resources will be key. Even though this is a given, my suggestions maybe more applicable to 2 major difference since the last election. The Internet as well as how much more pissed off the local Singaporeans is now with their policies. These 2 things create a potent mix that may spring a surprise on the ruling party.
There are bound to be more strategies and I welcome lots more ideas to add or refine to mine, but rather than blogging about the issues, let’s consider specific strategies to win more and more votes. Let’s think differently.
The Winds of Change is blowing….
-
One question Mr Manager,
Do the oppositions provide free buffet dinner cum night market fun fair and shopping for their nite rallies
-
How Singapore manage to “lose” its opposition over the years
TEMASEK REVIEW
By Eugene Yeo
In a recent interview with the online newspaper Malaysiakini, Dr Mahathir commented that it would be a “disaster” for Malaysia if it “loses its opposition” as in Singapore.
As a Singaporean who grew up during the Mahathir years, Dr M’s tolerance and embrace of the opposition came as a pleasant surprise given his autocracic tendencies exhibited during 22 years of iron-fisted rule.
He may even come across as being “magnanimous” and “gracious” when compared to the PM of this country who once threatened, in his very own words, to “fix the opposition” if more were to be elected into Parliament.
Indeed, is this the reason why there is no opposition left in Singapore ?
Since Singapore was separated from the Federation in 1965, politics on two sides of the straits had been dominated by a single mammoth entity – Barisan Nasional, a motley coalition led by UMNO in Malaysia and the People’s Action Party (PAP) in Singapore. Ironically, the Democratic Action Party (DAP), one of the main opposition parties in Malaysia was an offshoot of the PAP, being formed by the Malaysian PAP cadres in 1966.
Barisan Socialist’s fatal mistake
A flip through the history books will tell us that Singapore always has an active and vibrant opposition presence since the first legislative elections in 1955 held by the British colonial government in which the PAP, then in the opposition, won three seats.
In 1961, left-wing members of the PAP, led by Lim Chin Siong and Dr Lee Siew Choh left the PAP and form Barisan Socialis taking away 35 out of 51 branches from the parent party.
In February 1963, many members of the Barisan Socialis were arrested by the Internal Security Department (ISD) for “subversive” activities to set up a communist state in Singapore including its charismatic leaders Lim Chin Siong and Fong Swee Suan.
Despite that, in the 1963 state elections, Barisan Socialis won 13 out of 51 seats to become the largest opposition in Parliament.
After the elections, in a series of “anti-communist” and “anti-subversive” activities, the ISD would continue to arrest many members of the Barisan Socialis, including its MPs thereby crippling the party. However, the killer blow was not dealt by the PAP but by a disastrous move which led to serious repercussions for the opposition till today.
After Singapore’s independence from Malaysia, Barisan Socialis MPs began to resign one by one in 1966. Though the Barisan Sosialis’ official position was to ‘take the fight to the streets’, in reality, the party believed that Singapore’s future was in serious doubt and felt pointless to continue the political struggle. In the by-elections for these vacant seats, the PAP had a clean sweep. Calls for blank ballots by the Barisan Sosialis went unheeded.
By 1968, there was no opposition member of parliament and it would take another 13 years before the opposition parties could win a seat in parliament. Since then, the party itself has failed to win a single seat in parliament. Later in an election rally in 1980, party chairman Dr Lee Siew Choh apologised to the voters for what they did in 1966 and admitted what they had done was a grave mistake.
PAP consolidates its power
It was to be a mistake that the opposition in Singapore never recovered from. Barisan Socialis’s dramatic capitulation gave PAP 12 uninterrupted years of complete power and hegemony in Parliament in which they used the advantages of their incumbency to consolidate their presence and position in all branches of the government and civil society.
Important institutions of the state which are previously independent, such as the press, civil service and grassroots organizations came to be dominated by the PAP and their continued stranglehold on them has kept the opposition weak and subdued to this day.
Without a free press, the media soon became part of the PAP’s propaganda machinery constantly extolling the virtues and achievements of the government where criticism are almost unheard of. At the same time, laws are strengthened to curb basic freedoms of speech and assembly guranteed for citizens under the Constitution. Political activism especially in the university is severely curtailed with transgressors being jailed or exiled, most notably the prominent student leader Tan Wah Piow.
A subservient press and a subdued civil society serve only to perpetuate the PAP’s unbridled penetration into all aspects of Singapore be it the judiciary, HDB which builds the flats 90% of the population lives in, the NTUC supermarts in which Singaporeans buy their groceries and even kindergartens for the next generation.
The PAP’s presence and pervasiveness is so complete that it will not be exaggerated to compare it to the Communist Party of China. Singapore has been turned into a virtual police state.
In fact, the PAP’s strongman Lee Kuan Yew once said unashamedly to a foreign journalist that he is proud to admit that the PAP is the government of Singapore and verse versa.
More importantly, the PAP’s absolute control of Parliament, state resources and even the Election Commission under the PM’s Office enables them to change the rules at will to serve their own narrow political interests.
HDB flats in opposition wards such as Potong Pasir were not upgraded even though its residents pay taxes like the rest of Singapore.
Gerrymandering is rampant with single constituencies singled out as the bastions of the opposition being partitioned and amalgamated into bigger GRCs which have ballooned over the years further tip the playing field to the favor of the PAP.
The opposition is often ridiculed and demonized by the media as foreigner saboteurs, enemies of the state or some lunatics fresh out of IMH. Not surprisingly, the ranks of the opposition continue to be decimated throughout the years.
Nipping the nascent opposition in the bud
Though the opposition is severely weakend, Singaporeans continue to yearn for an opposition in Parliament to check on the PAP whose paternalistic style of governing involves forcing unpopular policies down the throats of citizens has caused increasing voices of dissent to emerge from Singaporeans
In 1981, Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam of the Workers’ Party won the Anson seat in a by-election with 51.9% to 47.1% of the vote to become Singapore’s first opposition MP since 1968. He was again re-elected to the same seat in 1984 as one of only two opposition politicians to win in that election.
Later, however, Jeyaretnam was brought down by a series of politically-motivated charges and fines in a successful effort to disbar him and prevent him from taking part in future elections. Two months after his 1984 re-election, he was charged for allegedly mis-stating his party accounts.
In 1986, a district court found him innocent of all charges but one; the prosecution appealed and the Chief Justice ordered a retrial in a district court. At the retrial, Jeyaretnam was declared guilty on all charges. The judge sentenced him to three months’ imprisonment (later commuted to one month), and fined him SGD5,000, sufficient to disqualify him from standing for election for a period of five years. He was also disbarred.
In the 1988 election, Jeyaretnam was barred from contesting due to his 5-year disqualification. However, he did attend election rallies to help out his fellow party members. At an election rally, he challenged the PAP’s claim to being an open and transparent government, and asked whether any investigation had been conducted as to how the Minister for National Development, Teh Cheang Wan, had obtained the tablets with which he had committed suicide, in the midst of being investigated for corruption.
After the elections, Lee commenced proceedings against Jeyaretnam, alleging that the latter had slandered him as his words at the election rally were understood to mean that Lee had committed a criminal offence by aiding and abetting Teh to commit suicide, and thereby, had covered up on corruption. The action was heard by Justice Lai Kew Chai who found a case against Jeyaretnam and ordered him to pay Lee, damages of SGD 260,000, together with interest on the amount and costs.
Jeyaretnam was subsequently being sued successfully for defamation in separate lawsuits in 1995 and 1997 resulting in over $S500,000 in damages. He was only discharged from bankruptcy and recalled to the Bar last year.
The plight of Jeyaretnam as well as other prominent opposition leaders who have been embroiled defamation suits such as Tang Liang Hong, Francis Seow, Gopalan Nair and Chee Soon Juan have caused Singaporeans to shun politics altogether particularly the young, capable and professional intellectuals who have much to lose.
Politics in Singapore has acquired such a sordid reputation that even the PAP has problems recruiting new candidates to stand for elections, let alone the opposition which has long been discredited and dismissed as a bunch of crankpots by the PAP and the state media.
The Wayang of today - PAP’s approved “opposition”:
In 2001, Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam, long seen as one of the few brave leaders in the opposition who dare to challenge the PAP, resigned abruptly from the Workers’ Party, citing lack of party’s support for his fight against bankruptcy.
Mr Low Thia Kiang who became the WP’s Secretary General swiftly pledged to chart WP from the “confrontational politics” promulgated by his predecessor and to serve as a “constructive opposition” in Parliament. He was later accused by Jeyaretnam for helping the PAP to oust him.
Low’s open deference to the PAP has made him an instant blue-eye boy of the regime and the media. MM Lee praised him in public as being “credible” and “acceptable”. The media began to run favorable reports on WP and its new generation of leaders. This ringing endorsement by the establishment net WP the biggest number of votes during the last General Election in 2006 with 2 MPs in Parliament.
Though decried often by detractors as being intolerant and insensitive, the PAP leadership does retain a certain degree of political acumen to realize that Singaporeans are getting tired and fed up with the ruthless and uncompromising approach it adopts towards its adversaries and the fact that there will always be support for the opposition.
Since you can’t beat them completely, might as well co-opt the acceptable ones into your fold!
During the GE 2006, MM Lee gave his definition of what a “First World opposition” should be – in short, an “opposition” that is compliant, cooperative and does not confront the PAP so that its MPs can continue to breeze their bills through in Parliament without any problems.
His words were directed at Low who by then was gaining a reputation as a “credible” opposition MP. Parliamentary sessions became more like a meeting with few questions asked or issues debated. Even PAP backbenchers and NMPs are more vocal than Low.
In a lame attempt to live up to the PAP’s “expectations” of him, Low went further by restricting his “opposition” to only making a few token speeches in Parliament and praising the PAP for its governance and laws in public. He even renounced the tag of “opposition”, preferring to call WP an “alternative party” providing an “alternative” to the PAP.
In Malaysia, it is possible to get two ideologically polarized parties like DAP and PAS to collaborate in the civil campaign “Bersih” to call for free and fair elections. Not so in Singapore where WP leaders and members shun SDP like a plague and are eager to be seen aligned to the PAP by inviting its leaders to WP’s 50th anniversary dinner last year.
In one interview with the Straits Times last year, Low infuriated opposition supporters by defining the role of the opposition as a ”watchdog” and not a “mad dog” alluding to SDP’s Chief Chee who has been the most voracious critic of the PAP.
With WP betraying the opposition’s cause to become a pseudo-subsidiary of the PAP, the opposition in Singapore is not only “lost”, it has also been rendered completely impotent and irrelevant.
The PAP’s “taming” of the opposition and its tacit approval of WP has severely curtailed the boundaries in which future opposition parties can operate.
In other democracies, the opposition is expected to check on the ruling party by voicing its concerns and criticism freely without any fear or worries to the extent of being confrontational. Across the causeway, no opposition party will survive if its leaders prostitute themselves to Barisan Nasional with boot-licking antics of the WP.
In Singapore, thanks to the new WP under Low Thia Kiang, the role of the opposition has now been denigrated to that of a “docile”, “compliant” and “non-confrontational” “alternative” voice in Parliament.
-
Originally posted by SANTA CLAUSE:
How Singapore manage to “lose” its opposition over the years
TEMASEK REVIEW
By Eugene Yeo
In a recent interview with the online newspaper Malaysiakini, Dr Mahathir commented that it would be a “disaster” for Malaysia if it “loses its opposition” as in Singapore.
As a Singaporean who grew up during the Mahathir years, Dr M’s tolerance and embrace of the opposition came as a pleasant surprise given his autocracic tendencies exhibited during 22 years of iron-fisted rule.
He may even come across as being “magnanimous” and “gracious” when compared to the PM of this country who once threatened, in his very own words, to “fix the opposition” if more were to be elected into Parliament.
Indeed, is this the reason why there is no opposition left in Singapore ?
Since Singapore was separated from the Federation in 1965, politics on two sides of the straits had been dominated by a single mammoth entity – Barisan Nasional, a motley coalition led by UMNO in Malaysia and the People’s Action Party (PAP) in Singapore. Ironically, the Democratic Action Party (DAP), one of the main opposition parties in Malaysia was an offshoot of the PAP, being formed by the Malaysian PAP cadres in 1966.
Barisan Socialist’s fatal mistake
A flip through the history books will tell us that Singapore always has an active and vibrant opposition presence since the first legislative elections in 1955 held by the British colonial government in which the PAP, then in the opposition, won three seats.
In 1961, left-wing members of the PAP, led by Lim Chin Siong and Dr Lee Siew Choh left the PAP and form Barisan Socialis taking away 35 out of 51 branches from the parent party.
In February 1963, many members of the Barisan Socialis were arrested by the Internal Security Department (ISD) for “subversive” activities to set up a communist state in Singapore including its charismatic leaders Lim Chin Siong and Fong Swee Suan.
Despite that, in the 1963 state elections, Barisan Socialis won 13 out of 51 seats to become the largest opposition in Parliament.
After the elections, in a series of “anti-communist” and “anti-subversive” activities, the ISD would continue to arrest many members of the Barisan Socialis, including its MPs thereby crippling the party. However, the killer blow was not dealt by the PAP but by a disastrous move which led to serious repercussions for the opposition till today.
After Singapore’s independence from Malaysia, Barisan Socialis MPs began to resign one by one in 1966. Though the Barisan Sosialis’ official position was to ‘take the fight to the streets’, in reality, the party believed that Singapore’s future was in serious doubt and felt pointless to continue the political struggle. In the by-elections for these vacant seats, the PAP had a clean sweep. Calls for blank ballots by the Barisan Sosialis went unheeded.
By 1968, there was no opposition member of parliament and it would take another 13 years before the opposition parties could win a seat in parliament. Since then, the party itself has failed to win a single seat in parliament. Later in an election rally in 1980, party chairman Dr Lee Siew Choh apologised to the voters for what they did in 1966 and admitted what they had done was a grave mistake.
PAP consolidates its power
It was to be a mistake that the opposition in Singapore never recovered from. Barisan Socialis’s dramatic capitulation gave PAP 12 uninterrupted years of complete power and hegemony in Parliament in which they used the advantages of their incumbency to consolidate their presence and position in all branches of the government and civil society.
Important institutions of the state which are previously independent, such as the press, civil service and grassroots organizations came to be dominated by the PAP and their continued stranglehold on them has kept the opposition weak and subdued to this day.
Without a free press, the media soon became part of the PAP’s propaganda machinery constantly extolling the virtues and achievements of the government where criticism are almost unheard of. At the same time, laws are strengthened to curb basic freedoms of speech and assembly guranteed for citizens under the Constitution. Political activism especially in the university is severely curtailed with transgressors being jailed or exiled, most notably the prominent student leader Tan Wah Piow.
A subservient press and a subdued civil society serve only to perpetuate the PAP’s unbridled penetration into all aspects of Singapore be it the judiciary, HDB which builds the flats 90% of the population lives in, the NTUC supermarts in which Singaporeans buy their groceries and even kindergartens for the next generation.
The PAP’s presence and pervasiveness is so complete that it will not be exaggerated to compare it to the Communist Party of China. Singapore has been turned into a virtual police state.
In fact, the PAP’s strongman Lee Kuan Yew once said unashamedly to a foreign journalist that he is proud to admit that the PAP is the government of Singapore and verse versa.
More importantly, the PAP’s absolute control of Parliament, state resources and even the Election Commission under the PM’s Office enables them to change the rules at will to serve their own narrow political interests.
HDB flats in opposition wards such as Potong Pasir were not upgraded even though its residents pay taxes like the rest of Singapore.
Gerrymandering is rampant with single constituencies singled out as the bastions of the opposition being partitioned and amalgamated into bigger GRCs which have ballooned over the years further tip the playing field to the favor of the PAP.
The opposition is often ridiculed and demonized by the media as foreigner saboteurs, enemies of the state or some lunatics fresh out of IMH. Not surprisingly, the ranks of the opposition continue to be decimated throughout the years.
Nipping the nascent opposition in the bud
Though the opposition is severely weakend, Singaporeans continue to yearn for an opposition in Parliament to check on the PAP whose paternalistic style of governing involves forcing unpopular policies down the throats of citizens has caused increasing voices of dissent to emerge from Singaporeans
In 1981, Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam of the Workers’ Party won the Anson seat in a by-election with 51.9% to 47.1% of the vote to become Singapore’s first opposition MP since 1968. He was again re-elected to the same seat in 1984 as one of only two opposition politicians to win in that election.
Later, however, Jeyaretnam was brought down by a series of politically-motivated charges and fines in a successful effort to disbar him and prevent him from taking part in future elections. Two months after his 1984 re-election, he was charged for allegedly mis-stating his party accounts.
In 1986, a district court found him innocent of all charges but one; the prosecution appealed and the Chief Justice ordered a retrial in a district court. At the retrial, Jeyaretnam was declared guilty on all charges. The judge sentenced him to three months’ imprisonment (later commuted to one month), and fined him SGD5,000, sufficient to disqualify him from standing for election for a period of five years. He was also disbarred.
In the 1988 election, Jeyaretnam was barred from contesting due to his 5-year disqualification. However, he did attend election rallies to help out his fellow party members. At an election rally, he challenged the PAP’s claim to being an open and transparent government, and asked whether any investigation had been conducted as to how the Minister for National Development, Teh Cheang Wan, had obtained the tablets with which he had committed suicide, in the midst of being investigated for corruption.
After the elections, Lee commenced proceedings against Jeyaretnam, alleging that the latter had slandered him as his words at the election rally were understood to mean that Lee had committed a criminal offence by aiding and abetting Teh to commit suicide, and thereby, had covered up on corruption. The action was heard by Justice Lai Kew Chai who found a case against Jeyaretnam and ordered him to pay Lee, damages of SGD 260,000, together with interest on the amount and costs.
Jeyaretnam was subsequently being sued successfully for defamation in separate lawsuits in 1995 and 1997 resulting in over $S500,000 in damages. He was only discharged from bankruptcy and recalled to the Bar last year.
The plight of Jeyaretnam as well as other prominent opposition leaders who have been embroiled defamation suits such as Tang Liang Hong, Francis Seow, Gopalan Nair and Chee Soon Juan have caused Singaporeans to shun politics altogether particularly the young, capable and professional intellectuals who have much to lose.
Politics in Singapore has acquired such a sordid reputation that even the PAP has problems recruiting new candidates to stand for elections, let alone the opposition which has long been discredited and dismissed as a bunch of crankpots by the PAP and the state media.
The Wayang of today - PAP’s approved “opposition”:
In 2001, Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam, long seen as one of the few brave leaders in the opposition who dare to challenge the PAP, resigned abruptly from the Workers’ Party, citing lack of party’s support for his fight against bankruptcy.
Mr Low Thia Kiang who became the WP’s Secretary General swiftly pledged to chart WP from the “confrontational politics” promulgated by his predecessor and to serve as a “constructive opposition” in Parliament. He was later accused by Jeyaretnam for helping the PAP to oust him.
Low’s open deference to the PAP has made him an instant blue-eye boy of the regime and the media. MM Lee praised him in public as being “credible” and “acceptable”. The media began to run favorable reports on WP and its new generation of leaders. This ringing endorsement by the establishment net WP the biggest number of votes during the last General Election in 2006 with 2 MPs in Parliament.
Though decried often by detractors as being intolerant and insensitive, the PAP leadership does retain a certain degree of political acumen to realize that Singaporeans are getting tired and fed up with the ruthless and uncompromising approach it adopts towards its adversaries and the fact that there will always be support for the opposition.
Since you can’t beat them completely, might as well co-opt the acceptable ones into your fold!
During the GE 2006, MM Lee gave his definition of what a “First World opposition” should be – in short, an “opposition” that is compliant, cooperative and does not confront the PAP so that its MPs can continue to breeze their bills through in Parliament without any problems.
His words were directed at Low who by then was gaining a reputation as a “credible” opposition MP. Parliamentary sessions became more like a meeting with few questions asked or issues debated. Even PAP backbenchers and NMPs are more vocal than Low.
In a lame attempt to live up to the PAP’s “expectations” of him, Low went further by restricting his “opposition” to only making a few token speeches in Parliament and praising the PAP for its governance and laws in public. He even renounced the tag of “opposition”, preferring to call WP an “alternative party” providing an “alternative” to the PAP.
In Malaysia, it is possible to get two ideologically polarized parties like DAP and PAS to collaborate in the civil campaign “Bersih” to call for free and fair elections. Not so in Singapore where WP leaders and members shun SDP like a plague and are eager to be seen aligned to the PAP by inviting its leaders to WP’s 50th anniversary dinner last year.
In one interview with the Straits Times last year, Low infuriated opposition supporters by defining the role of the opposition as a ”watchdog” and not a “mad dog” alluding to SDP’s Chief Chee who has been the most voracious critic of the PAP.
With WP betraying the opposition’s cause to become a pseudo-subsidiary of the PAP, the opposition in Singapore is not only “lost”, it has also been rendered completely impotent and irrelevant.
The PAP’s “taming” of the opposition and its tacit approval of WP has severely curtailed the boundaries in which future opposition parties can operate.
In other democracies, the opposition is expected to check on the ruling party by voicing its concerns and criticism freely without any fear or worries to the extent of being confrontational. Across the causeway, no opposition party will survive if its leaders prostitute themselves to Barisan Nasional with boot-licking antics of the WP.
In Singapore, thanks to the new WP under Low Thia Kiang, the role of the opposition has now been denigrated to that of a “docile”, “compliant” and “non-confrontational” “alternative” voice in Parliament.
From Temasek Review again - the review from "the sick ah mah".
-
a review for the opposition with regard to their past mistakes, but still, not a single lesson learned.