The following article was first published on 25 March 2011.


The makeshift cubicle that served as the office for Mr Chiam's Meet The People sessions for the past 27 years

Andrew Loh /

Seeing Mr Chiam See Tong up close is inspiring. Anyone who thinks that age or the two strokes he suffered in recent years have dented his spirit would be highly mistaken. The veteran opposition politician is as stout-hearted as he has always been.

As I waited for him to end his Meet-The-People session on Thursday at Block 108 in Potong Pasir, I was struck by the sight of what must now be legend – that singular table sited at a corner of the void deck, partitioned for privacy by aluminium panels into a makeshift cubicle.

That’s where Mr Chiam has conducted his MPS for 27 years.

The ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) – that is, the Government – has refused to provide offices for opposition Members of Parliament (MP). PAP MPs conduct their MPS’s at the air-conditioned offices of its PAP Community Foundation (PCF) kindergartens premises. And since opposition parties do not have their own chain of kindergartens and their MPs are not of the PAP, the PAP would say it is thus not appropriate to have opposition MPs use the PCF spaces.

Mr Chiam’s void deck cubicle is truly a symbol of how utterly petty our politics is, as played out by the ruling PAP.

As a Singaporean, I am ashamed that we would treat an elected Member of Parliament this way.

But Mr Chiam is unfazed.

“If a person … really wants to be an MP,” Mr Chiam says, “he can work the ground and he can show himself to the people – that he is hardworking and he is for the people. I think he will get elected that way and show that he is a true representative of the people.”

And as such, Mr Chiam does not believe in the Non-constituency MP (NCMP) scheme. “I don’t believe in going into Parliament by the back door,” he says. “[The] NCMP is not really elected by the majority of Singaporeans. It is a token of the PAP.”

I was curious about what the veteran politician thought of the six new PAP candidates unveiled so far. “They look very impressive on paper,” Mr Chiam says. “They have to win the hearts and minds of the voters, isn’t it? And that is a difficult task because it takes time. You can’t [befriend] a person overnight.”

Turning to his health, I asked if he is able to withstand the rigour and stress of an election. “Well, you must remember I was a sportsman in my early days,” Mr Chiam says.  “I was a school swimmer. And when I say school swimmer, I mean school swimmer,” he says with evident pride in his voice, “because I’m from ACS (Anglo-Chinese School).  It’s somebody to be a school swimmer in ACS. You must be strong and fit.”

Those who still doubt his physical ability should visit Bishan-Toa Payoh on Sunday where he will be conducting his walkabout, Mr Chiam says. “Then you see whether I am fit or not,” he added. He is expected to lead a team to contest the area in the elections in his bid to win a Group Representation Constituency (GRC) – something which no opposition party has achieved so far.

Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC is helmed by Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng. Mr Wong on Wednesday had questioned the opposition’s intention in wanting to win a GRC. He asked if this was to satisfy personal ambitions and questioned if the opposition winning a GRC has anything to do with benefiting Singaporeans.

“Is it about the interest and missions of political parties or an individual’s interest to create a legacy or to make history?” Mr Wong asked. Mr Wong also challenged the opposition to reveal their candidates early so voters can scrutinize them.

“Most of Singapore already know the candidates of the opposition,” Mr Chiam says. “Opposition like to talk a lot. They inadvertently reveal the names of their candidates. I think everybody knows who is standing at Bishan Toa Payoh. In fact I announced my candidacy about a year ago. How can you say that we did not reveal?”

Mr Wong seems to have alluded particularly to Mr Chiam when he asked if the opposition’s reasons for wanting to win a GRC was so that its candidates could leave a legacy – a personal ego trip rather than out of consideration for the future of Singapore.

“We are not so small-minded,” Mr Chiam says. “Our purpose is mainly to expand the opposition. At the moment as you know opposition only has two MPs in Parliament. PAP has 82. If the opposition captures a GRC, that will be a big psychological blow to the PAP. It’s no longer an impregnable fortress.”

And Mr Chiam added: “Any step that the opposition does that dents the PAP is one step forward for the voters.”

Mr Chiam remains just as sharp as he ever was.

Perhaps Mr Wong should be more concerned about his own legacy. Besides going down in history as the minister who let a limping suspected terrorist escape – not once, but twice – Mr Wong has only won in one election, despite having contested six General Elections in total so far.

His first and only victory was at his very first election – in Kuo Chuan SMC in 1984. After the Government introduced the GRC system in 1988, Mr Wong has had five walkovers.

What a contrast to Mr Chiam’s six consecutive contests and victories!

History indeed will remember Mr Chiam as one who went about quietly in his work in serving the people, in spite of the odds and the mountains he has had to climb, put in his way by a ruling party which apparently holds an elected representative of the people in little regard – if he is not of their ilk.

Mr Chiam’s legacy is, really, that of humility and steely determination. He has contested in eight General Elections. Won six of them – and going on his ninth. As far as I know, no other MP in Singapore’s post-independence history has such a record of six consecutive outright wins.  Not even Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew (five).

So, Mr Chiam has nothing else to prove to anyone, least of all to Mr Wong.

He does not need to win a GRC, in my opinion, for his name to be remembered. Indeed, his 27 years of service is testament enough. Yet he continues to serve despite his physical condition.

But perhaps what is most inspiring to me is that Mr Chiam’s example shows that serving the people does not have to include multi-million dollar paychecks and posh or ostentatious surroundings.

All it takes, really, is a bit of heart.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

社媒爆龙山寺住持涉丑闻 寺方称报警促查假网站

名为“龙山寺”的脸书专页声称该寺庙住持涉丑闻,惟该寺负责人受询时表示那是一冒名网站,已报警调查。 庙宇负责人指那是冒名网站,不过有关署名“龙山寺”的脸书用户自昨日(11月14日)下午开始就有人连续发出12个帖文,指传文法师并非首次嫖男妓,更扬言要放出照片和视频。 发帖者自称自己是龙山寺的拥护者,珍惜该寺庙的贡献。他指出曾经接获匿名者提供的资料,要求揭发龙山寺主持的恶行。 “我想了很久也核对了很久其内容的真实性,以免造成佛教的衰败,经过我沉思了这几天,我很痛心地把{龙山寺传文法师性丑闻}的内容给公布于世。” 但是,他随后表示,基于脸书上的限制,有关的视频和照片无法公布。 一系列帖文中,他也表示已经报警、通知慈善理事会、佛教总会,并指佛总不愿回应,因此才帖文公布。 传文法师自2016年中风后,左半身瘫痪,且患有肾病,以轮椅代步,常常出入都有类似看护的男子贴身照顾。 《联合早报》在一则报导也声称,有一名45岁的商人举报传文法师,指对方涉及嫖男妓,且附上了照片和视频。 该商人表示已经就此事报警,也同样通知贪污调查局、佛教总会和慈善理事会。 媒体随后向慈善理事会求证,当局表示已经在调查,警方受询时也表示已经接获投报,但是暂未有进一步行动。 在龙山寺办事处的职员受询问时,指出传文法师目前在马来西亚求医,并澄清“龙山寺”的名义遭人盗用设立脸书户头,更帖文爆料,惟这些爆料内容并不属实。 一系列的帖文立刻引起网民“轰炸”,纷纷帖文谴责,有者谴责传文法师的行为可耻,已经破戒了;有者谴责帖文者的行为,既然爱护佛教,更不应该在这里公布任何的讯息,改用其他管道;有者则认为这名帖文者行为可疑,“若非恶意中伤,就不要匿名,光明正大的公布自己姓名吧”。…

Ceriph: A birdhouse for words

By Danielle Hong Like many of us, Ivan Ang, 30, understands the…

SPF debunk rumours about ComfortDelGro taxi fitted with cameras is a Traffic Police vehicle; saying it is for taxi driver’s training purpose

An image that went viral on messaging platforms shows a ComfortDelGro taxi…

Important to build a gracious society

Learn from other countries to build a gracious society, says Tan Kin Lian.