“I didn’t realise that Singaporeans voted for merger with Malaysia in 1963 simply because all three choices available in the referendum were for merger, just in different ways. And that Singapore was booted out of Malaysia because, among other things, the PAP reneged on its promise not to contest the elections in Malaysia.” – Bertha Henson

Many Singaporeans just like Bertha Henson, a veteran journalist would be surprised by the relevation that the people of Singapore were presented with a poll to vote for merger with no choice of saying “No”.

We all know what have been taught to us in school.  In 1962, we voted overwhelmingly in favor of merger.  In 1965, we got kicked out and the rest, as they say, is history.

However, did we actually vote overwhelmingly in favor of referendum? In fact, did we even have a choice to vote against referendum?

The answer was revealed to people like Bertha Henson via Sonny Liew’s visual masterpiece, ‘The Art of Charlie Chan Hock Chye‘.

The Illusion of Choice

The recently held Scottish Independence Referendum and most other referendums have choices where the voter could clearly choose to vote in favour or against the motion that is sought to be passed.

The ballot paper for the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum
The ballot paper for the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum

Whereas Singaporeans voting in the 1962 referendum for merger were basically presented with a Hobson`s Choice, with 3 choices offered to them, all of which were for merger. The only difference between the three is the form of merger.

s
The ballot paper for the 1962 Singapore Independence Referendum

As evidenced by the ballot paper, the Singaporean voters clearly had no option to vote against merger.

The results of the referendum
The results of the referendum

The only way one could reject the merger was probably through blank votes – which is exactly what Barisan Sosialis, a now-defunct political party did to suggest voters to do.

However, PAP countered the Barisan’s ploy by saying that blank votes would be counted as votes towards Option A – a move that highly likely confused  many of those who had initially thought of submitting a blank vote to protest merger.

In the end, a majority of the voters voted for Option A, which was the option that granted the greatest autonomy to Singapore among the 3 options – indicative of a clear thirst for autonomy among voters.

When viewed through a different lens, the people of Singapore did not, in fact, vote overwhelmingly in favour of merger. What they did instead, was to vote overwhelmingly in favour of autonomy.

This begs the question, if voters were given the choice of voting against merger, which is also the epitome of autonomy, would the merger bill have been shot down?

Gallup Poll

The answer, according to a Gallup Poll conducted in the constituency of Tanjong Pagar, was a resounding “Yes”.

Before we go into the results, we must first understand that the residents of Tanjong Pagar who were surveyed, were the same people who elected the late Lee Kuan Yew into the Legislature for 3 consecutive elections from 1955 with a majority of at least 42%. This was the constituency that returned the Prime Minister to the Legislature.

To ensure impartiality, Gallup also took measures like inviting third party observers from political parties, civil society organizations and members of the public supervise the proceedings and the counting of votes. The poll presented to voters was also a more straightforward one, it read: “Are you for or against the Merger Proposals?” with two choices, “Yes” or “No”

The PAP itself, perhaps aware of sentiments on the ground, tried to discredit the poll by it’s age-old tactic of mud-slinging.

Even the PAP's smear tatics could not stop the Gallup Poll
Even the PAP’s smear tactics could not stop the Gallup Poll

90% voted against merger

The results of the Gallup Poll revealed that 90% of the residents that returned the Prime Minister to the Legislature voted against Merger.

Fajar, a publication by the University Socialist Club, carried an article on the Gallup Poll and what it reveals about the Government’s plans. The article, in its entirety, can be viewed below.

With the passing of Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore reaching its Golden Jubilee, it is may be important for us to separate myth from fact without fear or favour to learn more about what transpired in the past.

It is vital that we re-examine history and that we do not accept, at face value, the Government’s ‘official narrative’ which, more often than not, is construed to disguise ulterior political motives.

I reckon that this revelation, although astounding, is merely the tip of the iceberg. Rather than undermining our national security, as the NAC and MDA might think so, it would instead strengthen the Singaporean core and unite us by reminding us of the power of active citizenry. Though PAP’s security on its political power and legitimacy may be undermined, but that is none of Singapore’s business as it surely will carry on.

Click on the image below to read the article in its entirety.

The Fajar article in full
The Fajar article in full
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Military elitism in Singapore

5 out of 21 of the current cabinet were alumni of our military. Kent Ridge Common.

不能当“一世在野党” 林鼎:从政需有担当政府责任展望

人民之声党领袖林鼎律师认为,在野党的抱负不应自我设限的,如果要真正为人民服务,必须要有将来能担当起政府责任的展望。 “我没时间耗在那些一辈子只想当在野党的人士身上。”林鼎认为,如果政党已有长达15、20年参与国会斗争的历程,仍没有放眼有天能当政府的展望,那根本是在浪费光阴。 他直言,回顾过去20年,执政党许多政策都是“为自己服务”;再看1988年设立集选区制度,亦是稳固执政党长期执政的举措,这也就是为何在野党需要存在、在那里制衡和监督,这也是在野党最重要的任务,确保政府向人民负责。 林鼎受邀参与餐饮公司JC Global Concepts总监刘婉贞,在Youtube频道的清谈解节目“真情饭局”。除了介绍一些美食佳肴,也会和新加坡社会不同人士,坐下来访谈时尚、政经文教等课题。 林鼎也分析,有别于以往,本届选举因疫情关系,无法办竞选集会等群聚活动,社交媒体反倒成了“主流媒体”,可说是名副其实的“互联网选举”。多达75巴仙的国人都有使用社交媒体,社媒也将越发受到重视,也给予政党一个发声的平台。 林鼎也坦言,从政多少受到父亲的影响。父亲是公务员,在上世纪70年代还当过人民协会执行总监一职。尽管一开始就对政治有兴趣,不过他在出国返回新加坡后,有17年时间都只专注在当律师。 印尼从商深刻体会经商不易 2007年他曾前往印尼创业,开创一家矿业公司。但比起自己熟悉的律师事业,他体会到从商的过程多么地艰辛,这也致使他对本地中小企业处境感同身受,“那种要想办法找钱,支付店租、薪金的担忧和压力,是无法想象的。” 他直言,政治、政治人物的决策会影响生活的方方面面,甚至会影响下一代人。 后来加入了国民团结党,但当时他大部分时间都在印尼,也鲜少出席该党的会议;在2015年他还在印尼开创他的律师事业。…

王乙康:防大专校园传染,限制学生之间接触与交流

为防止武汉冠状病毒的传染,本地高等学府限制学生之间的接触与交流,确保校园能够继续运作。 日前,本地大学已取消50人以上的大型讲堂课和活动,并改以线上教学。 教育部长王乙康今日(26日)在国会答复官委议员伊萨德(Mohamed Irshad)的提问。后者询问政府目前采取什么行动控制局势,以及高等学府师生扮演的角色等。 他表示课程仍照常继续,但出席人数缩小,高等学府会确保出席讲堂课、辅导课和活动的学生人数不超过50人。 另外,各所高等学府也会在现有课程中推出涵盖冠状病毒内容的全面防卫教材。 两周前,王乙康接受媒体采访时曾表示,尽管当前新型冠状病毒疫情逐渐增加,但暂无计划停课。 王乙康表示,工艺教育学院将率先在本月推出全面防卫教材,而理工学院则会在4月推出相关教材。至于大学则会选择在适当时候再推出。

Measure outcomes not effort

~ By Leon Perera ~ The current national moment of urgency in…