We apologise for the delay in publishing Mr PN Balji’s piece, as earlier indicated on TOC. It will be published at a later date. We apologise for any inconvenience caused.

Mohd Haireez / Guest Writer

In response to a question on whether Singapore is ready for a minority-race prime minister, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong suggested that while it is not impossible, it is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future.

In support of his proposition, Mr Lee revealed at a dialogue session organized by MESRA, that it was dependent on how people voted and suggested that the race of the candidate is an unavoidable influence in the voting pattern.

With all due respect to Mr Lee, his response is at best, unsettling, particularly after decades of struggle to portray the government as a racially-unbiased institution.

Mr Lee pointed out that race is a factor in the appointment of a Prime Minister.

This is especially disturbing considering that the position of Prime Minister is not constitutionally dependent on the votes of the average citizen but is contingent upon the decision of the President who is supposed to select a Member of Parliament “who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the Members of Parliament..”, according to Article 25 of our Constitution.

In practice, while the People’s Action Party (PAP) continues to dominate Parliament, the person the party endorses as Prime Minister will be elevated to that position, and confirmed by the President. Hence, Mr Lee’s statement is especially important.

To suggest that race is an unavoidable issue in this appointment is to suggest that race is still a factor in deciding whether a candidate can command the confidence of our elected Parliamentarians. This leads to the inexcusable inference that our very own leaders are still somewhat racially-prejudiced.

I am not insinuating that our leaders should be free from the prejudices that plague the common man but as people whom the average person vests responsibility in, it is imperative that the government, at least the Prime Minister, should represent a figure who transcends racial lines.

I am also not suggesting that Singapore has reached a stage whereby citizens are Singaporeans first, before their own respective races, in all circumstances.

But if we accept that the way forward is embodied in our pledge “regardless of race, language or religion” as our Government has, then surely it has to start with our leaders.

In extension of his response, Mr Lee rationalised that the fact Senator John McCain garnered a majority of white votes in the recent US Presidential elections is a reflection of how race is still a factor in the minds of the American voters.

But this overlooks the fact that not a single Democrat has won a majority of the white vote since Lyndon Johnson in 1964 despite fielding white candidates as Presidential-hopefuls. In fact, Senator John Kerry, a white Democrat nominee, attracted less support from the white voters in 2004 than President-elect Obama did in the recent US Presidential election. Senator Kerry garnered just 43 percent of the white vote while still attracting the majority of the non-white voters despite being white himself.

These statistics make it at least clear that race, while etched in the minds of some, is only one of several concerns for the majority of the Americans.

The American people have shown that they are willing to start judging a candidate by his abilities, and not his race.

Similarly, a suitable Prime Minister must be assessed by his ability, regardless of his race.

Even if this remains an ideal, there is no reason why our leaders, especially Mr Lee, cannot endorse this ideal especially when it comes to selecting the Prime Minister of our multi-racial country.

———-

About the author:

Mohd Haireez is currently a year 3 undergraduate at the NUS Faculty of Law. He believes that community-involvement is the most effective means of familiarising oneself with grassroot issues. Besides being a regular at Downtown east and Arab Street, the former Vice-President of the NUS Malay Language Society is himself an avid volunteer. He is currently the Chairman of the Youth Committee in Al-Istighfar Mosque and is working with NGOs like YAMP on several projects.

———-

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

“I’ve created all these jobs…”: PM Lee

Explaining why there are more foreign professionals in Singapore, Prime Minister Lee…

HDB flat owners able to sell flats and keep profits, and are thus not “tenants”: Minister Indranee Rajah

Minister at the Prime Minister’s Office Ms Indranee Rajah has disputed the…

公共综合诊所看诊费 未津贴前贵过私人诊所?

医疗服务一直以来都是全球人民与政治人物关注重要议题,我国也不例外。事实上,我国医疗服务一直被世界各国赞赏,人民与永久公民均能享用合理的医疗服务。 卫生部之所以能够长期维持实惠经济的医疗费用,全凭3项措施-医疗保健(MediSave)、终身健保(MediShield)、保健基金(MediFund),人民只需要自付低价医疗费用。 卫生部曾在脸书上表示,“新加坡一直以来以建立方便、实惠、品质保证的医疗保健为目标。”文中指出,新加坡的医疗保健旨在确保“每个人都能够在不同层次的医疗中,享用合时、经济实惠及完美无缺的服务”。 然而近年来,各种措施与政策使医疗费用节节上升,造成人民怨声载道。《新加坡商业评论》(Singapore Business Review)指出,“医疗费用的提升大大削弱了新加坡作为医疗观光中心的吸引力,而开始转向邻国解决医疗需求”。 回到2014年,前副总理尚曼达曾表示政府预计医疗消费直至2020年将增长三倍,从2011年的40亿到2020年120亿。据卫生部的网站显示,医疗消费于2018年已达92亿9千万新元,比起上一年的86亿4千万新元,足足多了6亿元左右。 医疗消费迅速膨胀的缘故与我国人口老化逐渐上升,但仍另有其他说法。《商业时报》(Business times SG)指,除了人口老化,使用医疗服务的劳工族群也相当多,造成其医疗消费上升。汇丰银行(HSBC)续指,新加坡于2030年,新加坡老年人口将会是年轻劳动工作者的两倍,对于未来医疗消费会有长远的影响。 副总理王瑞杰不断强调新加坡人需要多注重健康的生活,才能在日后避免负担更重的医疗消费,该说法显然将减轻医疗消费的重担放在人民身上。 总理李显龙也曾提及,政府必须更谨慎处理医疗补助事宜,这不仅仅是为纳税人省钱,更是提倡不应过度治疗和过度消费医疗服务。…