The following is a contribution by a member of the audience at the Face to Face forum

https://i0.wp.com/www.theonlinecitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/FTF34741.jpg?resize=564%2C379&ssl=1

By Dr Wong Wee Nam

I went to the TOC Face to Face Forum as a guest of The Online Citizen and came away pleased and puzzled.

I was pleased to see the various political parties coming to share their views on the same stage. This is the first time that all the major parties are seen together at a single event. Except for the PAP who did not turn up and the Worker’s Party who sent a representative, all the secretary-generals of the invited parties honoured the occasion.

It was not a forum where the political parties make speeches about their stands on issues. It was a Q and A Session. However from the answers given, the listeners were able to know what the various parties stand for. From the answers given by the leaders of the various political parties, it was obvious that there were really not many differences in views and stands to the many issues that were brought up.

All the leaders agreed that the problems faced by Singaporeans had been brought about by the PAP and the people should vote for the opposition. In the past, speakers sometimes prefaced their speeches with some concession to the economic achievements of Singapore. Not this time around. No one credited the PAP with anything.

Why then did I say I come away puzzled? With so much in agreement and so little discernible differences, I was wondering, why no one embraced one another at the end of the evening and tell each other, “Hey we share the same views. Why don’t we meet up and see how we can work together to advance a common cause?”

Everyone just shook hands politely and smiled for group photographs. I don’t know if they were more pre-occupied about their own performance that they could not think of seizing the opportunity to strengthen ties that could be developed further for the benefit the country.

The forum had given them this golden opportunity. Yet during the post-forum socializing, none of the leaders gathered and exchange views. During and after the forum, the various parties had not given any indication that they are willing to come together to fight this round of electoral battle that is looming. The feeling is that in spite of all these agreements and lack of differences, everyone is still trying to keep the status quo and trying to fight the giant on its own.

The current political landscape is akin to a situation where many provision shops selling the same thing are trying to compete with an efficient hypermarket. Instead of pooling and combining resources and getting the economy of scale, these small outfits are trying to see who can battle the giant best and muscle out the rest at the same time.

The end result is the hypermarket gets stronger and more powerful and the provision shops get weaker and ineffective.

I don’t know if the various parties at the forum realised that they share many things in common. As far as I can see, the differences are only in the personality and temperament of the people in charge. From the views expressed at the forum, there is no difference at all in ideology.

Unfortunately, if differences in personality and temperament cannot be set aside for a common cause, then any alternative to the PAP will continue to remain fragmented and ineffective. This would indeed be a disservice to Singapore.

As long as political parties stay in their own cocoons, they will continue to make motherhood statements without being effective in changing things.

Take for example the question of the ISA (Internal Security Act). Everyone wholeheartedly agreed that it should be abolished.

Mentor and protégé: Meeting of minds once again?

Mr Chiam See Tong summed the mood very eloquently by his stunning declaration “I agree with Dr Chee” (that the ISA should be abolished). It is telling because Mr Chaim and his protégé, Dr Chee Soon Juan, had fallen out almost 20 years ago.

From the look of things, this issue is likely to remain just a little line in the various parties’ election manifestos (or even not at all).

If the parties were so convinced that the ISA should be abolished, why were they not committed enough to call a press conference immediately after the forum to issue a joint press release on this? After all the main stream media and the yahoo news reporters were all around and certainly ready to give audience.

The answer is simple – the bodies have met but the minds have not. Hopefully, the forum would be a step towards the meeting of minds. Otherwise all the wonderful individual manifestos put up by the political parties will not stop the juggernaut from continuing to run the lives of Singaporeans completely in the manner that it has been doing for the last 51 years.

Dr Wong ran as an opposition candidate in 1997 and is a regular contributor to The Online Citizen.

Were you at the Face to Face forum? Do you have anything to say? Please write to us at [email protected]

Read also “Face To Face: An awkward family reunion”

Watch Face to Face: The videos

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

插入导管刺破静动脉 74岁肾病患者死于意外

进行导管插入手术时,74岁肾病患者静脉和动脉意外被刺破,导致急性内出血而亡,这也是我国首次发生类似死亡事故。 据验尸庭指出,患有肾脏衰竭的74岁Lee Kuen Ngian于2016年11月10日,在陈笃生医院接受腹膜透析治疗(peritoneal dialysis),及把一种特殊的无菌液体灌入腹部内,再引出血液中的杂质。 死者之前已接受过检查,被评估为适合长期接受有关的治疗。 在当天进行手术时,肾内科负责医生See Yong Pey将导管插入腹部后并未见任何异常,但是在引入空气到死者腹腔时,却见死者忽然倒下,导管也被移出。 死者的脉搏曾在抢救时恢复,但是之后就出现两次“无脉搏性呼吸”,最终抢救不治。 据法医Chan Shijia指出,死者是因为在导管插入过程中,静动脉被刺破了,引发急性内出血,而高血压和肾病也有影响到病情。…

天平两端如何取舍:剖析外国奖学金和学费津贴议题

作者:工人党前非选区议员余振忠 两日前,教育部长王乙康,在国会回应我的伙伴工人党非选区议员贝理安(Leon Perera)的质询,透露过去10年来,政府为外国学生所提供的奖学金和学费补贴预算,已降低50 巴仙。 目前,对外籍生奖学金和学费补贴的预算加总,为2亿3千800万新元,这意味着,2009年的年度开销可能达到4亿7千800万元。放在过去我国仅有四所政府津贴大学(目前是六所),相较之下,政府在过去支持外籍生,对比本地生开销之百分比,可能比现在还来得高。 自2011年我进入国会起,我便时时刻刻关注、倡议相关课题。此前,我曾遇见许多因学额有限,未能将孩子送入本地大学就读的新加坡人民。许多孩子最终只能前往私立大学或出国留学。 我曾于2011年向国会提呈,希望能够借此获得更多数据。目前有4万1000名本地学生进入私立大学或私人教育机构(PEIs)就读。这些数字还不包括国外就读的新加坡学生,因为政府无法就此追踪流失的学生数据。若两者结合,相信其国外留学与就读私立大学的新加坡学生数据会更高。 4万1000名学生可视为相当高的数字,要知道,新加坡每年准备升学的学生在4万5000到五万左右,这意味着有更多的学生拥有求学襟抱,但碍于学额的限制,只能另寻出路。 无论是就读私立学校或出国留学,其开支都相当昂贵,同时也违背了许多国人的意愿。此窘境一直持续到政府愿意为本地学生开放更多学额而增设另两所大学,新躍大學(SUSS)以及新加坡理工大学(SIT)。 一名于本地大学担任教师的朋友告诉我,他们发现,在政府的奖学金优惠下,外国学生人数正激增,但其表现也无法勉强达到三等荣誉学位( third class honours)。然而,针对外籍生所设立的奖学金开支却相当高,试想若将开支花费在非新加坡人身上,那也应该是将钱花在有素质、有助提升我们教育与经济的外籍生身上。…

“People need to start caring and hearing us out”

by Goh Wai Fu “I smile and I try to present myself…

Mr Shanmugam sacrificed by earning ‘at least S$100 million lesser’ since entering politics, claims former MP Lee Bee Wah

Former People’s Action Party MP Lee Bee Wah staunchly defended Minister K Shanmugam by saying he made sacrifices to serve the people, by earning “at least S$100 million lesser’ since entering politics. She asserted in a Facebook video that he was facing unjust criticism regarding the rental of the state-owned black-and-white bungalows which he rented out from Singapore Land Authority Furthermore, she firmly believes that the Ridoutgate issue was “waste the time of our national leaders” for discussion in Parliament.