By Dr Wong Wee Nam

It is no good for democracy for a country to be run by a monolithic political party. Neither is it good to have a ragtag army of small political parties running around unable to provide a coherent alternative, let alone forming a government.

It is for this reason that for the past one year, I have been trying to get the opposition parties to try to come together to work out a common plan to contest this coming general election. To this end, I roped in Mr. Bentley Tan to help.

For a start, we decided to get the various parties to meet informally and without a fixed agenda to feel things out. The first meeting at a local hotel was called on 24 April 2010. Mr Tan Kin Lian, as a non-partisan, was also invited by us to help us moderate.

The response was encouraging. SDP’s Dr Chee Soon Juan came, so did SPP’s Sin Kek Tong, NSP’s Sebastian Teo and USD’s Jaslyn Go.

Kenneth Jeyaraetnam turned down the invitation because he thought such a meeting was unnecessary. The PKMS were not invited because there was no clear leadership at that time. The Worker’s Party did not respond.

It was a cordial meeting and there was a general consensus that some kind of opposition cooperation and unity should be worked at. Each party agreed that they would discuss the meeting with their respective CECs and invite the three of us (myself, Bentley and Kin Lian) to clarify our ideas before their committee before we

could move on to have the next meeting and have a definitive agenda to discuss more concrete things.

SDP’s CEC called us up first and after a thought-searching session, they said they would support a second meeting. NSP met us next. Though they had some misgivings, they were also in support of a second meeting.

We did not hear from SPP and when we called Mrs.Lina Chiam, she told us to wait until after their Annual General Meeting where a new CEC would be elected.

Subsequently, the Reform Party’s demands to join the SDA were Wickedly Leaked out and this had caused some internal problems within the SPP. Any talk of opposition unity received a stunning blow and Tan Kin Lian decided he did not want to be involved further.

Later when I met Tony Tan Lay Thiam of Reform Party over lunch, he fully supported such unity and cooperation idea and urged me to try again. Indeed, Tony may be a young politician but he can see a bigger picture than many more experienced ones.

However, this unsuccessful exercise was not a waste of time for me. From it, I gain a better insight to the people involved, or not involved, and it also reinforced my image of Mr. Chiam as a selfless politician.

I have known Mr. Chiam for twenty years. We first met when I wrote to the SDP, of which he was the then Secretary-General, to complain that they had not honoured my subscription to their newsletter, The Democrat. He immediately called me up to meet him for coffee. We met at the Pizza Hut in Jalan Jelita and he offered me his party membership straightaway. I told him that we had just met and how could he trust

me? But then, that is Mr Chiam. He has only one political opponent in his mind and everyone else could be his ally.

This attitude was to be reinforced again in 1997 at a Chinese New Year’s gathering hosted by him. I told him he needed to have a Barisan Nasional kind of arrangement amongst the political parties to fight the PAP. He immediately went to form the Singapore Democratic Alliance. In spite of misgivings by many others, he even invited the PKMS, a party that not many like to be associated with at that time, to join.

Unlike many political leaders, Mr. Chiam does not just pick people who think like him and exclude people whose views do not match his. Yes, this is Chiam. He has only one political opponent and everyone else is free to be his ally.

This is why I had no difficulty in getting him to agree to the meeting on the unity and cooperation of the various opposition political parties that Bentley and I had arranged.

He may have fallen out with his protégé Dr Chee Soon Juan for nearly twenty years. The painful scar still remains till today. Yet that has not prevented him from agreeing to sit down on the same table with the latter for the sake of opposition unity or saying “I agree with Dr Chee…” at the TOC’s Face-to-Face Forum.

Amongst the opposition political leaders, he is the only one I would consider a true statesman.

What then is my wish for the coming year? Below is the photograph I have taken this year. In the coming year, I just hope I have many more opportunities to take such photographs.

SDP's Dr Chee Soon Juan with SPP's Lina Chiam

The views expressed in this article is the author’s own.

This article is written for sgpolitics.net and theonlinecitizen.org. Please provide link to either website if you wish to re-publish the article.

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

“无法进口足够口罩就嘲笑他国” 陈智成叹冠病疫情考验我国数领域备战程度

前政治拘留者陈智成认为,冠病19危机曝露了我国在数个领域是否做足准备,也检视政府对人民福祉和服务上的支出,严重不足。 遗憾的是,尽管我们号称是全球最先进城市,但却用了近四个月时间,才设立本土口罩生产线。 陈智成是1987年光谱行动下的被拘留者之一。他指出:“当我们无法进口口罩时,我们却嘲笑我们的邻国、又怪责没有绵羊可生产足够的棉花。”过去20年打了沙斯病毒、禽流感、中东呼吸综合症等那么多防疫战,何以规划口罩生产自给自足,仍没被纳入规划议程? 口罩自给自足的规划 新加坡花费在国防和外交事务的预算占了约30巴仙,小红点上有好一部分土地,都用作新加坡武装部队的设施或训练等,再者全国百万人口都曾接受过军事训练。但近一甲子我国都未曾遇到任何武装冲突。 然而,仅仅过去20年,我们就打了包括SARS病毒、禽流感、中东呼吸综合症,以及当前的冠状病毒19等防疫战。甚至于冠病19仿佛是终极防疫战,而作为与外界高度连结的都会,我国更显得脆弱。 他也提及食物储备的问题,包括我国人口近500万人,但只能生产不到5巴仙的粮食需求。 至于政治人物一再重提建国先贤来号召人民团结,陈智成表示借助这些政治符号,却未能从历史中汲取正确的教训,这些都是空洞的口号。他指出过去土地和建造成本都很低,吸引了许多跨国公司带来就业机会;小贩中心和巴刹等较低廉,让那些无法融入制造业的居民,也能做自己的小生意维生,同时为民众提供实惠的饮食。 透过土地整合,政府理应能掌控租金和土地的使用,租金管控理应优先于技能升级。 对于附加预算案,陈智成也点评我国拟定预算案的优先次序和效率。一般我国维持四年的盈余预算,第五年或有时临近选举则会赤字预算,但他指出盈余预算仅意味着人们每年被抽约100亿元的税。“照麦波申议员(陈佩玲)的逻辑,我们每人好像都要多付政府2千元。” 冠病疫情检视医疗体系 陈智成也认为,冠病19疫情,也让我们检视医疗体系,我国比起经合国家(OECD)平均3.8比例的病床,我国每一千病患仅有2.3床位,而韩国每千名病患和床位比例,高达12,日本则达到每一千病患13床位。…

处长曾在得标公司PCI任职 600万元记录器招标是否涉利益冲突?

为了协助找出冠病患者曾接触人士,主管智慧国计划的外交部长维文,在六月初宣布政府将推出首批“合力追踪”穿戴式配备。 这些记录器的功能,与“TraceTogether”手机应用程序一样,当记录器或安装了应用的手机出现在附近时,双方会交换和记录蓝牙信号,追踪哪些人曾近距离接触,但不会记录人们所处的位置。 至于供应30万个“合力追踪”记录器的合约,则由本地一家电子公司PCI赢得,政府为此支付600万元。每个记录器价格约为20元。 合约是在在5月14日通过有限招标(Limited Tender)方式发出。这意味着政府只有一个预先指定的供应商,或者只邀请有限的几家竞标。这类竞标是针对攸关国家安全、或保护知识产权而不公开招标的项目。 不过有趣的是,政府科技局(GovTech)旗下人生旅程应用(Moments of Life)处长陈君浩,在2014年7月至2018年9月,曾是上述PCI公司的高级副主席。 陈君浩是在2018年才离开上述公司,接手政府科技局目前的职务。 为此,本社曾在本月24日下午2时,致函政府科技局,询问有鉴于陈君浩过去曾在此次涉及招标工程的公司任职,此项目是否有涉及利益冲突问题? 对此政府科技局表示,该局招标评估委员会由四人组成,陈君浩也是成员之一,不过他并非委会主持大局者。后者是给予他的相关设计制造领域的经验而受委。 该局也指出,他们也有考量陈君浩过去曾在PCI任职,但经过酌量后认为并没有利益冲突,而他过去在设计制造领域的参与,也不会影响他在评估委会的表现。

人力部冀服务业减少依赖客工,惟网民质问如何处理外籍PMET专才

“有一天我们会看到新加坡服务业的外籍客工人数减少。” 人力部长杨莉明透露,这是新加坡要减少对该领域过度依赖客工的主要原因。 她在参与2019年预算案辩论,针对削减服务业客工配额时说到,“这不是一个轻易做出的决定。我们不得不多次考虑这个决定”。 客工比率顶限(Dependency Ratio Ceiling,简称DRC),指的是公司员工总数和可聘请客工人数限额,之间的比例。服务业客工比率顶限将会分两个阶段进行削减,即目前减至40巴仙到2021年的35巴仙。 她补充说,S准证的客工比率顶限也将从现在的15巴仙减至2021年的10巴仙。 不能确保客工来源不断 有鉴于其他东南亚国家中产阶级也在不断增长,如果客工在其他国家也能领到相近的薪资,他们可能会不愿到我国的服务业打工。 杨莉明指出,“我们必须问自己这个问题:‘我们是否可以无限期地获得外国员工?’而这个答案如果是‘不’,那么我们最好三思,然后调整我们的政策。” 最重要的是,降低客工比率顶限的正面影响,将逐步引领可持续性的经商模式、和重新培养本地人,以适应日益数字化的未来挑战。 政府也将通过扩大配套范围和新措施,以协助相关企业达到这个目标等,而财政部长宣布总值10亿新元的一系列措施,以协助当地公司转型。…

SGD slid to 1.40 against USD as recessionary risks grow

On Thursday (20 Feb), the Singapore dollar (SGD) dropped to 1.40 against…