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

一月内四人“被泼马”是否太过? 易华仁:涉在野人物属不幸巧合

去年11月25日,财政部援引《防止网络假信息和防止网络操纵法案》,对新加坡前进党党员毕博渊(Brad Bowyer)发出指示,指其发表贴文存不实,要求更正。 此后在短短两个月内,包括民主党、人民之声党领袖林鼎以及一家来自澳洲的时政网State Times Review(STR),都收到来自人力部、教育部和内政部的更正指示。 对此,官委议员王丽婷今日(6日)在国会抛出犀利问题,一个月时间内,一连四次发出更正指示会否“太过了”?她也要求通讯与新闻部长解释在《防假消息法》下的“公共利益”指标为何? 同时,王丽婷也质问,对于被指应用防假消息法存政治偏见,政府持什么立场?打击网络假消息的客观和公信力会否受影响等。 “不幸巧合” 对此,易华仁在问答环节回应,最初的数项行动都涉及在野政治人物,“我会说是一种趋同性,有者可能形容是不幸的巧合。” 但他强调,这些案例不代表未来该法的执行模式都是如此,而是只要有假消息,如涉及公共利益,就需采取行动。 认为,如果政府未能采取果断措施,网络假消息会影响公信力,“政府和在座议员,有责任确保公民不会受到误导。” 对于此前四个政府部门发出的更正指示,读者可以阅读原文和澄清事实,让读者自行判断。…

【武汉冠状病毒】黄循财:若加强目前措施防疫 无需去到锁国地步

如果我国能够加强多道防线,确实无需进行类似“锁国”的极端措施。 国家发展部长兼领导政府跨部门抗疫工作小组部长黄循财于周二(3月17日)晚上,在新闻发布会上被问及,我国是否会考虑实行类似马来西亚的行动管制措施时,如实回答。 黄循财指出,尽管目前我国在应对武汉冠状病毒(Covid-19)抗疫行动上,不排除有任何可能,但是国人不应该认为政府正计划进行封锁。 “这当然是一个非常极端的措施,如果我们继续一直在做的措施,且继续倡导并做得非常好,就无须走到那一步。” 他指出,马国目前所采取的措施,包括在暂时关闭学校和工作场所达两至三周,就目前而言是可行的。 “我们的计划中有一系列的措施,会不断监控目前状况和风险状况,然后再做出调整。” 马国首相慕尤丁于周一(16日)宣布,将实施全国性行动管制措施,于今日(18日)零时开始,为期两周,以遏止冠毒疫情扩散。禁令是依据1988年《预防和控制传染病法》及1967年《警察法令》制定,禁止国民出入境,以加强边境管制。 禁令实施期间,马国居民不得到国外旅行,自海外返回的公民也必须接受健康监测和自我隔离14天,其他措施还包括禁止游客入境等。 黄循财在新闻发布会上指出,马国政府在宣布禁令前,已经给我国一些提示。“他们可能意识到,鉴于疫情的严重性,这是他们必须进行的事项。我们也了解原因。” 他表示马国政府只是做了必须进行的事项,“就如我所说的,这样的措施会带来不便和破坏”。 “但是从某个角度来说,如果你仔细分析有关的措施,它有助于控制疫情跨境传播。” 他认为如果我国面临类似情况,“我们也必须考量非常严峻的措施”。

Option for CPF members to withdraw part of CPF in lump sum at 65: LHL

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced changes to the Central Provident Fund…