Andrew Loh

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) may do better than what the Workers’ Party (WP) have done come the next General Election.

The WP’s victory in Aljunied GRC is based on several factors, of course. These include its consistent grassroots work, trustworthy brand names of Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim and the party itself, and a slate of credible candidates.

The SDP’s team in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC has almost all of these attributes but in smaller measure. The brand name of the SDP has changed somewhat. The demonization campaign by the People’s Action party (PAP) government and the state-controlled media of SDP secretary general Dr Chee Soon Juan will take time for the party to overcome. The good news is that it is not an impossible task, as this election has shown. Dr Chee’s video where he spoke in Hokkien, for example, has been warmly received by those who have seen it, and by some who were previously skeptical of him.

The SDP’s use of the Internet and social media tools has helped raised its profile and more importantly present a side of the party which attracted approval and support. The scorecard of its Holland-Bukit Timah team is nothing to snigger at. 40 per cent is an achievement, given the short campaign period. 36 per cent in Sembawang GRC too is a good result.

As the SDP itself has acknowledged, it needs to work the ground more consistently and reach out to the heartlanders in the next five years. In this, it should learn from the WP. Nothing beats that personal touch – shaking a voter’s hand, looking people in the eye, and lending an ear to residents’ grievances.

One big advantage the SDP has over the other political parties is its ability to harness the potential of New Media and social media. Its embrace and use of Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, and its ability to produce quality videos, have allowed it to reach potential voters and disseminate its message. The other parties have either fumbled, such as the PAP, or do not feel that New Media is as important as real grassroots work, such as the WP.

Going forward, however, and as this election has shown, cyberspace is the new grassroots. There is no doubt about this. Knocking on doors in the heartlands is still important but so is engagement online. Social media and the introduction of mobile Internet connections have shown that human communications is forever changed. What is online no longer stays online, and the SDP seems to understand this better than the other parties. Indeed, because of its relentless use of such tools, the SDP has gone some way in addressing what it deems its misrepresented public image.

While the PAP and the WP may be steps ahead of the SDP as far as brand names and outreach are concerned, the SDP will be able to catch up and close the gap substantially by the next election if it is able to supplement its online expertise with consistent face to face engagement in the heartlands.

The party has been able to attract intelligent members, such as Mr Tan Jee Say and Ms Michelle Lee, and inspirational candidates such as Dr Vincent Wijeysingha and Mr Ang Yong Guan; it also has the ability to put together some rather compelling policy proposals as well.

Politics is a long-term endeavour and success comes in incremental steps, especially for opposition politics in Singapore. So, while some may feel disappointed that the SDP did not win any seats this time round, and it has not done so since 1991, there is no need to despair.

In fact, the SDP has taken a huge leap in being seen as a credible party, compared to past campaigns where it was assailed with accusations and lawsuits by the ruling party. In the 2011 campaign, the party was disciplined, stuck to its game plan, and, more importantly, surprised many with its rational and focused approach. Its courage in speaking up firmly against some government policies has also struck a chord with some.

Many of the younger generation have come to know the SDP for the first time and like what they see. They are not hampered by the perceptions their parents may have of the SDP. It is this generation which the SDP has its biggest support, one would suspect. By the next election, this number would grow with the addition of a new group of young first-time voters which is more attuned to what is online.

The SDP now needs to work on the older generation which is less likely to prefer online engagement. So, the party will need to go the old fashioned way and hit the coffeeshops and markets regularly.

If the SDP continues its work – both in cyberspace and on the ground – the next five years, the party could reap substantial rewards, perhaps even surpassing what the WP has achieved in 2011.

So, SDP supporters and members should not despair. Indeed, 2011 could be just the curtain raiser – a new chapter for the SDP could have just begun, and it is looking encouraging.

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

21 arrested for immigration-related offences

20 men and one woman were arrested between 29 July and 2…

Public can enter the Istana for the first time at night on 6 October

In conjunction with the Istana 150 Commemorative Event, members of the public…

Mas Selamat – reconvene Committee of Inquiry

Reprimand of officers should also be re-looked into. Leong Sze Hian.

打包不适任Yes Man进国会 林鼎狠批集选制

人民之声创党人林鼎狠批集选区选举制弊病,把不适任的候选人,和民望较高的资深候选人打包在一起,藉此获选当上国会议员。 林鼎在上周五的脸书贴文,比较我国和英国西敏寺议会制度,指出在英国,即便保守党的后座议员,会把国家前途优先于党的利益,敢于抨击和反抗,该党领袖特蕾莎梅提出的脱欧议程。 在西敏寺制度下,后座议员无政府官职,也不偏反对党,他们坐在下议院的前台(即执政党席位的后座),新加坡的议会制度,也是取材自西敏寺议会范本。 林鼎直言,只有当所有国会议员,在议会表决时把国家利益摆在党利益之前,议会民主才能正常运作。这正是英国保守党后座议员展现的代议士素质! “即使知道他们的行为可能让党失去政权,但选择在国家大义前,放下党派成见。” 讥行动党后座议员成“Yes Man” 他不忘抨击人民行动党后座议员,在议会中只愿当“应声虫”(Yes Man)。结果,整体议会素质灾难性地下降,议会辩论差强人意,议员们糟糕的出席率也落人笑柄。 他说,正是饱受抨击的集选区选举制,把不合格的人选送进国会,才导致今日议会素质崩坏的局面。 为此,他扬言人民之声若得以执政,将废除集选区制度,铲除掉这个议会民主的毒瘤。 在林鼎的另一则贴文,则强调铲除精英主义、落实直接民主的重要。他对教育部长王乙康,认为新加坡必须成为一党制国家才能生存,不敢苟同。…