Connect with us

Commentaries

A new hope

Published

13 years ago

on

Steffen Toh /

In the wee hours of Sunday morning, as the dust of the just-concluded battle royale in Aljunied barely settled, a friend on Facebook wondered, with more than a tinge of sadness, if ‘Singapore and Singaporeans have won tonight.’ The answer is that we won’t know for sure; we can only hope, but my word, do we have many reasons to be hopeful. This general election is a watershed in so many ways, and I cannot help but see silver linings peeking through everywhere.

The first concerns the changing dynamics of the interplay between conventional and new media in the fulfilment of the role that mass media as a whole and journalism in particular are supposed to play, as objective reporter and vigilant watchdog.

There have been much talk and analysis about how local print media, for instance, have been fairer in their coverage of the opposition compared to the previous general election. The inclusion of wide-angle photographs that accurately depict the size of the crowd gathered at Workers’ Party rallies and the slightly more comprehensive coverage of various opposition parties’ plans and ideas are two examples. Of course, most neutral observers will argue that there is still much room for improvement, but improvement is highly probable, given the meteoric emergence of online media in this election.

One reason being offered for conventional media’s more even-handed approach to covering GE 2011 is that any news that they fail to report that might be seen to give the incumbent an unfair advantage would very quickly be picked up by new media and promulgated through cyberspace. For instance, popular blog ‘Yawning Bread’ have reported on and contrasted crowd sizes at opposition rallies versus those at PAP rallies as well as published investigative reports that debunk myths that property in Hougang have lower value than nearby precincts. Ms Tin Pei Lin’s sophomoric slip on cooling-off day and her subsequent attempts to rectify that faux pas were also very quickly spotted and reported by watchful netizens. Of course, the nascent capability of new media to play the role of reporter cum watchdog is still currently held back by a tendency for emotions and rhetoric to rule the day. However, this election would serve as a dress rehearsal for new media and their users for future elections and other democratic discussions that will better prepare them for that role.

The second silver lining is the maturing of the electorate, the first in the galvanising of a people long-derided for apathy into a spontaneous and passionate support for their chosen party; the second in the courage and ‘enlightenment’ shown by the residents of Aljunied in making the choice they have made.

Over the past eleven days, there has been an outpouring of passion that Singapore has not recently seen the likes of: in offices and schools, coffee shops and wet markets, flood-lit stadiums and online forums. I was on my way to a stadium the night before cooling-off day to attend a rally and I saw Singaporeans of all ages, including multi-generational families with grandparents and grandchildren in tow, young professionals still togged in office wear, even groups of teenagers, all streaming towards the stadium. I had this fleeting sensation that Singapore was a real being, and alive, and we, the people, represented blood coursing through its veins. Cynics will say that unhappiness with certain government policies gave the people something to focus on, and that this effect will not last long after the election is concluded.

There are encouraging signs however, that this passion will not die out like it did previously. There is the boldness, passion, and commitment displayed by a bumper crop of young politicians in the opposition ranks, the Nicole Seahs, Yaw Shin Leongs, and Pritam Singhs. They had enough passion to prompt them to take the highly arduous route of serving Singaporeans whilst flying opposition colours, and enough humility to acknowledge the good work done by the ruling party and those who came before them whose shoulders they now stood on. There is also the passion shown by many young Singaporeans, in public spheres and cyberspace, in discussing and debating ideas and ideologies offered by both the ruling party and the opposition.

And then there is the laudable mettle that the voters of Aljunied have shown, and are rightfully earning online plaudits for. Their role in consigning a highly respected politician in Mr George Yeo to defeat should not over-shadow the significance of the choice they have made, on behalf of the community beyond their own. It is a choice most definitely not based on ‘self-interest’. In rejecting the PAP team, they showed that they were willing to put aside the incumbent’s best-laid plans for their own GRC, a strategy meant to appeal to their self-interests.

In picking the WP team to represent them, they are endorsing the opposition team’s vision to provide more balance in Parliament and the man-in-the-street with a louder voice in the debate and formulation of policies that affect his everyday life. Their choice is an ‘enlightened’ one, because they have shown a concern beyond a self-serving consideration of whether or not the GRC would get new linkways or park connectors or a fresh coat of paint. They have borne well the ‘burden’ which Mr Yeo spoke of early in the campaigning, and much work remains to be done by Mr Low’s team, both in Parliament and in the town council. However, the encouraging blend of experience and talent in the newly elected team bodes well, and hopefully the Aljunied residents’ choice would also demonstrate to the rest of Singapore how not to vote in elections to come.

I have saved what I feel is the best lining for the last. The incumbent has been pushed hard this election, despite all the talk of a ‘clear mandate’. The groundswell of unhappiness or what Dr Balakrishnan calls a ‘national tide’ surely cannot be ignored by the ruling party, and indeed, has already prompted PM Lee to call for some ‘intense soul-searching’. Whether or not this soul-searching would translate into true reform or give rise to a slew of tokenistic measures to engage the people remains to be seen. However, the reasons for a greater commitment to change surely cannot be more compelling for our government. The confluence of factors discussed above, from the rapidly increasing potential of new media to be used as an instrument of democracy, to the swaying of the tide in the opposition’s favour in terms of attracting young, bold and engaging candidates, to the coming of age of the Singaporean people in matters to do with politics, sets this general election apart from previous ones. For these reasons, I believe the government would make a more sustained and authentic effort to change, perhaps including a shift to better engage Singaporeans as actors in the Singapore story.

Change is always disconcerting, and often frightening, and sometimes may not pay off. However, we will never know the outcome or reap any rewards that may come if we don’t take the plunge. If Singaporeans have not taken the leap of faith and picked a young and relatively unproven Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his party to chart their future, the Singapore of today would not exist.

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Commentaries

Lim Tean criticizes Govt’s rejection of basic income report, urges Singaporeans to rethink election choices

Lim Tean, leader of Peoples Voice (PV), criticizes the government’s defensive response to the basic living income report, accusing it of avoiding reality.

He calls on citizens to assess affordability and choose MPs who can truly enhance their lives in the upcoming election.

Published

1 year ago

on

15 September 2023

By

SINGAPORE: A recently published report, “Minimum Income Standard 2023: Household Budgets in a Time of Rising Costs,” unveils figures detailing the necessary income households require to maintain a basic standard of living, using the Minimum Income Standard (MIS) method.

The newly released study, spearheaded by Dr Ng Kok Hoe of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) specifically focuses on working-age households in 2021 and presents the latest MIS budgets, adjusted for inflation from 2020 to 2022.

The report detailed that:

  • The “reasonable starting point” for a living wage in Singapore was S$2,906 a month.
  • A single parent with a child aged two to six required S$3,218 per month.
  • Partnered parents with two children, one aged between seven and 12 and the other between 13 and 18, required S$6,426 a month.
  • A single elderly individual required S$1,421 a month.
  • Budgets for both single and partnered parent households averaged around S$1,600 per member. Given recent price inflation, these figures have risen by up to 5% in the current report.

Singapore Govt challenges MIS 2023 report’s representation of basic needs

Regrettably, on Thursday (14 Sept), the Finance Ministry (MOF), Manpower Ministry (MOM), and Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) jointly issued a statement dismissing the idea suggested by the report, claiming that minimum household income requirements amid inflation “might not accurately reflect basic needs”.

Instead, they claimed that findings should be seen as “what individuals would like to have.”, and further defended their stances for the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) and other measures to uplift lower-wage workers.

The government argued that “a universal wage floor is not necessarily the best way” to ensure decent wages for lower-wage workers.

The government’s statement also questions the methodology of the Minimum Income Standards (MIS) report, highlighting limitations such as its reliance on respondent profiles and group dynamics.

“The MIS approach used is highly dependent on respondent profiles and on group dynamics. As the focus groups included higher-income participants, the conclusions may not be an accurate reflection of basic needs.”

The joint statement claimed that the MIS approach included discretionary expenditure items such as jewellery, perfumes, and overseas holidays.

Lim Tean slams Government’s response to basic living income report

In response to the government’s defensive reaction to the recent basic living income report, Lim Tean, leader of the alternative party Peoples Voice (PV), strongly criticizes the government’s apparent reluctance to confront reality, stating, “It has its head buried in the sand”.

He strongly questioned the government’s endorsement of the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) as a means to uplift the living standards of the less fortunate in Singapore, describing it as a misguided approach.

In a Facebook video on Friday (15 Sept), Lim Tean highlighted that it has become a global norm, especially in advanced and first-world countries, to establish a minimum wage, commonly referred to as a living wage.

“Everyone is entitled to a living wage, to have a decent life, It is no use boasting that you are one of the richest countries in the world that you have massive reserves, if your citizens cannot have a decent life with a decent living wage.”

Lim Tean cited his colleague, Leong Sze Hian’s calculations, which revealed a staggering 765,800 individuals in Singapore, including Permanent Residents and citizens, may not earn the recommended living wage of $2,906, as advised by the MIS report.

“If you take away the migrant workers or the foreign workers, and take away those who do not work, underage, are children you know are unemployed, and the figure is staggering, isn’t it?”

“You know you are looking at a very substantial percentage of the workforce that do not have sufficient income to meet basic needs, according to this report.”

He reiterated that the opposition parties, including the People’s Voice and the People’s Alliance, have always called for a minimum wage, a living wage which the government refuses to countenance.

Scepticism about the government’s ability to control rising costs

In a time of persistently high inflation, Lim Tean expressed skepticism about the government’s ability to control rising costs.

He cautioned against believing in predictions of imminent inflation reduction and lower interest rates below 2%, labeling them as unrealistic.

Lim Tean urged Singaporeans to assess their own affordability in these challenging times, especially with the impending GST increase.

He warned that a 1% rise in GST could lead to substantial hikes in everyday expenses, particularly food prices.

Lim Tean expressed concern that the PAP had become detached from the financial struggles of everyday Singaporeans, citing their high salaries and perceived insensitivity to the common citizen’s plight.

Lim Tean urges Singaporeans to rethink election choices

Highlighting the importance of the upcoming election, Lim Tean recommended that citizens seriously evaluate the affordability of their lives.

“If you ask yourself about affordability, you will realise that you have no choice, In the coming election, but to vote in a massive number of opposition Members of Parliament, So that they can make a difference.”

Lim Tean emphasized the need to move beyond the traditional notion of providing checks and balances and encouraged voters to consider who could genuinely improve their lives.

“To me, the choice is very simple. It is whether you decide to continue with a life, that is going to become more and more expensive: More expensive housing, higher cost of living, jobs not secure because of the massive influx of foreign workers,” he declared.

“Or you choose members of Parliament who have your interests at heart and who want to make your lives better.”

Continue Reading

Commentaries

Political observers call for review of Singapore’s criteria of Presidential candidates and propose 5 year waiting period for political leaders

Singaporean political observers express concern over the significantly higher eligibility criteria for private-sector presidential candidates compared to public-sector candidates, calling for adjustments.

Some also suggest a five year waiting period for aspiring political leaders after leaving their party before allowed to partake in the presidential election.

Notably, The Workers’ Party has earlier reiterated its position that the current qualification criteria favor PAP candidates and has called for a return to a ceremonial presidency instead of an elected one.

Published

1 year ago

on

5 September 2023

By

While the 2023 Presidential Election in Singapore concluded on Friday (1 September), discussions concerning the fairness and equity of the electoral system persist.

Several political observers contend that the eligibility criteria for private-sector individuals running for president are disproportionately high compared to those from the public sector, and they propose that adjustments be made.

They also recommend a five-year waiting period for aspiring political leaders after leaving their party before being allowed to participate in the presidential election.

Aspiring entrepreneur George Goh Ching Wah, announced his intention to in PE 2023 in June. However, His application as a candidate was unsuccessful, he failed to receive the Certificate of Eligibility (COE) on 18 August.

Mr Goh had expressed his disappointment in a statement after the ELD’s announcement, he said, the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) took a very narrow interpretation of the requirements without explaining the rationale behind its decision.

As per Singapore’s Constitution, individuals running for the presidency from the private sector must have a minimum of three years’ experience as a CEO in a company.

This company should have consistently maintained an average shareholders’ equity of at least S$500 million and sustained profitability.

Mr Goh had pursued eligibility through the private sector’s “deliberative track,” specifically referring to section 19(4)(b)(2) of the Singapore Constitution.

He pointed out five companies he had led for over three years, collectively claiming a shareholders’ equity of S$1.521 billion.

Notably, prior to the 2016 revisions, the PEC might have had the authority to assess Mr Goh’s application similarly to how it did for Mr Tan Jee Say in the 2011 Presidential Election.

Yet, in its current formulation, the PEC is bound by the definitions laid out in the constitution.

Calls for equitable standards across public and private sectors

According to Singapore’s Chinese media outlet, Shin Min Daily News, Dr Felix Tan Thiam Kim, a political analyst at Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Singapore, noted that in 2016, the eligibility criteria for private sector candidates were raised from requiring them to be executives of companies with a minimum capital of S$100 million to CEOs of companies with at least S$500 million in shareholder equity.

However, the eligibility criteria for public sector candidates remained unchanged. He suggests that there is room for adjusting the eligibility criteria for public sector candidates.

Associate Professor Bilver Singh, Deputy Head of the Department of Political Science at the National University of Singapore, believes that the constitutional requirements for private-sector individuals interested in running are excessively stringent.

He remarked, “I believe it is necessary to reassess the relevant regulations.”

He points out that the current regulations are more favourable for former public officials seeking office and that the private sector faces notably greater challenges.

“While it may be legally sound, it may not necessarily be equitable,” he added.

Proposed five-year waiting period for political leaders eyeing presidential race

Moreover, despite candidates severing ties with their political parties in pursuit of office, shedding their political affiliations within a short timeframe remains a challenging endeavour.

A notable instance is Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, who resigned from the People’s Action Party (PAP) just slightly over a month before announcing his presidential candidacy, sparking considerable debate.

During a live broadcast, his fellow contender, Ng Kok Song, who formerly served as the Chief Investment Officer of GIC, openly questioned Mr Tharman’s rapid transition to a presidential bid shortly after leaving his party and government.

Dr Felix Tan suggests that in the future, political leaders aspiring to run for the presidency should not only resign from their parties but also adhere to a mandatory waiting period of at least five years before entering the race.

Cherian George and Kevin Y.L. Tan: “illogical ” to raise the corporate threshold in 2016

Indeed, the apprehension regarding the stringent eligibility criteria and concerns about fairness in presidential candidacy requirements are not limited to political analysts interviewed by Singapore’s mainstream media.

Prior to PE2023, CCherian George, a Professor of media studies at Hong Kong Baptist University, and Kevin Y.L. Tan, an Adjunct Professor at both the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore and the NTU’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), brought attention to the challenges posed by the qualification criteria for candidates vying for the Singaporean Presidency.

In their article titled “Why Singapore’s Next Elected President Should be One of its Last,” the scholars discussed the relevance of the current presidential election system in Singapore and floated the idea of returning to an appointed President, emphasizing the symbolic and unifying role of the office.

They highlighted that businessman George Goh appeared to be pursuing the “deliberative track” for qualification, which requires candidates to satisfy the PEC that their experience and abilities are comparable to those of a typical company’s chief executive with shareholder equity of at least S$500 million.

Mr Goh cobbles together a suite of companies under his management to meet the S$500m threshold.

The article also underscored the disparities between the eligibility criteria for candidates from the public and private sectors, serving as proxies for evaluating a candidate’s experience in handling complex financial matters.

“It is hard to see what financial experience the Chairman of the Public Service Commission or for that matter, the Chief Justice has, when compared to a Minister or a corporate chief.”

“The raising of the corporate threshold in 2016 is thus illogical and serves little purpose other than to simply reduce the number of potentially eligible candidates.”

The article also touches upon the issue of candidates’ independence from political parties, particularly the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).

It mentions that candidates are expected to be non-partisan and independent, and it questions how government-backed candidates can demonstrate their independence given their previous affiliations.

The Workers’ Party advocate for a return to a ceremonial presidency

It comes as no surprise that Singapore’s alternative party, the Workers’ Party, reaffirmed its stance on 30 August, asserting that they believe the existing qualifying criteria for presidential candidates are skewed in favour of those approved by the People’s Action Party (PAP).

They argue that the current format of the elected presidency (EP) undermines the principles of parliamentary democracy.

“It also serves as an unnecessary source of gridlock – one that could potentially cripple a non-PAP government within its first term – and is an alternative power centre that could lead to political impasses.”

Consistently, the Workers’ Party has been vocal about its objection to the elected presidency and has consistently called for its abolition.

Instead, they advocate for a return to a ceremonial presidency, a position they have maintained for over three decades.

Continue Reading

Trending