By Joshua Chiang/

I ran into an academic/blogger at Toa Payoh Stadium in the wee hours of Sunday morning. The recounting was ongoing, but by then it was becoming clear that Dr Tony Tan would win the Presidential elections by the narrowest of margins. So we talked about what was the foremost thing in our minds – did Tan Jee Say’s entry into the race cost Dr Tan Cheng Bock the presidency?

“Tony Tan may still win even without Tan Jee Say in the race,” came the unexpected reply. “In fact, Tan Jee Say’s entry may actually have helped bring down Tony Tan’s votes and bring up Tan Cheng Bock’s votes.” How so? I asked. The academic/blogger explained that for many people who might have otherwise voted for Dr Tony Tan out of familiarity, Tan Jee Say’s campaign – which runs on a message almost contrary to the government’s prescribed role for the president – made them question if they truly wanted someone so closely associated with the establishment in role which isn’t nearly as powerless as the government would have them believe. But at the same time, they might have been uncomfortable with Tan Jee Say’s bluntness and picked a more moderate alternative – Dr Tan Cheng Bock.

I also spoke to a Tony Tan supporter who told me that her second choice – interestingly – was Tan Jee Say. His passion and firm convictions impressed her, she said. She wasn’t the first voter I knew to narrow down her choice to one that’s between Dr Tony Tan and Tan Jee Say. I wouldn’t know if the numbers of such voters are statistically significant, but it does point to one thing – it is overly simplistic to presume that all the votes that had gone to Tan Jee Say would have gone to Dr Tan Cheng Bock if the former didn’t run. And more importantly, just like what the General Elections have shown – where some highly unpopular ministers retained their seats –  people are more likely to use their votes to put who they want in office rather than kick who they do not want out of the office.

A growing liberal voice?

I wrote an article two weeks ago opining that if anything, this Presidential elections – just like the previous one – will be a referendum on the People’s Action Party, and also would give a clearer picture of how Singaporeans are spread across the political spectrum.

What’s obvious to see is that without the fear of their housing estates turning into slums should they vote in an opposition team, nearly 65% of Singaporeans voted against Dr Tony Tan. If the May General Elections sent a clear signal to the PAP that it cannot be business as usual, this Presidential Elections confirmed it.

But what’s less obvious, is the growing number of people who are willing to give a more liberal voice – in the form of Tan Jee Say – a chance. While it is tempting to assume that only hardcore opposition supporters vote vote Tan Jee Say because he is the least connected to the ruling party (and they would even vote an orang-utan as long as it doesn’t wear white), my observations suggest otherwise. Not all people who voted for Tan Jee Say are comfortable with his ‘confrontational’ image, but his clear stances on certain issues – abolishment of ISA, anti-mandatory death penalty, no discrimination of minorities, including homosexuals to name a few – appealed to them.  The fact that Tan Jee Say was with the SDP for short while had very little to do with their decisions.

In contrast, Dr Tan Cheng Bock remained an enigma. Alex Au summed up their discomfort with Dr Tan nicely:

Pealing away his gentle, avuncular demeanour, I find a troubling hole I cannot fathom. I cannot find an answer to a fundamental question: What does the man stand for?

‘I endorse Tan Jee Say’, Yawning Bread

Dr Tan Cheng Bock lost this group of voters not because of his past associations with the PAP but because he wasn’t very clear what he stood for on such issues. It isn’t only liberals who think so. As I had described earlier, there are voters for whom the choice is between Dr Tony Tan and Tan Jee Say. Which is strange because I actually believe that there are always more people in the centre of the political spectrum than there are in the left or right, and it wouldn’t be difficult to choose Dr Tan Cheng Bock to represent their voices… unless they weren’t sure IF he was really the guy in the centre.

In other words, it isn’t nearly enough that you are a kind person. People want to know exactly how you plan to translate this kindness into concrete actions and clear stand on issues – which Tan Jee Say has.  To add a new twist to a familiar saying, “Better the angel you know than the one you don’t.”

No longer a walk in the (Istana) park

Despite the fact that Dr Tony Tan wasn’t my favored candidate to win the elections, I think it’s overly pessimistic to presume he would ‘pull a Nathan’ on us. For once, he actually fought hard to get into office. (But to be fair to S.R Nathan, no one else stood up when he ran for both terms) And the result – 35% of the total votes – is a sobering reminder that he has his work cut out for him if he wants to remain president for more than one term.

The Tony Tan presidency is likely to be one that is far more accountable and transparent than the one that preceded it. I have a hunch as well that if Dr Tony Tan were to aspire to be the next Ong Teng Cheong, the government is less likely to get in his way than they did the former president, for a very simple reason: It would cost them votes in the next GE. And so would a presidency that is too closely aligned with the interests of the government. Dr Tony Tan HAD to be independent. Any less than that and it would likewise affect what happens in 2016.

But the biggest challenge for Dr Tony Tan is not in the guarding of the reserves. It is whether he can truly play a unifying role. In today’s political climate, it goes beyond lending a face to charities and social causes. It even goes beyond making speeches to sooth nerves when disagreements between different segments of society threaten to tear apart the social fabric. It is in the exercising of his other presidential powers – such as vetoing of key appointment holders and budgets that will only serve partisan interests for example – that will demonstrate if he is indeed committed to unifying the people.

If he can do that, then in all likelihood, he will have a clearer mandate in the next Presidential elections. And maybe it would be an easier walk in the (Istana) park for him if he does get a second term.

Heck, he might even get to stop for a game of golf or two.



President-elect Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam’s media release HERE.

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

金管局:没操纵汇率

对于美国财政部把新加坡并列入汇率操纵观察名单,我国金融管理局在今日发文告表示,并未操纵其货币以获得出口优势。 金管局在文告中解释,我国金融政策框架以汇率为中心,旨在确保中期物价的稳定,不会也不能通过汇率来取得出口优势和经常账目盈余。 “诚如美国财政部报告所言,金管局在政策范围内,管理新加坡元的名义有效汇率 (S$NEER,即一国对各贸易伙伴国名义汇率,加权平均后的汇率指数),如同他国央行通过定位利率来实施货币政策一样。” “无论是针对汇率或利率,央行首要任务,都是把消费者物价通胀维持低点和平稳。” 金管局也解释,如果刻意削弱新元,将导致通膨急窜,从而影响该局稳定价格的目标。 金管局也认为,我国的经常账户盈余( current account balance )也要视情况来分析。在我国发展早期,即1965-1984年间,经常账户赤字平均接近GDP的10巴仙,投资需求大于储蓄。随着经济成熟,投资需求逐渐减少,故此国家储备也就增加,这使得经常账户有盈余。 金管局评估富裕程度提高将增加消费,而随着公共和私人储备用于应付人口老龄化的需求,我国经常账户盈余将随之减少。

A woman and child caught on CCTV throwing hanged clothes off common corridor at Toa Payoh

Earlier this month (2 Jan), a resident at an apartment in Toa…

王志豪:军训仍持续 采取必要措施保障士兵健康

国防部高级政务部长王志豪强调,不论有无新型冠状病毒疫情,国家防卫仍很重要。军训仍会持续,也必须采取必要措施保障士兵的健康。 我国卫生部在上周五(7日),将“疾病爆发应对系统”(DORSCON)警戒级别升级为橙色。王志豪则在今日(11日)视察德光岛的基本军训中心,以了解该中心落实新防疫措施的情况。 根据国防部文告,王志豪表示在与受训士兵互动后,认为他们对于所采取的防疫措施有信心。 “这是我们需要的,不管是国民服役人员或常规军人,都需要让他们相信我们将保障他们的建康。” 目前,该军训中心每日要求新兵测量体温两次、增加清洁和消毒、让新兵错开时段用餐等,同时减少或推迟非必要的大型社交活动,以避免人群聚集。  

【冠状病毒19】逾1.4万客工仍在隔离

被隔离宿舍客工中,截至昨日(21日)有98人确诊。目前,仍有1万4300名客工仍在隔离。 8月18日,在原本已无冠病的宿舍内,当局仍发现100新病例,这致使7千客工需再次隔离。这已是当局第二次在安全宿舍内发现新病例。 8月12日,当局宣称安全宿舍发现新确诊,导致800客工需隔离。 卫生部医药服务总监麦锡威教授称,这些客工相信是在宿舍仍有病例时被感染,而一些客工在确诊时虽已康复,惟当局仍他们算在每日新增确诊人数中。 在昨日新增117冠病19确诊中,其中六例为社区病例,13例入境病例。 社区病例中,一例曾接触早前确诊者,是在隔离期间检测时被发现。三例住是住在宿舍外的建筑、海事与岸外业及加工业职员,还有一例为前线人员。一名61岁新加坡男子在出现症状后,曾到Excelsior 购物中心的一家相机店上班。 入境病例方面,分别从印度、英国和菲律宾入境。