The Online Citizen catches up with Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) Secretary General Dr Chee Soon Juan for a post-GE interview.

During GE2011, the SDP did not win any seats but saw the highest climb percentage-wise in votes. Were you satisfied with the outcome for the SDP?

A political party’s objective is to win seats in parliament. Any time it fails to achieve this is obviously a disappointing outcome.

But we are not deterred because the political system we have in Singapore is not a democratic one. We don’t have a media that give all contesting parties a fair shake when it comes to election coverage. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong stated very clearly before the last elections: “Not all opposition parties are the same…And I think there’s a difference in the way they approach politics and the way we approach them.”

Netizens will recall that the SDP was repeatedly excluded from Channel News Asia’s programmes when other parties were invited and we had to protest our exclusion before we were invited, even then under ridiculous conditions, on Talking Point.

The media gave the SDP little coverage despite the fact that we were all over the Internet as well as on the ground in our campaign. We held two pre-election rallies, conducted house visits and walkabouts on a weekly basis, produced an alternative economic programme, published a shadow budget, produced countless videos, launched The SDP Promise and the list goes on. But our coverage on the mass media did not reflect this reality.

SPH journalists have intimated to me that there is a more pronounced bias against the SDP than other opposition parties.

After years of targeting the SDP, and then giving us minimal coverage during the hustings, is it any wonder we did not get more than what we polled? For these reasons, it is difficult to conclude that the election results is an accurate reflection of the views of an informed electorate.

Despite this, as you mentioned, we were still the best performing party. This is because we knew what we were up against and we relied on the Internet to get our message across. Our members and associates performed heroically, never complained and just got on with the job of getting our message out to the voters. The results showed.

Did you think the New Paper’s report on your alleged desire to stage a protest march after an SDP rally affect the outcome in anyway?

Whenever the press run such biased reports, they always negatively affect our effort. But that’s nothing new, they have been doing this for years and they have been getting away with it.

But things are beginning to change with the advent of new Internet tools. We will continue to use them to explain to the people what we really are about. The state media cannot continue to smear us with impunity. The new media has made an impact and they are slowly changing Singaporeans’ views about us.

This elections saw 40% voting against the PAP and 6 seats going to the opposition. Do you think it’s a good outcome?

Any time the opposition makes gains electorally, it’s a good thing. But, as I said, we must remember that we have a system that is undemocratic and under the control of the PAP.

The PAP will continue to treat different parties differently according to which party it likes and which it doesn’t. The PAP has not hidden the fact that the SDP is the opposition party that it doesn’t like, and has done everything to marginalise and demonise us through biased media coverage.

Under such a system, real and meaningful change cannot occur. The only way that Singaporeans are going to see real change is when a democratic opposition gets into Parliament.

If real change is going to come, the PAP must not be allowed to dictate what the voters get to read and watch about the various opposition parties. We are confident that given fair media coverage, the SDP would be in Parliament to make the necessary changes Singaporeans so desperately want and need.

What do you think of the PAP’s efforts to change itself so far, post-GE?

If the PAP has changed then they’ve done a pretty good job of masquerading it. Yes, some ministers are no longer in the cabinet but these changes are purely cosmetic. It is unrealistic to hope for reform from within the party. The party culture is so autocratic and entrenched that the earth would stop revolving first before we see meaningful change there.

The media are still completely in its hands, our reserves are still tied up in the hands of the few, and the Singaporeans still labour under an economic system that exploits them.

What are SDP’s plans for the next five years?

We will double our efforts to speak up for our fellow Singaporeans. We will not forget why we got into politics in the first place, that we are here for the people, we are here to serve them. We want to see a compassionate system that genuinely cares for the people.

Our Community Services Subcomittee is doing great job reaching out to the folks who are in most need of help. Our GO! (Ground Operations) team is also busy preparing for our ground work. And, of course, we will continue to come up with alternative ideas and solutions that we have become known for.

What do you think the upcoming Presidential election will be about? What should Singaporeans expect from the next President? (The interview was conducted before the start of the Presidential Elections – Ed)

The President’s first obligation is to the people of this country who will elect him, not the government of the day. We hope to hear the candidates make their stand on this matter clearly and without equivocation during their campaigns, and that they will remain true to this promise whoever is elected.

One of the roles of the President is to safeguard our reserves. This can only be done if the people know how much the reserves are and how they are being used. In other words the next president cannot continue in the mode of the President S R Nathan where the people’s reserves are operated without transparency and he makes no attempt to keep the public informed.

 

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

Police investigations into conduct of WP’s Pritam Singh and Faisal Manap still ongoing: K Shanmugam

SINGAPORE — Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam stated on Tuesday…

范国瀚被判藐视法庭罪

社运份子范国瀚和民主党党要陈两裕,于今日在高等法庭,被法官宣判藐视法庭罪成立。 高庭法官Woo Bih Li指出,范国瀚和陈两裕两人,在脸书上的贴文攻击了司法机构的诚信和公正,存在引起公众对司法正义信心动摇的风险。 范国瀚随后也在脸书证实此事,并在帖文中表示,此案将安排另一单独听证会。 范国瀚在今年4月,于脸书的贴文称,“马来西亚法庭处理政治个案比新加坡司法更独立”,而被总检察署指控藐视法庭。有关贴文也转载新闻:“《当今大马》挑战反假新闻法违宪”。 随后,新加坡民主党党要陈两裕于5月6日,在脸书为范国瀚抱不平,指出总检察署的举措,更加证实范国瀚的批评所言不虚。结果也同样被控藐视法庭罪。 2016年司法(保护)法令自去年10月生效,上述两人也“抢了头香”,成为该法令生效以来首两位被指控藐视法庭的个案。被判藐视法庭罪者,可悲罚款高达10万新元,或监禁3年,或两者兼施。 早前,在今年7月的审讯中,高级政府律师Francis Ng指责,范国瀚的言论,乃是向公众影射,在马国进行挑战宪法, 如发生在新加坡则必然败诉,因为本国缺乏司法独立。 至于范和陈的辩护律师Eugene…

居民问责白沙-榜鹅市镇会:是否动用公款聘请天价律师达文星?

一名白沙-榜鹅区居民,致函询问白沙-榜鹅市镇会(PRPTC),在使用市镇会款项用于与居民利益无关的诉讼、聘请律师时,是否已咨询居民的同意? 曾代表人民力量党于2011年参选蔡厝港议席的李子旭,揭露一名住在白沙-榜鹅区的友人,致函其市镇会提问四个问题: 市镇会是否能未咨询居民同意,擅用大笔款项,用在非市镇用途? 市镇会可否对居民隐瞒有关大笔款项的资讯? 市镇会在聘请律师时,是否货比三家律师报价? 市镇会是否违反了自身条规? 李子旭说,其友人表示,致函提问白沙-榜鹅市镇会,主要是要问责,既然该市镇会聘请了新加坡最贵的律师达文星,是否有动用市镇会的款项? 诉讼案的中心人物—诉方律师达文星,乃是行动党籍大巴窑集选区前议员,也是已故李光耀和总理李显龙的王牌律师,为他们在诉讼案中打败过多名对手,包括邓亮洪、徐顺全、博客鄞义林,以及多家外国媒体如《经济学人》、彭博社和《纽约时报》。 市镇会:诉讼仍进行不回应 但是,两周前电邮给市镇会的询问仿如石沉大海,即是这名居民反复拨电给市镇会,得到的答复也只是“不会针对审讯中的诉讼作回应。” 李子旭把该居民的经历分享在脸书,让更多人知道此事,一同问责该市镇会是否有合理使用公款。 居民质问聘请达文星律师费…

PSP sets up pro-bono legal clinic for residents in West Coast GRC, Pioneer SMC

Progress Singapore Party (PSP) is setting up a pro-bono legal clinic for…