~by: Ravi Philemon~

Should Hougang be reserved exclusively for Workers' Party (WP) to contest People's Action Party (PAP)? Are any other political parties intent to contest in Hougang anathema?

This view is expressed very strongly in the blogosphere, especially in response to Tan Jee Say and National Solidarity Party's stand that they will not unequivocally state that they will not contest the pending Hougang by-election.

This opinion seem to stem from the fear that only WP will be able to deny the PAP another seat in Parliament in Hougang, and that a multi-cornered electoral battle will only favour the men in white.

The fear also rises out of the recent four-cornered Presidential Election where some quarters have concluded that Tan Kin Lian and Tan Jee Say throwing their hats into the electoral contest, robbed Tan Cheng Bock of his victory.

But what these have forgotten is, if Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian had not availed themselves, then the voters would have had to choose from two former PAP MPs and Central Executive Committee members.

Even PM Lee chose to remind the voters that both were in the same team in his post-election congratulatory message (see HERE).

Although I disagree with the view that WP should not contest in Hougang because WP's selection process of election candidate is not rigorous enough (no matter how rigorous the selection process is, cases like Yaw's do happen), I agree that the political players must not be vilified or discouraged for wanting to give the people of Hougang a choice – which is what democracy is all about.

And choice is what the two other Tan's, not from PAP, gave the people of Singapore – and for that they must not only be appreciated, but be also respected.

Quite a few would have spoken up against the bogeyman of 'freak election' unleashed by the PAP during election times. We cannot then, when it suits our convenience, use the same argument of 'freak election' (i.e. PAP will win if another party besides WP stands in Hougang) to discourage other parties to contest the impending by-election.

Another excuse as to why the other opposition political players should not contest in Hougang, emanate from the rationale that because the others have not 'walked the ground' they should not contest in that ward, if they do, then they are just being opportunistic.

This is a disingenuous argument. How can the other opposition parties 'walk the ground' when it is held by a opposition party; and especially when it is so close to the last General Election, when nobody expected  something like this to happen?

The PAP actually uses this same argument at every election, to say why the opposition should not be voted in, when the PAP itself is guilty of parachuting in candidates who have not 'walked the ground', using mere Party branding.

And also how can the opposition 'walk the ground' when the boundaries keep shifting, when they all hold full-time jobs, and without the help of government funded grassroots organisation (read People's Association)?

In fact, if other political players stay away from Hougang, it is probably not because they support WP's continued presence in Hougang, but because of pragmatism…they don't want to lose their deposit, they don't want to irk the voters who'll think that they are opportunistic, they don't have the resources, etc.  Because it is almost certain that any other Party (besides the PAP) that challenges WP in Hougang will lose its deposit.

If Desmond Lim's lose in Pungol East single member constituency in the last General Election (see HERE), is an indicator, those that fear that WP will not retain its seat in Hougang if another Party contests there, need not fear so. That the men in white won that electoral battle is besides the point (anyone fielded in that ward besides PAP would not have won). It will be the reverse in Hougang.

The real question is, by what margin is WP going to win in Hougang?

Some political players have of course used their inability to contest the impending Hougang by-election to their advantage.

Whether we want it or not, multi-cornered electoral battles will become a reality in the foreseeable future. I can certainly foresee WP going into areas like Marine Parade and Tampines in the next GE, and it is only right for them to do so, because they need to grow as a political party. Should WP be vilified if they choose to challenge NSP in the 'turfs' NSP has claimed as their own?

Just as WP cannot be faulted for wanting to expand into other wards, other opposition players too should not be assailed for wanting to do the same; because they too need to grow as a party and the parties will not grow unless they take part in elections. Furthermore, these parties are only doing what they have promised they would do – contest elections to give the people of Singapore a choice.

Vilifying something that is not villainous is a great disservice.  

When that happens, there is a chance that some voters will lose their confidence and trust in them resulting in their elect-ability being affected – which is more to the advantage of the men in white in the long run.

If it's a straight fight we want, then we're only going to get that when we have something like Malaysia's Pakatan Rakyat here. And the likelihood of that happening in Singapore, is very slim.

That being the case, with WP being the dominant opposition party right now, the other parties will always have to play second fiddle to WP, unless they challenge not just the PAP, but also WP (especially if WP refuses to cooperate with them). If that does not happen WP will take all the 'sweet ground' and the others will be left with the 'hard' ones; the result of that being, only WP members being more likely to be in Parliament.

Which means that WP will challenge the other political parties on their 'turfs' and the other political parties will challenge WP (and perhaps even another) on the 'theirs'.

Can we vilify Singapore People's Party if it wants to contest Ang Mo Kio GRC because it is next to Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC (and so makes sense), when Reform party has contested there in the last election and has claimed it as their 'turf'?

Because we don't have a coalition today, it is fair for opposition parties to pit themselves against each other for their own survivability. So, multi-cornered fights will be unavoidable as we go into the future. It will be the survival of the fittest – the rest will fall by the sidelines.

The other political parties do not have to ensure WP's survival.

Hougang is as fair as it gets in any election because the Hougang boundaries have barely changed over the years, and has been a WP stronghold for that many years. If another opposition political player contests Hougang (I highly doubt if any will), I predict that they will get no more than 8 per cent of the votes cast. Which will be a good learning curve for WP, for they'll know that those that voted against them, but not for PAP, want WP to run a tighter ship.

But Hougang is certainly not WP's own little fiefdom, that every other opposition party has to stay away from. 

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

扩大公共医院的应对能力 49名确诊患者病情稳定后送私立医院

为了让公共医院保留更多资源给疾病严重的患者,49名患者在病情稳定后,已经从国家传染病中心(NCID)转至私立医院。 卫生部昨日(23日)在回复媒体询问时表示,随着武汉冠状病毒(COVID-19)疫情在全球扩散,预计我国确诊病例也会随之增加,因此欲扩充本地医院及医疗服务的应对能力。 因此,公共医院也会与私立医院合作,将病情较为稳定的病人转至私立医院,以准备为接更严重的病患。 卫生部表示,在过去三天里,国家传染病中心已先将20名病人转至泰和国际医院(Concord International Hospital),随后在将29名病人以专用救护车送往伊莉莎白医院(Mount Elizabeth Hospital)。 而这些患者目前整体情况恢复良好,所以也会留在所在的私立医院直到康复,并在24小时内接受两次检测,都需呈阴性才能出院。 卫生部也表示,公共医院的专家,包括国家传染病中心的医生,也会与私立医院的医护人员有着紧密合作,如确保他们的医疗设备和资源足够、并协助他们制定医疗和拭子测试措施、隔离措施、感染控制措施,以及出院措施。 伊丽莎白医院执行总裁杨圣明也向《今日报》透露,其他医院如鹰阁医院(Gleneagles Hospital)、伊莉莎白诺维纳医院(Mount…

第三度面控 累积32控状 纳吉:我不是小偷

马国前首相纳吉,于今午同时被反贪污委员会和马来西亚警察提控上庭,指控他涉及21项洗黑钱罪和四项贪腐罪,不过纳吉对所有25项控状均不认罪,最终法庭允准以350万令吉(约115万新元)交保候审。 这已是纳吉第三度被控上庭。他在7月4日和8月8日,分别面对三项失信、一项滥权和三项洗黑钱指控。致使他目前面对累积控状达32项。 昨午4时13分,反贪会在布城总部逮捕纳吉,并在今早另被警方逮捕,他同时面对反贪会和马来西亚警方提控。 副总警长诺拉西发文告称,警方取得总检察署允准,援引2001年反洗黑钱及反恐融资法令第4(1)条文下指控纳吉。后者面对9项接收黑钱、五项使用黑钱及七项转移黑钱罪名,供21控状。 至于反贪委会则指控纳吉四项控状,涉嫌滥用职权,收取总额约22亿令吉(约7亿元)的贿金,抵触《2009年大马反贪污委员会》第23(1)条文,若在同一法令第24(1)条文下定罪,将被判监禁不超过20年,以及罚款不少过五倍受贿数额,或1万令吉,视何者更高。 纳吉在今午1时35分,在警方陪同下前往吉隆坡地庭面控。下午2时30分,纳吉代表律师沙菲宜抗议,辩方在开庭前才获悉控状,没有时间让他向当事人说明,为此获得休庭15分钟,直至下午3时05分才开庭。 警方关上法庭大门,纳吉支持者不满被限制进入法庭范围内而抗议,现场一度混乱,甚至需动员镇暴队维持秩序。 在审讯结束后,纳吉接受现场媒体采访,坚称26亿门事件乃是抹黑其声誉的做法,强调他“绝不是小偷”。 他指出,今日的提控有三个层次,即指控他收到的献金、被使用和已被归还的献金。“但我们掌握着有利我们的证据,在第13届大选结束后,我也已归回很大笔数目的献金。” 他说,会在审讯过程中,提出有力辩护,并相信如果法庭伸张正义,体现法治精神,26亿门事件的指控也将不攻自破。 他感谢反贪会和警方公平的礼遇,也对外界澄清,并没有被关在拘留所过夜,只是在反贪会的总部接受调查。  

Young lawyer at 28 already saddled with $1.1 million mortgage loan

South China Morning Post reported yesterday that as the era of ultra-low…

Kenneth Jeyaretnam: Singaporeans Need to Take a Long Hard Look Under That Carpet

In a compelling opinion piece, Kenneth Jeyaretnam, Secretary General of the Reform Party, delves into the pressing questions surrounding the resignations of Tan Chuan-Jin, the former Speaker of Parliament, and PAP MP Cheng Li Hui. He probes into the timing and implications of their affairs and calls for an immediate GE and reforms to address the flaws in the current political system.