Lee Hsien Loong pap60 party rally
There was a time when members of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) prided themselves on basing things on facts, and would go the length to sue anyone who would do otherwise.
Things seem to have changed somewhat lately.
Three recent instances show that PAP ministers have made claims or allegations which do not seem to be based on facts, but are rather spurious and even wild imaginations.
In September, when the now infamous clash of events at Hong Lim Park between the YMCA and the CPF protest took place, Manpower Minister Tan Chuan Jin led the chorus of PAP MPs who accused the protesters of “heckling” the special needs children who were at the YMCA charity event.
But as this writer pointed out then, there was and has been no evidence to show that any “heckling” directed at the children had actually taken place.
Read the report here: “Heckling, anarchist? Nah, just immaturity”.
The media subsequently picked up the accusation and even headlined their reports with it.
However, the minister himself has been silent about this since.
In his speech to party faithful in December during the PAP’s 60th anniversary celebrations, secretary general Lee Hsien Loong claimed that “the opposition have not articulated any vision for Singapore, as they say they cannot form the government.” (CNA)
Mr Lee is wrong on both counts, in fact.
First, at least four opposition parties have their own visions for Singapore and have laid these out in various forms.
The Workers’ Party’s vision, as Mr Lee ought to have known, is laid out in its election manifesto in quite some details, in fact. (See here.)
Secretary general of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), Chee Soon Juan, responded to Mr Lee’s claims thus:
“The SDP published Dare To Change: An Alternative Vision for Singapore in 1994.
“I had more recently described a new vision for Singapore in an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal. Mr Lee ignores these and claims that the opposition has not articulated one.”
And to make sure that Mr Lee was properly corrected, Dr Chee tweeted his response to the latter. (See here.)
The National Solidarity Party (NSP) had also presented its vision, in the form of a manifesto, to Singaporeans in 2011. (See here.)
Even the newly-formed Singaporeans First Party (SingFirst) has its vision laid out on its website in some details. (See here.)
“We need a new vision that puts Singaporeans at the heart of the nation,” SingFirst says on its website. “The vision of a fair society with strong families and a confident people with high self-esteem. The vision of Singaporeans First.”
So, it is rather puzzling how Mr Lee could tell his audience and Singaporeans that “the opposition have not articulated any vision for Singapore” when these alternative visions are all there readily available for anyone to peruse.
Secondly, Mr Lee’s claims that the opposition “say they cannot form the government” is also not quite true.
According to a TODAY report in April 2011, just a month before the general election, the paper said there were “conflicting views among [the] opposition on forming [the] government.” (See here.)
While it is true that the WP had said that it was not yet ready to form the government, the WP alone is not the opposition, nor does it represent the wider opposition view.
Indeed, other opposition parties seem to disagree with the WP’s views that the opposition parties are not “at a stage when they can form shadow Cabinets to take over from the Government now.”
Dr Chee said then that it was “not right for leaders of today’s opposition parties to talk as if the (PAP) is of such high quality and that the opposition… are unable to take over the governance of Singapore.”
“Singaporeans, including those in the opposition camp, must not fall into the mindset that the opposition has trouble matching the PAP in terms of our candidates and our ideas,” he added.
The Reform Party’s secretary general, Kenneth Jeyaretnam, said his party was ready to be part of a coalition government, and that there was “no need for (the opposition) to have any inferiority complex with regards to the PAP over policy.”
So, clearly, Mr Lee’s claims that the opposition had said it was not ready to form the government is not entirely accurate.
It was only the WP which had said so, and the WP does not represent all the opposition.
However, the WP had also said – in its manifestos of 2006 and 2011 – that its aim is to form the government of Singapore one day. In 2006, its leader, Low Thia Khiang, gave a possible timeframe of 20 years for this to happen.
The third instance of a minister making unfounded or unsubstantiated accusations took place in December as well.
Minister of State for National Development, Desmond Lee, apparently took umbrage at some of his critics’ questioning of his attacks on the Workers’ Party and its town council.
Mr Lee, who is an MP for Jurong GRC, was reported to have said:

“[We] have seen a coordinated online campaign to distract the public, using falsehoods, half-truths and speculations, by friends, sympathisers and proxies of the Workers’ Party (WP). The aim is to confuse the public and distract them from the real issues.”

Mr Lee has been challenged by some online to substantiate what he claims, but to date he has not done so. (See here.)
There are so many claims in Mr Lee’s remarks which he should indeed substantiate and show proof for.
For example, where is this “coordinated online campaign”? In what website is this being conducted? Which social media outlet or platform? Who is “coordinating” this “campaign”? Who indeed is funding it, if true?
What are the “falsehoods, half-truths and speculations” which Mr Lee is accusing others of propagating?
Who are these “friends, sympathisers and proxies of the Workers’ Party” of which he speaks? Is Mr Lee accusing members of the public who disagree with him of being “friends, sympathisers and proxies” of the WP?
And where is the proof that it is the WP which is behind this, as Mr Lee claimed?
Unfortunately, Mr Lee has provided not a shred of explanation or evidence to prove what he freely alleges.
It is, honestly, most unbecoming of a person of Mr Lee’s position – a minister of state – to make such wild and unsubstantiated allegations against unnamed targets.
Such allegations only serve to discredit the government and its ministers. Singaporeans will now, and rightly so, raise a question mark over all that is claimed or said by our ministers.
The mark of a leader is how he remains restrained and rational, particularly on occasions when emotions run high, and not give in to making accusations or claims which are easily shown up as empty hot air.
It does no one any good, least of all in the area of building trust between the government and the people.

Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

SMRT and SBS to provide free travel for all bus and train services on National Day

Singapore’s public transport operators (PTOs), SBS Transit and SMRT Corporation Ltd has…

Government to provide public transport vouchers for low-income households help cope with with 4.3% hike in fare or some say, 11%

Following the latest fare increase by the Public Transport Council (PTC), the…


选举局证实,曾接获投诉指工人党后港单选区议员陈立峰的竞选海报不符合张挂高度。 在昨日(8月31日)的国会,陈立峰提到选举期间,自己在后港竞选曾遭受“卑劣的政治手段”( petty and bad politics ),令他质疑执政党是否在开倒车。 选举局在竞选期间接获两起与他有关的投诉,第一份投诉,包括13项指控陈立峰的竞选海报,位置低于2.2米标准,“我的志工都感到讶异,他们很肯定他们把海报挂在适当的高度。后来志工也去检查和矫正了海报高度。” 但两天后,又接到第二起投诉,令工人党竞选团队更加感到困惑。他也指有居民告知他,目睹行动党团队把陈立峰的竞选海报拉低。 陈立峰也谈及自己在2015年凤山参选时,都没有遇到类似糟糕的经历,也担忧形成争锋相对、最终导致分化的政治文化,最终受害的还是国人。 对此,选举局则向媒体回应,证实陈立峰的两起投诉均与海报高度有关,而若选举局接获此类投诉,无论来自什么政党的候选人,当局都会要求选举代理在三小时内纠正,否则将采取行动。 至于称有居民看见人民行动党将陈立峰的海报位置拉低,选举局则表示,这是严重的指控,但却未接获陈立峰的举报,因此呼吁陈立峰立即向当局报案,启动调查。

Former NCMP Gerald Giam questions why MOH took two years to notify affected individuals of the HIV data theft

In the latest HIV data leak fiasco, former Non-Constituency Member of Parliament…