Inderjit Singh: Factors behind BN’s loss not irrelevant to PAP’s current leaders

In a Facebook post on Thursday (10 May), former People's Action Party Member of Parliament, Inderjit Singh identified three key factors behind the shock loss of Malaysia’s ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition. What was interesting about the post was that he felt that the situation was not entirely alien to PAP’s 4G leadership. He even made reference to the President's opening address and asked: “how [has what happened in Malaysia yesterday] relevant to Singapore?”

Key factor #1: A ruling elite who is out of touch with average Singaporeans

Mr. Singh first said that the average Malaysian faced a serious cost of living issue but nonetheless had a “ruling elite [who had] lost touch with ground and did not listen to people”. This was in tune because “leaders were rich [and] did not feel [or] listen to the ground to understand the true situation”.

He added that “Malaysians were concerned about the overinvestment by foreigners in their country, as they felt that their country was being ‘sold’ to the foreigners, but the government [instead] pressed on to allow more and more investments”.

In a later part of his post, the former PAP MP drew some parallels to the situation in Singapore where “more and more Singaporeans are feeling uncomfortable about some issues affecting them” and cited examples on how Singapore’s economy was dual-track, such that “MNCs [Multi-national companies] and GLCs [Government-linked companies] are experiencing growth and support compared to SMEs [Small and medium entreprises] who are struggling”.

In addition, he questioned if we were ready for the future economy while “the ability of our young to afford a house in the future and the quality of life in Singapore... are serious worries Singaporean have”.

Key Factor #2: The use of an old governance model that might not work in today’s environment

The second factor that Mr. Singh had identified was that the BN “continued to depend on old policies, old structures and old politics to run the country and how they conducted their politics. The government "did nothing new” and adopted “an irrelevant 50-year-old strategy”.

For instance, “BN again reverted to the old election tactic of handouts and dangling carrots like public holidays and tax exemptions. This showed that they were out of touch with the majority millennial voters who wanted accountability and transparency more than anything”.

Again, he said that this was not different in Singapore. He shared his experience at a recent event he attended where a 4G Minister had shared three key principles for Singapore to adopt moving forward: to build the right infrastructure, providing Singaporeans education to prepare ahead and building a system based on meritocracy and corrupt-free government.

“I don’t see any change in the government’s thinking about how we will be driving Singapore’s economy” he wrote, adding that he “realize[d] we have heard the same from our founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew some 50 years ago”.

He even referred to an interview the late Mr. Lee gave to Asiaone in 2011 where the elder statesman was quoted as saying that the Liberal Party in Japan “held power from 1955 to 2009, with an 11-month interruption from 1993 to 1994” and that the “downfall of the Japanese party was partly because it ‘carried on with old ideas’".

Key Factor #3: Assuming that the right to lead is an inherited right

Mr. Singh identified the final factor in that the “political elites took care of themselves and assumed they will always have the right to rule. They forgot that in a democracy people have the right to choose who leads them and the political leaders need to earn the right to lead.”

He then went on to say that the current batch of political leaders cannot assume that they will have the right to lead “just because they have been put in place by virtue of the past government’s ability to put them in their current positions”.

The now vocal critic of the PAP then suggested that the 4G leaders create a meaningful “vision equivalent to the ‘Swiss standard of living’ again where Singaporeans can aim for a vision of meaningful employment with respectable wages and where there is a balanced lifestyle”

Concluding remarks

Mr. Singh said that while Singapore was privileged not to have the “corruption and kleptocracy” that have plagued Malaysia politics for some time now, “this does not mean Singapore has no other problems of our own”. He hoped that the 4G leaders would identify problems Singaporeans face and make bold changes and “give birth to a new social compact among govt, the political leaders and the population”.

Given that Singapore's elections are expected to take place next year or at most, early 2020, do you think that the 4G leaders have enough time to make such reforms and win the trust of the electorate?

This entry was posted in Opinion.

---