Long before the General Election (GE) was called on 23 June 2020, the People’s Action Party (PAP) was already on high alert with several members from the alternative parties, which include Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Lee Hsien Yang from the Progress Singapore Party (PSP), Tan Jee Say from the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), and the Workers’ Party (WP) in general.

The primary target on the PAP’s scope, however, was Dr Tan, who is the founder of PSP. 

According to PAP’s Chan Chun Sing, when the PAP plans its political strategy, it “draws the strongest opposition’s plan first, and learns how to prepare to counter that”. It doesn’t do so for the weakest one though.

Mr Chan, formerly the Minister of Trade and Industry, was speaking about the PAP’s GE strategy in a closed-door meeting to 60 attendees in the northwest division in Bukit Panjang on 9 Jan 2019. He verbalised certain predictions and concerns about alternative parties’ policies manifestos, candidates, and campaign strengths. 

PAP was wary of Dr Tan and Lee Hsien Yang threat

It seems that the strongest team the PAP was most cautious about was Dr Tan and Lee Hsien Yang. He said that this duo was “a given

“In fact [we have been preparing] for Mr Tan and Mr Lee to [contest] in the northwest. If you’re unlucky, he would go to the West [Coast] and not the northwest,” Mr Chan commented, before letting off a boisterous laugh.

“You should prepare for this,” he cautioned.

However, on 25 June 2020, nearly a year and a half after this meeting, when responding to a media query about Mr Lee possibly contesting in Tanjong Pagar GRC, Mr Chan said that “[they] are not particularly focused on who is coming or going”. 

Turns out, what Mr Chan warned came into being, albeit partially.

On 25 June, Mr Lee’s membership to PSP was officially declared by Dr Tan. The PAP initially anticipated that Dr Tan and Mr Lee might contest in Tanjong Pagar GRC, but it was later revealed that Dr Tan will be contesting in West Coast GRC instead – without Mr Lee as a candidate.

Meanwhile, Mr Chan and the PAP have been squaring off in some coruscating back-and-forth with Dr Tan over a variety of issues during the campaigning period. Some of the issues include engaging in a televised debate with Mr Chan over competency of alternative parties in handling COVID-19 crisis, violating safe-distancing measures during a walkabout, and “gutter politics” and “fear-and-reward politics” that the PAP is employing. Regarding the debate proposal, Mr Chan has turned down the idea to have one. 

Mr Chan foresaw that “more accountability” and “freedom of speech” would be part of The Workers’ Party’ strategy

Mr Chan then had a brainstorming session with the attendees on what Dr Tan and Mr Lee’s manifesto and political strategy would be for the next GE.

“Do you think they’ll stand up and shout: Vote PAP and Lee Hsien Loong out! I’m the man?” he jokingly asked. 

Answers from the attendees were then tossed out.

“More accountability,” said one of the attendees.

“No, that sounds like Pritam Singh,” Mr Chan immediately replied.

In WP’s manifesto for GE2020, the party calls for related individuals to political office holders to be denied appointment to “key positions in national institutions, including organs of state, national media companies and sovereign wealth funds”. 

It also feels that the “Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau should be overseen by a cross-partisan parliamentary committee”, and the Attorney-General’s Chambers, Elections Department, and Electoral Boundaries Review Committee should have more independent jurisdiction and authority separate from the Government’s purview – among other things. 

Another answer came from the floor: “Freedom of speech?” 

“That is Pritam Singh [too],” Mr Chan stated. 

WP’s manifesto also focuses on media and speech freedom, in which the party proposes an amendment to the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act so that “the Government’s power to require a class of management shares in newspaper companies is abolished”. 

It also wants the “licensing regime [to be] opened up to allow mass media companies to be majority owned and managed by locals”, and an “[establishment of an] independent regulatory industry body to investigate complaints against the media on grounds of ethics and journalistic integrity”. 

Speaking about the WP, Mr Chan noted that the party’s strength was mainly ground campaigning.

Mr Chan anticipated that Dr Tan will go for the “true leadership” angle, hoping to stir the government back on the right track

“Are Singaporeans happy with the cost of living?” came another mock strategy that Dr Tan may use.

Mr Chan regarded it as a typical angle that all alternative parties tend to take. 

“Some are typical angles [that] the opposition will attack: Ministers’ salary, cost of living, no accountability,” he said.

One of the attendees said that Dr Tan will resort to saying that he is “disgruntled” with the PAP.

In response, Mr Chan opined that it would be a “wrong tactic” for Dr Tan, but instead accredited it to the WP and SDP’s playbook. 

“No; if you’re Dr Tan, first you must stand out from all the opposition parties. Then you must beat the PAP. [So] it must be something that only Dr Tan will say, that others can’t say,” he stressed.

Mr Chan then predicted that it would be something along the lines of “you like my face, you trust me, you know my record”.

He went on to say that if he was Dr Tan, he would say that PAP has “deviated from the truth”, adding that Dr Tan and Mr Lee will proceed to claim that “[they] are [the] true leadership; [they] will keep the truth straight and bring back the original PAP”. 

On 5 July, Mr Lee commented on the kind of leadership that should be in Parliament. He compared the requirement of having “character and courage” to join an alternative party, whereas PAP holds candidates with illustrious professional credentials in high regard. 

He also asserted on 1 July that PAP has “lost its way” and that “the current government has failed its people”. Hence, he urged all Singaporeans to “vote fearlessly” and “rescue the future of the country we love”. 

“They will [present] an image that [PSP] would bring you back to the original PAP,” he affirmed. 

In PSP’s manifesto, it encourages “diversity of views”, a political and social climate where Singaporeans “can speak up without fear or favour”, and a “review of POFMA”. 

“And their policies won’t be so different from the PAP; it would be attractive enough to maintain the PAP [core], but trim the dangers that would bring PAP’s [power] back to its people,” Mr Chan added.

Besides that, Mr Chan foresaw that the PSP would be filled with lawyers and doctors to complement the powerhouse duo.

However, out of 24 candidates being fielded in GE2020, PSP only has one practising lawyer and one practising doctor.

Mr Chan felt threatened by Tan Jee Say

Mr Chan also revealed that the politician whom he felt directly threatened his position was Tan Jee Say.

“If Dr Tan [goes] back to the West Coast then [that’s] good. I don’t have to worry about the northwest already. [But] if Tan Jee Say comes back to Tanjong, I [will] panic already. Tanjong Pagar is hoping everyday for Tan Jee Say to come back,” he noted, adding that PAP “was looking high and low [to find] his party”.

Mr Chan believed that the “SDP was strong on the internet” when it comes to its reach and campaigning.

“Even if you prepare for Tan Jee Say, [when] he turns up you’ll [still] not be okay,” Mr Chan stated.

Tan Jee Say will be standing in the GE, although in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, and not in Mr Chan’s Tanjong Pagar GRC. So, he is safe for now.

Also read:

Leaked Audio 3: Chan Chun Sing said PAP couldn’t blatantly say they’re going to let micro companies die as it was not politically prudent

Leaked Audio: Chan Chun Sing says allowing Muslims to withdraw CPF fund for Hajj is “reasonable” but cannot be done 

Leaked Audio: Chan Chun Sing said crisis will save PAP in the election

Subscribe
Notify of
9 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Law Minister K Shanmugam will only deliver ministerial statement in Parliament in November after the Police and AGC completed their reviews on Parti Liyani’s case

The Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam revealed on Friday…

官委议员王丽婷吁政府重视年轻人心声 重新省思“维权”意义

日前,官委议员特斯拉(Walter Theseira)针对耶鲁-国大学院取消《异议与抵抗》课程一事,表示认为保护学子们免受敌对意识形态影响固然重要,但也不应限制他们的思想。 对此,官委议员王丽婷(Anthea Ong)也在本月7日的国会致词时强调,政府应该重新省思“倡导、维权以及异议”的关联,学习捍卫良好理念。 王丽婷认为,不能仅凭维权人士的言论,就将他们定义为“招惹是非的人”,也不要将“侮辱”与“评论”混为一谈。 “为此,任何新加坡人包括维权、评论、异议人士、作家、知识分子到普通老百姓,他们都会透过不同的方式为新加坡作出贡献,也逐渐形成重要且另类影响国家的因素”,她表示。 王丽婷也指出,虽然改变对“异议“的观点及审查政策是重要的,但仅仅转变观点是不够的,要想要民众一同参与公民政策咨询,并提供有用意见,首先必须先确保他们必须通过不同管道获得多方信息与数据,经过比较后,提出客观的观点。 其中,应立法确保民众能够有效地核实所得信息,同时也加强民众对政府机构的信任。 另外,王丽婷也指出适当的公民教育,能协助民众分析复杂多元的信息,并确保他们能够获得充分地解释,以此鼓励更多民众能够有效参与公共课题的讨论。她认为应该予以评论适当的空间发酵,而且承认评论的价值与对社会的重要性。 她表示,“目前第四代领导人应该将目标定在提高公民素养。如果遇上不爱批评的人民,或是不拥护批评的人民,国家可能会停滞不前。“ 此外,针对副总理王瑞杰表示,将积极塑造空间,让年轻人参与各项政策讨论,王丽婷也质问,以目前的政治格局,是否真的能够实现上述目标? 她指出,她曾和许多新加坡年轻人讨论到相关问题,大部分均表示对目前有限的发声空间,无形中,让他们陷入恐惧、监视与胁迫的感觉。…

IMF:预测我国今年经济增长放缓至2巴仙

国际货币基金组织(IMF)称,因全球贸易紧张局势影响外部需求,将2019年新加坡经济增速预测,放缓至两巴仙。 IMF预测我国增长动力将转向内需,而随着数码化和新行业相关计划的推动,预计投资也将增加。在服务业和其他贸易相关领域推动下,我国经济增长在“中期”应会稳定在2.5巴仙左右。 而在今年五月份,IMF预测我国2019年GDP增长为2.3巴仙。2018年增速为3.2巴仙。 IMF指我国经济活动在去年放缓在2017年国内需求激增之后,2018年的增长率逐渐减少至3.1巴仙。虽然消费保持弹性,但投资急剧下降,增长的主要推动力转向外部需求。 由于制造业减速,2019年第一季度增长进一步放缓至1.2巴仙。尽管如此,2018年劳动力市场状况持续改善:失业率下降,就业人数增加,实际工资增长。而去年的通膨压力仍温和,金管局核心通胀率放缓至1.6巴仙,放映了电价和全球油价下跌。 至于2019年第一季的经常账户盈余虽有所下降,但在GDP的占比仍较大。 不过IMF仍赞扬我国宏观经济表现亮眼,在过去20年人均GDP增长一倍;自全球金融危机以来收入不平等有所下降,也赞扬新加坡当局合理的宏观经济管理和稳健政策框架。 IMF也赞许新加坡在房地产市场采取宏观审慎和其他措施,并建议消除附加买方印花税和居住区别差异,然后在系统性风险小时候,才逐步取消措施。 IMF认为,如果经济下滑风险成为现实,财政政策硬成为第一道防线,建议优先支持银行的外汇流动性。 贸工部预估数据:次季经济增长仅0.1巴仙 而在上周五,新加坡贸工部公布预估数据,新加坡经济在第二季度(2Q19)表现不如预期,增长仅0.1巴仙,比上季度的1.1巴仙更低。十年来最低的季度增长,2009年第二季时经济萎缩1.2巴仙。

工作设备被充公 许渊臣用旧手机发文解释诽谤指控调查

本社总编许渊臣,针对有关刑事诽谤指控的调查,作出数点澄清,为外界解惑。 在今年9月18日,资讯通信媒体发展局(IMDA),援引《广播法》第16(1)项,要求本社在六小时内撤下被指违规的贴文,本社已遵照该局的指示删除贴文。 这篇文章是由一名非常规撰稿人发表。资媒局质问本社刊载这篇文章的编采决策,许渊臣这么写道: “就出版编辑标准而言,已阐明该文章为读者来函。我们的立场,公众针对政府是否腐败可保留个人意见。例如,总理已在国会澄清弟妹对他的指控,那任何人重提总理弟妹的控诉,也算是不符事实的?” 至于文章中指控当权者篡改宪法,任何对宪法的修改,例如违背公众意见,为了特定议程修改总统选举制,都可算是篡改。 许渊臣也回应,对读者来函只负责校对文句,如涉及任何未公开事实的指控,本社将与有关当局求证。他也重申,若整篇文章牵涉如藐视法庭或刑事诽谤等法律问题,都不会被刊登,除非有关读者能提供进一步的资讯佐证。 个体或机构是不可能以上述形式对政府构成伤害的。在欠缺媒体自由的情况下,政府已经在多个场合重申,容许公民批评政府。 根据资媒局文告,在上述文章被移除后,资媒局在10月4日向警方报案。 警方在星期二上午依据庭令,扣押了我的两台桌面型电脑、两部手机、三台笔记型电脑、两部平板电脑、三部硬盘和其它电子储存设备等。 许渊臣申请在警方完成调查后能把归还上述设备,但被拒绝了。只有结案之后,才能索回。 他在昨午3时30分,在广东民大厦接受盘问,至11时30分结束。目前,上述案件还在调查中。 –许渊臣透过旧手机撰文发布…