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

采矿公司多灾多难 博客分析淡马锡投资恐面对亏损

新加坡一名博客作出分析,指淡马锡基金在国际上投资的其中一家采矿公司,投资蒙古国的铜和金矿采矿项目“多灾多难”,2012年参与投资该公司的淡马锡基金很可能惨遭连累,而面对亏损。 这名博客在个人财经文章中形容,淡马锡对于采矿业投资的“豪赌”,可能面对至少10亿美元的亏损。这名博客Pat Low指的是绿松石山资源公司(Turquoise Hill Resources),这家公司在蒙古奥尤陶勒盖(Oyu Tolgoi)进行铜矿和金矿开采。 绿松石山资源公司 的主要控股股东,是跨国矿产资源巨头力拓集团(Rio Tinto Group)。根据本月14日的最新报导,力拓集团和绿松石山,他们与蒙古最大的Oyu Tolgoi铜金银矿现有的贷方合作,共同进行债务重塑。此消息也导致该公司股价跌了近23巴仙,市值跌至17.5亿美元。 绿松石山的前身,是加拿大艾芬豪矿业公司(Ivanhoe…

前进党批“泼马”不符透明问责原则 律政、通讯新闻部联合声明反驳

日前,新加坡前进党(Progress Singapore Party)发声明,,指目前《防假消息法》赋予部长权力,来宣布哪些消息内容是假的,但欠缺明确的阐释和标准,该党认为这并不符合透明和问责的原则。 不过,昨日(11日)律政部联合通讯及新闻部,发表声明反驳该党。 前进党的文告抨击,在未有明确阐释和标准的情况下,《防假消息法》赋权部长宣布哪些消息是假的。对此该部坚称,该法下要求部长明确说明为何相关内容存伪。如何定夺虚假讯息也有法律先例可循。 “近期动用《防假消息法》,对于消息为何存假,也有清楚解释。对此前进党和该党党员毕博渊先生也不否认,他自己的贴文存有不实信息。” 事缘前进党党员毕博渊(Brad Bowyer),在上月底被政府援引《防假消息法》,要求更正网络贴文。 该部声明也重申,《防假消息法》需符合一定条件才能使用,再者也允许被指控者上诉。 律政和通讯及新闻部也指责,前进党声称部长可随意施加任何惩处。该部反驳部长可给予更正指示;如相关人士拒绝遵循,只有法庭可以施加惩处。 不过吊诡的是,本社记者重新阅读新加坡前进党在本月10日发表的声明,从头到尾都未指控部长可随意施加任何惩处。 反驳毕博渊的嘴可曾被堵住?…

管你使用哪个途径 724入境马国者统统隔离

马来西亚国防部长依斯迈沙比利在今午(7月23日)2时的新闻发布会上指出,无论是透过海、陆、空途径入境该国的人士,就算从新马长堤步行入境的新加坡公民或马国人民,都将被强制送入隔离中心。 他指出,该国政府不再允许居家隔离,而入境者须在政府认证的隔离中心进行隔离14天。 至于入境者是否需要进行冠状病毒拭子检测,他表示,既然所有入境者都必须隔离,那么他们在抵达马国之前,就无需像之前那般,强制进行检测了。 “无论如何,这还是要依循他们出发地点的规矩,若相关国家要求他们在离开之前进行拭子检测,那么他们就必须做。而且,这也要看他们所乘搭的航空公司决定。” 依斯迈沙比利指出,政府允许来自同一个家庭的入境者,在接受强制隔离时同住一间房间。 他表示,比如夫妻、父母在回到马来西亚之前都没有分开,因此隔离时也无需特意安排,而12岁或以下孩童也可以和父母同住一间房间。 但是,在入住同一间房之前,他们必须提呈事前同意文件,“因为我们担心万一发生任何感染,而他们是在事前已交出政府同意书,让他们同住一间房间”。 他也提到,被强制送入隔离中心的民众需要承担两笔费用,即隔离费用和冠毒检测费用。 此外,他也宣布了另一项新措施,8月1日起,凡是在公共场合,如公共交通上,马国民众都必须戴好口罩,否则罚款1000令吉。 他指出,卫生部通报指出,大部分使用公共交通工具的人们已开始疏于防疫,而马国境内重新开始出现感染群,因此必须强制民众戴口罩。 他也鼓励马国民众,可以依据世界卫生组织所制定的标准,自行缝制口罩。

When will Singapore have a non-Chinese prime minister?

by Robin Low When will Singapore have a non-Chinese prime minister? It…