“We should continue to have vigorous debates on the challenges facing our nation, and be prepared to take necessary and bold decisions for our future. It is important for us to do so, to have the best ideas and best leadership for Singapore. Everyone should join in the debates, understand the issues, share their views and argue their positions. Sometimes these debates will stir great passions, but we cannot allow our differences to pull us apart. So while we may have differing views, all sides must take a long-term perspective for the common good. And once the debate is settled, we must come together again, to move ahead as one united people.”
- President Tony Tan during the re-opening of Parliament yesterday
The Government’s actions in the past have constantly contradicted these words Tony Tan said yesterday, from defamation suits to the National ‘Conversations,’ many who do raise alternatives get suppressed. And even in Parliament, many want to debate and raise alternatives but the Party Whip comes into play. We do need debates, alternative policies and diversity. I personally believe we have more than enough talent in Singapore for a two-party system and even a coalition government. These debates shouldn’t be restricted to the walls of Parliament alone.
As I was reading the book Hard Choices (highly recommended), I have come to realize that there are many well researched alternative policies which have been tried and tested and backed up with solid evidence to tackle the problems Singapore faces today. Even SDP just released it’s policy paper for Education which I personally believe is well thought out and realistic. You know, alternative policies doesn’t always have to come from the Opposition Camps.
There are 80 MPs from the PAP in Parliament, I’m pretty sure that even within them not everyone wholeheartedly agrees with all of the policies presented but they fear the Party Whip. In the past, PAP MPs like Toh Chin Chye, Goh Keng Swee, Deva Nair, Tan Cheng Bock, Ong Teng Cheong all have debated against the party’s policies and direction too. MPs shouldn’t be spokespeople for their Parties.
And in order to have good Debates, free access to information. And Freedom of Information is non-existent in Singapore. Most information are classified and even when asked in Parliament the MPs have the right not to disclosed the information.
Tony Tan, the words you said are powerful and idealistic. But in all honesty, it’s hard to believe that those words will materialize. It’s hard to believe not only because of the Government’s track record but also because of your own absence during National Issues like the Little India Riots, Population White Paper, Fare Hikes, etc.
Despite 65% of the Populace voting against you during the last General Election, you still became our President. It’s been a long time since we last had a People’s President like Deva Nair and Ong Teng Cheong who kept the ruling party in check and truly spoke up for the people.
Parliamentary Debates should be vibrant, vigorous, and powerful. But recently, many at times MPs being paid $16,000 a month have been caught sleeping in Parliament.. this is a clear reflection of the intensity of these debates. I doubt they will be sleeping if someone like JB Jeyaretnam or Chee Soon Juan was in Parliament. But even then, as the leaders of PAP know that even if not all 80 of their MPs may agree with what PAP puts forth, they will not dare to speak against the Party, so they have 80 votes, more than 90% of Parliament, in the bag.. so they can rest comfortably in the hopes that the people aren’t listening or watching to whatever the Opposition is putting forth.
For example, there was the 6.9 million Population White Paper which was quickly rammed through Parliament last year and endorsed by an overwhelmingly 77 “yes” votes from the PAP MPs. This action led to the first ever major public protest in Hong Lim Park on 16 February last year. The protest by generally docile Singaporeans shocked even seasoned foreign journalists. It made international news with some foreign newspapers giving the Singaporean protest large play and even front-page coverage.
An interesting question arises. What if the 2 contentious issues i.e. ministerial salaries and 6.9 million population proposal were decided by Singaporeans through a national referendum instead of the PAP-dominated Parliament – what do you think the outcome would be?
If you truly meant the words that you have said and are not merely being a spokesperson for the Government or saying it for the sake of it. Despite prices sky-rocketing all over our island, talk is still relatively cheap.
But we Singaporeans are beginning to Wake up and we can not be fooled by sweet talk anymore..
We will judge you by your Actions, not by your Words.
You’re no longer under the PAP, and you’re technically supposed to be non-partisan. Although you were PAP’s preferred candidate during the PE 2011, you still have time to redeem yourself, I hope you can prove me and the 65% of Singaporeans who voted against you wrong.
And I would love to be proven wrong.
Ariffin Sha
*The writer blogs at http://ariffin-sha.com/