Sunday, August 28, 2005
27th of August 2005, a date to forget in the pages of history of Singapore. In this pseudo-democracy, the idea of election is that eligibility to stand for election, is determined by a small council of secretive and secluded persons, that is hidden from public view. That the President's office is of such prestige and standing is all the more regrettable.
While this blog has no reason to question the findings of the Presidential committee, the question lies in the fact that in a population of 4 million, less that 30 people collected forms for eligibility, of these less than 10 submitted and only 1 was selected. Are Singaporeans really so apathetic? Or is it the fact that we all lack the charisma and integrity? My contention is that well the general population is partially to blame, the intrinsic system of selection also plays a large part in deterring many from standing in an election. The general mentality being 'Don't rock the boat'.
This has lead to a situation whereby the president is selected from a small pool and without the mandate of the people, as there was no electoral process in the first place. While it can be argued that this is all an exercise in futility, since the post of President is only largely symbolic, the counter argument is much more persuasive. That precisely because it is such a symbolic role, the election will also be a symbol that the people will rally behind the Head of State in time of crisis because they elected him into power and thus are responsible for their decision. Till that day comes, Singapore will still be largely a rich but politically immature society.
3:57 PM
Sunday, August 07, 2005
The government in Singapore needs to change, and not for the usually rehashed ideas that deals with poor governance of one sort or the other. From the onset, let us not fool ourselves into underestimating the capabilities of the PAP and its contributions to Singapore. However, in an ever changing socio-political landscape, it is increasingly difficult to have a pseudo-single partied government that is tasked to run an increasingly complex society of four million. To add to the problems, this government has shown to be coming short of ideas of late, stuck in a quagmire between paradigms of the past and the challenges of the future.
A good government, above all else requires check and balances. In the Singaporean system of politics, this is in the form of the executive (parliament), legislative (cabinet) and the judiciary. However, since the PAP is the party that runs all the systems, I guess insofar as Singapore is concerned, the government, inculding both the parliament and the cabinet, and the PAP will be used to mean the same thing and interchangeably.
Up till now, the PAP has been able to manage the country fairly well. However, in the recent year since the economic downturn of 1998, there has been more and more evidence of the PAP running out of ideas to due with changes in Singapore both internally and externally. Policies to attract investment in the biochemical field has been less successful than expected, while social policies that attempt to make life in Singapore supposedly more relaxed and attractive have only led to more people going overseas. While not all of these can be attributed solely to the PAP, it is clear that as a government, it cannot absolve itself of all responsibilities by pushing all the blame to the citizens.
Sticking with a single partied government at this point in time is neither desirable nor effective. As a party, decisions are made at the top and passed to the bottom. As a result, the country is run by the parliament, which is run by the PAP, which is effectively run by a few head at the top. Although there are claims that 'new-blood' is being injected into the party, in fact, the newer member will be indoctrinated by the senior members to some extent, which inevitably lead to attempts to solve 21st century problems with 1965 approaches (witness the 'have-more-children program').
Enter the concept of another party to act as a credible counter-weight to the PAP. With such a policy, to allow another party to form, perhaps more concepts can be properly debated in parliament, leading to more solutions as opposed to bickering. Of course when discussing a multi-party system, it is easy to argue that this is the present situation. However, this do not take into account the fact that the PAP represents virtually the whole of Singapore. It is the prerogative of the people to ensure that this is not the case. By opposition, this should mean a constructive disapproval of plainly impractical and downright stupid policies and some attempts at pushing through alternative policies. Thus current opposition is obvious inadequate to serve this function.
So perhaps it will be best, during this week to look forward and see if you can do your part for Singapore and voice out your views, not for want of power or otherwise, but for the betterment of the country.
12:46 AM
