Dear editor,
Introduction
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has in a recent interview with Lianhe Zaobao (and translated for the Straits Times) mentioned how the search for political successors has become a big challenge for his government.
He cited how out of the 600-odd students who scored four As in their A levels each year, about 150 would eventually work abroad, some never to return. Implied in this is that our future top leaders would probably be from this 600-odd.
Looking in the wrong places?
I feel that to limit the search to students who can ace examinations is slightly myopic and that perhaps we are looking in the wrong places. Management students would have heard of Level 5 leadership (eg late President Wee Kim Wee); or Great man aka Traits theory (that leadership is inherent eg MM Lee Kuan Yew) and other theories. But Singapore’s 4 A’s theory of political leadership we have not.
Furthermore, to address this vital issue of future political leadership fully, we cannot avoid the problem of Singapore’s high emigration rate as the two issues are inextricably intertwined.
Singapore’s high emigration rate
Singapore’s emigration rate, one of the highest in the world on a per capita basis, is a serious threat to our viability as a nation. Many social commentators have already voiced their concerns that quick fixes whereby Singaporeans who have left are replaced by more-than-willing new citizens from India and China may not have its intended effect as it is difficult to sieve out those who only see Singapore as a hotel and not home.
Although globalisation -where talented Singaporeans are a scarce commodity courted by developed economies, must be the main culprit for our population outflow, an often quoted push factor is that Singapore is too regulated and stifling. Perhaps these ex-Singaporeans feel that they do not belong here and that they would rather invest their lives in another land.
New Paradigm needed
I wonder if the establishment would agree with me that a political structure that leaves little room for alternative paths and views is “regulated and stifling”. Would our present leaders ever consider a new paradigm- A paradigm with a level playing field and where the best ideas can emerge freely to lead us to greater heights?
Conclusion: Voting with the feet is worse than voting for the other side
The risk of the citizens voting for the other side is still better than if they voted with their feet. Even if they voted against the ruling party, they may still be persuaded the next time. Once they have left, they are gone forever.
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: Hi friends, I sent the above letter to the Forum Page .
19.4.08: The Straits Times Forum Page has published it on the Online section of the Forum page here.
Links to related posts on littlespeck.com
1. Thinking beyond tea-chats
&
2. The exodus continues
Showing posts with label Just politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Just politics. Show all posts
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Monday, February 04, 2008
Are you ready for change: What’s your Locus of Control score?
Hi Friends,
Recently I had some opportunities to do psychometric tests. One of these is the Rotter’s Locus of Control scale.
Locus of Control:
Locus of control refers to how individuals attribute responsibilities for events that happen to their lives. In simple terms, do we feel that most things that happen to us are beyond our control? That our social structure or our office hierarchy are so fixed and entrenched that nothing we do can meaningfully change or improve it? That if the government says there should be an ERP gantry on every street, we just have to take it or leave it(ie migrate) ?
Or are you someone who feels that “Impossible is nothing” ( to borrow a commercial slogan) and that if there is a will, there is a way? That the journey of a thousand miles start with the first step? (OK enough of cliches)
Generally, common sense tells us that there are factors both within and without our controls. The "within's" include one’s abilities; efforts and the "without's" fate; luck and powerful others (eg politicians; business billionaires).
People who believe that destiny lies within their own hands are deemed as having Internal Locus of Control whilst those who perceive that factors extrinsic to themselves determine their personal outcomes have External Locus of Control.
A person’s locus of control could have developed from Accumulative causes (eg childhood upbringing; social deprivation) or Episodic causes such as life-changing events like near-death experiences such as accidents or natural disasters.
Are you ready to face the facts and find out your score? Are you are an “internal” or an “external”? Be honest.
I may reveal my score later as a comment.
Best wishes and Gong Xi Fa Cai!
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: I just got my 100000th hit the past few days! ( and I was not hitting this blog myself!)
THE TEST
Rotter's Locus of Control Scale ( Choose a or b for each of the following questions)
1. a. Children get into trouble because their patents punish them too much.
b. The trouble with most children nowadays is that their parents are too easy with them.
2. a. Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are partly due to bad luck.
b. People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make.
3. a. One of the major reasons why we have wars is because people don't take enough
interest in politics.
b. There will always be wars, no matter how hard people try to prevent them.
4. a. In the long run people get the respect they deserve in this world
b. Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes unrecognized no matter how hard he tries
5. a. The idea that teachers are unfair to students is nonsense.
b. Most students don't realize the extent to which their grades are influenced by accidental happenings.
6. a. Without the right breaks one cannot be an effective leader.
b. Capable people who fail to become leaders hive not taken advantage of their opportunities.
7. a. No matter how hard you try some people just don't like you.
b. People who can't get others to like them don't understand how to get along with others.
8. a. Heredity plays the major role in determining one's personality
b. It is one's experiences in life which determine what they're like.
9. a. I have often found tlint what is going to happen will happen.
b. Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for me as making a decision to take a definite course of action.
10. a. In the case of the well prepared student there is rarely if ever such.a thing as an unfair test.
b. Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course work that studying in really useless.
11. a. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, hick has little or nothing to do with it.
b. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at the. right time.
12. a. The average citizen can have an influence in government decisions.
b. This world is run by the few people in power, and there is not much the little guy can do about it.
13. a. When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work.
b. It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because many things turn out to- be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow.
14. a. There are certain people who are just no good.
b. There is some good in everybody.
15. a. In my case getting what I want has little or nothing to do with luck.
b. Many times we might just as well decide what to do by flipping a coin.
16. a. Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was lucky enough to be in the right place first.
b. Getting people to do the right thing depends upon ability, luck has little or nothing to do with it.
17. a. As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us are the victims of forces we can neither understand, nor control.
b. By taking an active part in political and social affairs the people can control world events.
18. a. Most people don't realize the extent to which their lives are controlled by accidental happenings.
b. There really is no such thing as "luck."
19. a. One should always be willing to admit mistakes.
b. It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes.
20. a. It is hard to know whether or not a person really likes you.
b. How many friends you have depends upon how nice a person you are.
21. a. In the long run the bad things that happen to us are balanced by the good ones.
b. Most misfortunes are the result of lack of ability, ignorance, laziness, or all three.
22. a. With enough effort we can wipe out political corruption.
b. It is difficult for people to have much control over the things politicians do in office.
23. a. Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive at the grades they give.
b. There is a direct connection between how hard 1 study and the grades I get.
24. a. A good leader expects people to decide for themselves what they should do.
b. A good leader makes it clear to everybody what their jobs are.
25. a. Many times 1 feel that I have little influence over the things that happen to me.
b. It is impossible for me to believe that chance or luck plays an important role in my life.
26. a. People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly.
b. There's not much use in trying too hard to please people, if they like you, they like you.
27. a. There is too much enphasis on athletics in high school.
b. Team sports are an excellent way to build character.
28. a. What happens to me is my own doing.
b. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking.
29. a. Most of the time I can't understand why politicians behave the way they do.
b. In the long run the people are responsible for bad government on a national as well as on a local level.
Score one point for each of the following:
2.a, 3.b, 4.b, 5.b, 6.a, 7.a, 9.a, 10.b, 11.b, 12.b, 13.b, 15.b, 16.a, 17.a, 18.a, 20.a,
21.a, 22.b, 23.a, 25.a, 26.b, 28.b, 29.a.
A high score = External Locus of Control
A low score = Internal Locus of Control
Locus of Control
Locus of Control refers to the extent to which individuals believe that they can control events that affect them. Individuals with a high internal locus of control believe that events result primarily from their own behavior and actions. Those with a high external locus of control believe that powerful others, fate, or chance primarily determine events. Those with a high internal locus of control have better control of their behaviour and tend to exhibit more political behaviors than externals and are more likely to attempt to influence other people; they are more likely to assume that their efforts will be successful. They are more active in seeking information and knowledge concerning their situation than do externals.The propensity to engage in political behavior is stronger for individuals who have a high internal locus of control than for those who have a high external locus of control.
Links to:
Locus of control
PS: By the Way, My score is 0 (Zero). That means I have strong internal locus of control. That means I always try to change things and will not accept that everything needs be the same.
Recently I had some opportunities to do psychometric tests. One of these is the Rotter’s Locus of Control scale.
Locus of Control:
Locus of control refers to how individuals attribute responsibilities for events that happen to their lives. In simple terms, do we feel that most things that happen to us are beyond our control? That our social structure or our office hierarchy are so fixed and entrenched that nothing we do can meaningfully change or improve it? That if the government says there should be an ERP gantry on every street, we just have to take it or leave it(ie migrate) ?
Or are you someone who feels that “Impossible is nothing” ( to borrow a commercial slogan) and that if there is a will, there is a way? That the journey of a thousand miles start with the first step? (OK enough of cliches)
Generally, common sense tells us that there are factors both within and without our controls. The "within's" include one’s abilities; efforts and the "without's" fate; luck and powerful others (eg politicians; business billionaires).
People who believe that destiny lies within their own hands are deemed as having Internal Locus of Control whilst those who perceive that factors extrinsic to themselves determine their personal outcomes have External Locus of Control.
A person’s locus of control could have developed from Accumulative causes (eg childhood upbringing; social deprivation) or Episodic causes such as life-changing events like near-death experiences such as accidents or natural disasters.
Are you ready to face the facts and find out your score? Are you are an “internal” or an “external”? Be honest.
I may reveal my score later as a comment.
Best wishes and Gong Xi Fa Cai!
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: I just got my 100000th hit the past few days! ( and I was not hitting this blog myself!)
THE TEST
Rotter's Locus of Control Scale ( Choose a or b for each of the following questions)
1. a. Children get into trouble because their patents punish them too much.
b. The trouble with most children nowadays is that their parents are too easy with them.
2. a. Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are partly due to bad luck.
b. People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make.
3. a. One of the major reasons why we have wars is because people don't take enough
interest in politics.
b. There will always be wars, no matter how hard people try to prevent them.
4. a. In the long run people get the respect they deserve in this world
b. Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes unrecognized no matter how hard he tries
5. a. The idea that teachers are unfair to students is nonsense.
b. Most students don't realize the extent to which their grades are influenced by accidental happenings.
6. a. Without the right breaks one cannot be an effective leader.
b. Capable people who fail to become leaders hive not taken advantage of their opportunities.
7. a. No matter how hard you try some people just don't like you.
b. People who can't get others to like them don't understand how to get along with others.
8. a. Heredity plays the major role in determining one's personality
b. It is one's experiences in life which determine what they're like.
9. a. I have often found tlint what is going to happen will happen.
b. Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for me as making a decision to take a definite course of action.
10. a. In the case of the well prepared student there is rarely if ever such.a thing as an unfair test.
b. Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course work that studying in really useless.
11. a. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, hick has little or nothing to do with it.
b. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at the. right time.
12. a. The average citizen can have an influence in government decisions.
b. This world is run by the few people in power, and there is not much the little guy can do about it.
13. a. When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work.
b. It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because many things turn out to- be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow.
14. a. There are certain people who are just no good.
b. There is some good in everybody.
15. a. In my case getting what I want has little or nothing to do with luck.
b. Many times we might just as well decide what to do by flipping a coin.
16. a. Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was lucky enough to be in the right place first.
b. Getting people to do the right thing depends upon ability, luck has little or nothing to do with it.
17. a. As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us are the victims of forces we can neither understand, nor control.
b. By taking an active part in political and social affairs the people can control world events.
18. a. Most people don't realize the extent to which their lives are controlled by accidental happenings.
b. There really is no such thing as "luck."
19. a. One should always be willing to admit mistakes.
b. It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes.
20. a. It is hard to know whether or not a person really likes you.
b. How many friends you have depends upon how nice a person you are.
21. a. In the long run the bad things that happen to us are balanced by the good ones.
b. Most misfortunes are the result of lack of ability, ignorance, laziness, or all three.
22. a. With enough effort we can wipe out political corruption.
b. It is difficult for people to have much control over the things politicians do in office.
23. a. Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive at the grades they give.
b. There is a direct connection between how hard 1 study and the grades I get.
24. a. A good leader expects people to decide for themselves what they should do.
b. A good leader makes it clear to everybody what their jobs are.
25. a. Many times 1 feel that I have little influence over the things that happen to me.
b. It is impossible for me to believe that chance or luck plays an important role in my life.
26. a. People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly.
b. There's not much use in trying too hard to please people, if they like you, they like you.
27. a. There is too much enphasis on athletics in high school.
b. Team sports are an excellent way to build character.
28. a. What happens to me is my own doing.
b. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking.
29. a. Most of the time I can't understand why politicians behave the way they do.
b. In the long run the people are responsible for bad government on a national as well as on a local level.
Score one point for each of the following:
2.a, 3.b, 4.b, 5.b, 6.a, 7.a, 9.a, 10.b, 11.b, 12.b, 13.b, 15.b, 16.a, 17.a, 18.a, 20.a,
21.a, 22.b, 23.a, 25.a, 26.b, 28.b, 29.a.
A high score = External Locus of Control
A low score = Internal Locus of Control
Locus of Control
Locus of Control refers to the extent to which individuals believe that they can control events that affect them. Individuals with a high internal locus of control believe that events result primarily from their own behavior and actions. Those with a high external locus of control believe that powerful others, fate, or chance primarily determine events. Those with a high internal locus of control have better control of their behaviour and tend to exhibit more political behaviors than externals and are more likely to attempt to influence other people; they are more likely to assume that their efforts will be successful. They are more active in seeking information and knowledge concerning their situation than do externals.The propensity to engage in political behavior is stronger for individuals who have a high internal locus of control than for those who have a high external locus of control.
Links to:
Locus of control
PS: By the Way, My score is 0 (Zero). That means I have strong internal locus of control. That means I always try to change things and will not accept that everything needs be the same.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Suharto: .."if he had any faults, please forgive them"
Hi Friends,
'Father has returned to God.
'We ask that if he had any faults, please forgive them...may he be absolved of all his mistakes.'
These words by Siti Hardianti Rukmana, the eldest daughter of the late President Suharto are poignant indeed.
Great are Suharto’s excesses but so are his achievements. I will leave it to the Great Weighing Scale in the Sky to conclude if the balancing scale tipped in Suharto’s favor.
It is perhaps too easy for us to speak of forgiveness if we were but bystanders looking from a distance. Forgiveness would be most meaningful if it came from those whose loved ones’ lives were snuffed out in Acheh or East Timor during the many military conflicts of Suharto’s reign.
I hope that all who suffered find peace and solace and let bygones be bygones. The alternative would be to let hatred gnaw inwards until little remains of the human soul.
Many giants of history had endured unmentionable torture and brutality only to forgive their tormenters later.
Nelson Mandela forgave FW deKlerk.
Kim Dae Jung forgave Chun Doo-Hwan and Roh Tae-Woo .
I look to the day when on our own sunny Singapore shores, the players of both sides of our political scene learn to live and let live. Let there be more debate about ideas and less on destroying the messengers.
Are there many still banished from our borders because youthful idealism led them to join liberation armies that were not to be? Are they still languishing in south of Thailand? How ironic that those who were most passionate are punished whilst the apathetic gets rewarded.
All of us have a lot to learn from two twenty-year olds last weekend in Melbourne. Looking at the photographs of Novak Djokovic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga with arms on each others' shoulders and matched by wide smiles. Can you tell who won the Australian Open?
To Indonesians out there, Cheers!
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
'Father has returned to God.
'We ask that if he had any faults, please forgive them...may he be absolved of all his mistakes.'
These words by Siti Hardianti Rukmana, the eldest daughter of the late President Suharto are poignant indeed.
Great are Suharto’s excesses but so are his achievements. I will leave it to the Great Weighing Scale in the Sky to conclude if the balancing scale tipped in Suharto’s favor.
It is perhaps too easy for us to speak of forgiveness if we were but bystanders looking from a distance. Forgiveness would be most meaningful if it came from those whose loved ones’ lives were snuffed out in Acheh or East Timor during the many military conflicts of Suharto’s reign.
I hope that all who suffered find peace and solace and let bygones be bygones. The alternative would be to let hatred gnaw inwards until little remains of the human soul.
Many giants of history had endured unmentionable torture and brutality only to forgive their tormenters later.
Nelson Mandela forgave FW deKlerk.
Kim Dae Jung forgave Chun Doo-Hwan and Roh Tae-Woo .
I look to the day when on our own sunny Singapore shores, the players of both sides of our political scene learn to live and let live. Let there be more debate about ideas and less on destroying the messengers.
Are there many still banished from our borders because youthful idealism led them to join liberation armies that were not to be? Are they still languishing in south of Thailand? How ironic that those who were most passionate are punished whilst the apathetic gets rewarded.
All of us have a lot to learn from two twenty-year olds last weekend in Melbourne. Looking at the photographs of Novak Djokovic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga with arms on each others' shoulders and matched by wide smiles. Can you tell who won the Australian Open?
To Indonesians out there, Cheers!
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Singapore's other political parties- still alive and kicking!
Hi Friends
This article (below) in the weekend’s Today caught my eye just when I thought that the most interesting event in the past week was the subdued “black shirt” protest against the Annuitygate!
Things have changed (albeit at snail’s pace).
In the old days ( or like my kids will say ... when policemen wore pants), such articles would never have seen the light of day. Although Loh Chee Kong did not exactly say that he welcomed multi-party politics but at least he appeared rather neutral and even mentioned about the Privy Council’s judgement that ruled in JBJ's favour. ( Younger readers should read up on the Privy Council's deliberation- rather intriguing).
If my memory serves me right, it was coincidental that shortly after this saga regarding JBJ (and was it involving Wong Hong Toy too?) that Singapore’s judiciary system decided to cut its umbilical cords from its British origins and the Privy Council no longer served as our court of last appeal. If anyone has the facts or references please do post them for the benefit of our younger ones who missed the more colourful goings-on of the old days.
(Dr.Huang (18.9.07) someone has provided me with references to the above event here and here )
I whole-heartedly believe that a vibrant WP is good for the nation.
Nothing can really beat having good-ole competition in the marketplace!
More good years for all our political parties (including the SDP whom I believe also had not been lying down and just doing nothing ( read here)
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: Something I wrote about David Marshall here
50 years on ... what keeps Workers' Party going
Loh Chee Kong (15th Sept 2007)
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg
HALF a century is a long time in politics. Very long if that is opposition politics. And an eternity if the politics happens to be in a country where the ruling party has been in power for 48 uninterrupted years, delivering an economic miracle and breathing life into nearly every corner of the physical, social, economic and political environment and fighting its rivals tooth and nail.
.
Then, how did the Workers' Party (WP) — put together by a pipe-smoking criminal lawyer called David Marshall on Nov 7, 1957, to promote workers' welfare — manage not just to survive but keep its parliamentary presence for a very long 26 years?
.
The answer may rest in the fact that in nearly every election, about a third of voters do not support the ruling People's Action Party (PAP), said Dr Terence Chong from the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (Iseas). "Opposition parties have survived on the votes of this 30 to 40 per cent of Singaporeans," he added.
.
The permanent anti-PAP bloc aside, the WP has also been kept alive by the presence of leaders who were able to provide the party and its supporters with what was needed at that time.
.
Mr Marshall was an idealist who thought there was room for another party amid a highly-charged political landscape. The next WP leader, Mr J B Jeyaretnam, threw in his lot with confrontational politics at a time when the political scene was bereft of opposition politicians who exhibited a sense of bravado to take on the PAP heavyweights.
.
And now there is Mr Low Thia Khiang, who is a major departure from his predecessors with his non-confrontational style. He prefers to let his grassroots walking do all the talking — a strategy that has gone down well with his constituents voting for him in four successive elections, the last one with an increased majority.
.
In the late 1950s, Mr Marshall, who had quit the Labour Front, discovered that there was a niche to be carved between the two extremes of the political spectrum — the left-wing PAP and the right-wing Labour Front government. And the quickest way to do that was through the communist-infested trade unions. Thus, the WP was born.
.
Despite a bright start that saw the party winning four of five seats it contested in the City Council Elections, the WP lost support dramatically once the communists threw their support behind the PAP. As political historian Hussin Mutalib notes in his book Parties and Politics, Mr Marshall's centrist stance failed to woo the populace, "at a time when the agitative political climate was looking for more radical leaders".
.
Mr Marshall was to go on to win the Anson seat in 1961 but, two years later, he was forced out of the WP after the party disagreed with his "all-or-nothing" position on the merger with Malaysia. Mr Marshall had wanted Singapore to either seek a complete merger with Malaysia or seek its own independence.
.
Divided and shorn of its most prominent face, the WP went into disarray and Mr Marshall was trounced at the 1963 elections in which he stood as an independent candidate.
.
The party remained rudderless until 1971, when a flamboyant former District Judge by the name of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam brought with him a group of English-educated professionals into WP's fold.
.
Armed with a 14-point manifesto that sought to "amend and repeal" some of the PAP's policies, the WP under JBJ — as he came to be known — was cheered from the fringes but failed to grab any parliamentary seats in an election just months after the leadership change.
.
The party tried to make an impression in the 1976 elections with its platform of "Towards a Caring Society". The campaign saw JBJ winning the highest percentage (40 per cent) of votes for an opposition politician but it was not enough to win him a ticket to Parliament.
.
JBJ was not to be denied five years later, when he won the Anson by-election, breaking the PAP's 15-year-old monopoly in the chamber.
.
He wrote a boisterous chapter in WP history during his term in Parliament when he made his presence felt, frequently engaging senior Cabinet Ministers, including Mr Lee Kuan Yew, in fiery debates.
.
But while his term in Parliament kept him in the limelight, his confrontational approach towards the Government led to his downfall.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam was forced to relinquish his Anson seat in 1986, when he was found guilty of false declarations of the WP's accounts — a conviction the Privy Council in Britain overturned but which was upheld here.
.
Still, he led a one-man crusade against the PAP. By roping in outspoken individuals who had an axe to grind, including former Solicitor-General Francis Seow, Mr Jufrie Mahmood and Mr Tang Liang Hong, the party established itself as the biggest — if not the loudest — opposition voice.
.
The exception was Mr Low Thia Khiang. Mr Jeyaretnam might rue the day he brought Mr Low into the party, since this set in motion a renewal process that indirectly led to his exit as WP leader.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam, who handed the reins to Mr Low in 2001, was bankrupted by defamation lawsuits while Mr Seow and Mr Tang fled Singapore.
.
Dr Hussin, in his book that was first published in 2003, argues the WP was often let down by the poor quality of its election candidates and its "spray-gun" approach against PAP policies. One exception was the WP's call for a "caring society" in the 1980s, which offered Singaporeans an alternative policy.
.
But even this platform was somewhat usurped by the PAP Government when then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong took the reins in 1990 and unveiled a vision for a "gracious society".
.
If Mr Jeyaretnam, with all his passion and fearless attitude, could not take the WP to greater heights, many doubted if the mild-mannered, Teochew-speaking Mr Low could take it anywhere at all.
.
After six years at the helm, Mr Low has proven his critics wrong. One need only look at last year's General Election to see how far Mr Low has helped to revive the WP's fortunes. Even the presence of Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong during the Hougang hustings in support of the PAP candidate and the dangling of juicy carrots before voters could not swing the votes against Mr Low.
.
Mr Low's restrained ways have reshaped the WP brand — moving it away from firebrand politics and, consequently, unnecessary and costly legal battles. His stoic approach to the PAP's attacks also won him fans.
.
While observers, such as Iseas' Dr Chong, have no doubt the WP, under Mr Low, is the strongest opposition party today, the key questions many are asking as the party celebrates its 50th birthday in November are: Where can it go from here?
.
The PAP — like any other ruling political party — cannot be expected to make life easier for the WP. For some observers, the WP may find succour in something beyond PAP's control — the forces of globalisation.
.
Dr Chong said: "As Singapore becomes more open, will there be a gradual resistance to globalisation among Singaporeans? Will the WP be able to take advantage of the inequalities and side-effects it brings?"
.
Even in this area, the PAP is unlikely to concede space with the Government already taking the high ground by introducing measures such as Workfare to provide relief to lower-income Singaporeans.
.
While the odds are stacked against the WP's efforts to make a major impact on national policies, there are signs the party have started to adopt an approach that may seem modest at first glance but could pay big dividends eventually. And that is its strategy of "going local".
.
That means working the ground — Mr Low reportedly attends as many funerals as he can in Hougang — and convincing the constituents that its members can do as good a job, if not better than, their PAP counterparts in running an estate and helping them solve their municipal problems through non-governmental means. But the biggest hurdle the WP faces is a ruling party that is likely to be tenacious in defending its ground vigorously. Still, as the hardline Old Guard exit the political stage, how the successive generations of leaders — brought up in an entirely different era — deal with the opposition will play a part in the latter's durability.
.
Like everything else in Singapore, it's results that matter. So, like JBJ's victory in 1981, securing the party's survival for another 50 years might hinge on the party winning a Group Representation Constituency.
This article (below) in the weekend’s Today caught my eye just when I thought that the most interesting event in the past week was the subdued “black shirt” protest against the Annuitygate!
Things have changed (albeit at snail’s pace).
In the old days ( or like my kids will say ... when policemen wore pants), such articles would never have seen the light of day. Although Loh Chee Kong did not exactly say that he welcomed multi-party politics but at least he appeared rather neutral and even mentioned about the Privy Council’s judgement that ruled in JBJ's favour. ( Younger readers should read up on the Privy Council's deliberation- rather intriguing).
If my memory serves me right, it was coincidental that shortly after this saga regarding JBJ (and was it involving Wong Hong Toy too?) that Singapore’s judiciary system decided to cut its umbilical cords from its British origins and the Privy Council no longer served as our court of last appeal. If anyone has the facts or references please do post them for the benefit of our younger ones who missed the more colourful goings-on of the old days.
(Dr.Huang (18.9.07) someone has provided me with references to the above event here and here )
I whole-heartedly believe that a vibrant WP is good for the nation.
Nothing can really beat having good-ole competition in the marketplace!
More good years for all our political parties (including the SDP whom I believe also had not been lying down and just doing nothing ( read here)
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: Something I wrote about David Marshall here
50 years on ... what keeps Workers' Party going
Loh Chee Kong (15th Sept 2007)
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg
HALF a century is a long time in politics. Very long if that is opposition politics. And an eternity if the politics happens to be in a country where the ruling party has been in power for 48 uninterrupted years, delivering an economic miracle and breathing life into nearly every corner of the physical, social, economic and political environment and fighting its rivals tooth and nail.
.
Then, how did the Workers' Party (WP) — put together by a pipe-smoking criminal lawyer called David Marshall on Nov 7, 1957, to promote workers' welfare — manage not just to survive but keep its parliamentary presence for a very long 26 years?
.
The answer may rest in the fact that in nearly every election, about a third of voters do not support the ruling People's Action Party (PAP), said Dr Terence Chong from the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (Iseas). "Opposition parties have survived on the votes of this 30 to 40 per cent of Singaporeans," he added.
.
The permanent anti-PAP bloc aside, the WP has also been kept alive by the presence of leaders who were able to provide the party and its supporters with what was needed at that time.
.
Mr Marshall was an idealist who thought there was room for another party amid a highly-charged political landscape. The next WP leader, Mr J B Jeyaretnam, threw in his lot with confrontational politics at a time when the political scene was bereft of opposition politicians who exhibited a sense of bravado to take on the PAP heavyweights.
.
And now there is Mr Low Thia Khiang, who is a major departure from his predecessors with his non-confrontational style. He prefers to let his grassroots walking do all the talking — a strategy that has gone down well with his constituents voting for him in four successive elections, the last one with an increased majority.
.
In the late 1950s, Mr Marshall, who had quit the Labour Front, discovered that there was a niche to be carved between the two extremes of the political spectrum — the left-wing PAP and the right-wing Labour Front government. And the quickest way to do that was through the communist-infested trade unions. Thus, the WP was born.
.
Despite a bright start that saw the party winning four of five seats it contested in the City Council Elections, the WP lost support dramatically once the communists threw their support behind the PAP. As political historian Hussin Mutalib notes in his book Parties and Politics, Mr Marshall's centrist stance failed to woo the populace, "at a time when the agitative political climate was looking for more radical leaders".
.
Mr Marshall was to go on to win the Anson seat in 1961 but, two years later, he was forced out of the WP after the party disagreed with his "all-or-nothing" position on the merger with Malaysia. Mr Marshall had wanted Singapore to either seek a complete merger with Malaysia or seek its own independence.
.
Divided and shorn of its most prominent face, the WP went into disarray and Mr Marshall was trounced at the 1963 elections in which he stood as an independent candidate.
.
The party remained rudderless until 1971, when a flamboyant former District Judge by the name of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam brought with him a group of English-educated professionals into WP's fold.
.
Armed with a 14-point manifesto that sought to "amend and repeal" some of the PAP's policies, the WP under JBJ — as he came to be known — was cheered from the fringes but failed to grab any parliamentary seats in an election just months after the leadership change.
.
The party tried to make an impression in the 1976 elections with its platform of "Towards a Caring Society". The campaign saw JBJ winning the highest percentage (40 per cent) of votes for an opposition politician but it was not enough to win him a ticket to Parliament.
.
JBJ was not to be denied five years later, when he won the Anson by-election, breaking the PAP's 15-year-old monopoly in the chamber.
.
He wrote a boisterous chapter in WP history during his term in Parliament when he made his presence felt, frequently engaging senior Cabinet Ministers, including Mr Lee Kuan Yew, in fiery debates.
.
But while his term in Parliament kept him in the limelight, his confrontational approach towards the Government led to his downfall.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam was forced to relinquish his Anson seat in 1986, when he was found guilty of false declarations of the WP's accounts — a conviction the Privy Council in Britain overturned but which was upheld here.
.
Still, he led a one-man crusade against the PAP. By roping in outspoken individuals who had an axe to grind, including former Solicitor-General Francis Seow, Mr Jufrie Mahmood and Mr Tang Liang Hong, the party established itself as the biggest — if not the loudest — opposition voice.
.
The exception was Mr Low Thia Khiang. Mr Jeyaretnam might rue the day he brought Mr Low into the party, since this set in motion a renewal process that indirectly led to his exit as WP leader.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam, who handed the reins to Mr Low in 2001, was bankrupted by defamation lawsuits while Mr Seow and Mr Tang fled Singapore.
.
Dr Hussin, in his book that was first published in 2003, argues the WP was often let down by the poor quality of its election candidates and its "spray-gun" approach against PAP policies. One exception was the WP's call for a "caring society" in the 1980s, which offered Singaporeans an alternative policy.
.
But even this platform was somewhat usurped by the PAP Government when then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong took the reins in 1990 and unveiled a vision for a "gracious society".
.
If Mr Jeyaretnam, with all his passion and fearless attitude, could not take the WP to greater heights, many doubted if the mild-mannered, Teochew-speaking Mr Low could take it anywhere at all.
.
After six years at the helm, Mr Low has proven his critics wrong. One need only look at last year's General Election to see how far Mr Low has helped to revive the WP's fortunes. Even the presence of Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong during the Hougang hustings in support of the PAP candidate and the dangling of juicy carrots before voters could not swing the votes against Mr Low.
.
Mr Low's restrained ways have reshaped the WP brand — moving it away from firebrand politics and, consequently, unnecessary and costly legal battles. His stoic approach to the PAP's attacks also won him fans.
.
While observers, such as Iseas' Dr Chong, have no doubt the WP, under Mr Low, is the strongest opposition party today, the key questions many are asking as the party celebrates its 50th birthday in November are: Where can it go from here?
.
The PAP — like any other ruling political party — cannot be expected to make life easier for the WP. For some observers, the WP may find succour in something beyond PAP's control — the forces of globalisation.
.
Dr Chong said: "As Singapore becomes more open, will there be a gradual resistance to globalisation among Singaporeans? Will the WP be able to take advantage of the inequalities and side-effects it brings?"
.
Even in this area, the PAP is unlikely to concede space with the Government already taking the high ground by introducing measures such as Workfare to provide relief to lower-income Singaporeans.
.
While the odds are stacked against the WP's efforts to make a major impact on national policies, there are signs the party have started to adopt an approach that may seem modest at first glance but could pay big dividends eventually. And that is its strategy of "going local".
.
That means working the ground — Mr Low reportedly attends as many funerals as he can in Hougang — and convincing the constituents that its members can do as good a job, if not better than, their PAP counterparts in running an estate and helping them solve their municipal problems through non-governmental means. But the biggest hurdle the WP faces is a ruling party that is likely to be tenacious in defending its ground vigorously. Still, as the hardline Old Guard exit the political stage, how the successive generations of leaders — brought up in an entirely different era — deal with the opposition will play a part in the latter's durability.
.
Like everything else in Singapore, it's results that matter. So, like JBJ's victory in 1981, securing the party's survival for another 50 years might hinge on the party winning a Group Representation Constituency.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Did the PM mention the old flats in Hougang and Potong Pasir?
Hi Friends,
I watched PM Lee Hsien Loong’s National Day Rally speech tonight.
He almost got me glued to the goggle-box!
He seemed to have covered a lot of ground- from Education/Ageing population/CPF and HDB upgrading with government funds. He has become a very polished and confident orator, much like his father , MM Lee.
But I must confess- I was not giving the speech my complete and unadulterated attention.
You see, I was also surfing the TV channels and watching the Man City-Man United match at the same time. And I must have missed some salient points by the PM.
For instance, when mentioning that all HDB flats built earlier than 1980 would be upgraded, he must have mentioned Hougang and Potong Pasir.
Common sense dictates that since the flats in these 2 wards are amongst the oldest in Singapore, it must be their turn for the “sprucing up” seen all over that “Google earthesque” map of Singapore that PM referred to so frequently?
But , I did not hear the magic words of Hougang and Potong Pasir.
Ah, it must have been when I switched channels to watch Man City score the solitary goal against the now very desperate Man United.
Punggol 21-plus with its water feature seemed so fantastic and it must have mesmerized many of you. But did any of you hear the PM mention Hougang and Potong Pasir, eh? You must have.
Now that the match has ended and after licking my wounds and tending to my bruised ego ( esply as my other team Leeds United is now in League One with -9 points!) , I will surf the net for the complete and unabridged speech of the PM to see for I, me and myself the magic words of Hougang and Potong Pasir.
It must be somewhere in the transcript- the whole two and half hours’ worth of it. Right?
Dr. Huang Shoou Chyuan
I watched PM Lee Hsien Loong’s National Day Rally speech tonight.
He almost got me glued to the goggle-box!
He seemed to have covered a lot of ground- from Education/Ageing population/CPF and HDB upgrading with government funds. He has become a very polished and confident orator, much like his father , MM Lee.
But I must confess- I was not giving the speech my complete and unadulterated attention.
You see, I was also surfing the TV channels and watching the Man City-Man United match at the same time. And I must have missed some salient points by the PM.
For instance, when mentioning that all HDB flats built earlier than 1980 would be upgraded, he must have mentioned Hougang and Potong Pasir.
Common sense dictates that since the flats in these 2 wards are amongst the oldest in Singapore, it must be their turn for the “sprucing up” seen all over that “Google earthesque” map of Singapore that PM referred to so frequently?
But , I did not hear the magic words of Hougang and Potong Pasir.
Ah, it must have been when I switched channels to watch Man City score the solitary goal against the now very desperate Man United.
Punggol 21-plus with its water feature seemed so fantastic and it must have mesmerized many of you. But did any of you hear the PM mention Hougang and Potong Pasir, eh? You must have.
Now that the match has ended and after licking my wounds and tending to my bruised ego ( esply as my other team Leeds United is now in League One with -9 points!) , I will surf the net for the complete and unabridged speech of the PM to see for I, me and myself the magic words of Hougang and Potong Pasir.
It must be somewhere in the transcript- the whole two and half hours’ worth of it. Right?
Dr. Huang Shoou Chyuan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)