A Post from Desmond Mao

I read a post on Facebook by Desmond Mao and I thought it would be great to put up here.
It is brilliantly balanced and draws out the salient points Aljunied voters need to consider. Thank you Desmond.

Its 2 May 2011 at 1am and my mind is in a whirlpool.

Being a 29 year old voter from Aljunied GRC, I find myself in the eye of the storm. This GRC has been described as the frontline of battle in this election. Since the start of election campaigning, the fight for this GRC has dominated the front pages of the Straits Times, testament to the fear within the ruling party that this 6-member GRC may fall into the opposition hands.

Balanced views on the GE are hard to find. Mainstream media is biased towards the PAP, much of social media seems heavily biased towards the WP. Recognising that everyone has their bias and prejudices (including me), this long-winded essay is my attempt at distilling my thoughts on what's at stake for Aljunied voters.

I attended the 1st 2 WP rallies at Hougang and Serangoon stadium and went home amazed yet disturbed. WP rallies are a phenomenon in this country. No other event in recent history can bring people from all races, young and old, rich and poor, English and non-English speakers together to stand like packed sardines in one place. Its amazing (and ironic) that politics has the potential to be both a unifying and divisive force in society.

The disturbing part stemmed from the many angry voices from the audience. Multitudes of people seemed to bear a grudge against the ruling party and the rally afforded a wonderful opportunity to let rip at them. The failures of the PAP were highlighted time and time again, playing to the destructive nature of the mob. As I sat pondering on how these 'inept' PAP ministers should be held accountable, an acute sense of my own fallibilities overwhelmed me.

As a medical doctor in a public hospital, I have made my fair share of errors (some quite horrendous). By the mercies of God, none of them resulted in fatal outcomes to my patients. After explanations and apologies, much grace has been extended to me, giving me an opportunity to learn from my mistakes and to continue serving.

Even the best of us makes mistakes. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Decades of good governance has caused the citizens to come to expect perfection from our Ministers. Sure, we had 2 unforeseen floods, a HDB housing issue, the YOG overran the budget and a man with a limp escaped from prison. Are not Ministers but mere mortals with blind spots like the rest of us? Can they foretell the future? While we need accountability, do we want to foster a culture where absolutely no mistakes are tolerated?

Dark clouds are in the horizon for Singapore. Both the leaders of the country and the enlightened members of the opposition know it. Singapore faces, among many problems, a rapidly aging population. The baby boomers are starting to retire. Soon our population would be like that of Japan, where a rapidly shrinking workforce would have to bear the escalating burdens of caring for young and old. As a nation, we have collectively come to expect the government to eradicate all problems in this country and continue to provide us with an increase in our quality of life.

Come on! Get real! There will always be poor people in amongst us who will fall through the cracks. Even with the best systems in place, there will be a certain level of injustice because the system is thought of and run by human beings! I am of the opinion that the PAP has already performed admirably. Would the opposition do any better? I seriously doubt it.

The PAP of today is clean, has no sex scandals, and makes generally good policies for Singapore. I believe their biggest problems lie with their failure in moderating the expectations of Singaporeans, and their desire to overwhelmingly dominate parliament at all cost.

Is our growth in GDP even sustainable? Is it the government's responsibility to ensure that you get your pay rise, your choice home, your cheap healthcare, that your child goes to your choice school, your comfortable transportation and the list goes on. Its ludicrous to read certain complaint letters in the forum pages. Some Singaporeans have no shame in the things they complain about. The frequent refrain is 'what is the gah-men going to do about this?' Its sad that this country has bred so many 'spoilt brats' who have come to depend on the government to meet their every need. The replies from certain ministries is even more laughable. At times, in a bid to retain the popular vote, the PAP and the civil service have chosen instead to upset the natural order of things by bending over backwards to accede to unreasonable requests.

Can the government continue to satisfy the dreams, aspirations and demands of each generation? Human beings have an insatiable appetite for discontentment. The PAP's present method of pleasing the electorate with goodies and increased efficiency of the civil service would only serve to temporarily appease the electorate rather than truly build this nation.

What then do the people really want? Mr Chiam See Tong and Mr Low Thia Kiang have both held on to their SMCs despite having vastly less resources compared to the PAP and their candidates. Why is that so?
Both men are capable, extremely dedicated leaders, and men of integrity. People recognise that and respect them for it. Thus despite PAP's Eric Low describing Hougang as a 'slum', I have no doubt that should Mr Low have stood in Hougang SMC, Mr Eric Low wouldn't have had a sliver of a chance this election. The PAP needs to realise that while Singaporeans do want to improve their lot, the majority are not materialistic people who vote solely based on selfish reasons. Like the American voters who propelled Barack Obama from a nobody to President of the United States, Singaporeans are on the lookout for a leader who understands and care for the people, a leader whom we can rally around to achieve our collective dream. Mr Chiam and Mr Low are 2 such leaders. While the people of their respective constituencies received much less than their richer neighbours, Potong Pasir and Hougang continued to vote in their MPs election after election, because they loved their leaders, and their leaders loved them.

Unfortunately, the PAP no longer inspires such devotion from the electorate.

To me, the biggest factor is the salary of a Minister. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against paying someone his fair wage. Everyone needs to eat and put food on the table for his family. The issue is that such great amounts of money attract the wrong candidates and corrupt the calling to serve the people. At the risk of being called naive, I believe that politics is much like the noble professions of teaching, doctoring and nursing, and the clergy. Wasn't it the late Dr Goh Keng Swee that told fresh candidates joining the PAP that they were joining a 'holy order'?

The excuse given by the PAP is that if we don't pay top dollar, they would have trouble recruiting top-notched candidates. Why has this happened? Has the PAP ceased to inspire good people to join its ranks and therefore needs to use the lure of money? If part of the motivation to join the PAP is because of the high salary, how willing would these Ministers/MPs be to serve in a difficult time (eg war, economic collapse) when Singapore isn't able to pay them as much? Even if they had pure, idealistic motives of serving this country, the very scale of their salaries breeds cynicism amongst the electorate. Every time this issue is brought up, the moral authority of the PAP to govern is eroded. My personal view is that the salaries of the ministers should be decided by an independent President. And the salary of the President should be a factor of the median income of the average working Singaporean. But this proposal is a discussion for another day.

The PAP's current practice of parachuting top-notched technocrats from the civil service, SAF and private sector into ministerial positions, through the GRC system, is a perculiar one which may not stand the test of time. No one doubts that these technocrats are extremely smart, capable people who are probably men of integrity with a proven track record. They would probably make good permanent secretaries! Yet, these factors in themselves, would be inadequate to consider them good politicians.

A good politician is NOT an extension of the civil service. Rather, a good politician understands and is able to inspire and rally the electorate into following him in his decisions, even if it means sacrificing our lives to protect this country. I find it laughable that we are told that the 4th PM of Singapore may be amongst the new candidates, but this supposed 4th PM is going to ride into Parliament on the tailcoats of a heavyweight. This brings me to my next point.

I believe in the GRC system. After 45 years of independence, I choose to believe that we have deepened our bonds as Singaporeans. Still, like it or not, many today still vote based on one's race, religion and language. To ensure minority representation, the GRC is a necessity.

As with any other well-intentioned idea, the devil is in the details. I disagree with manner of GRC implementation on three counts.
Firstly, why do we need such a big GRC? Wouldn't a 3-4 member GRC suffice to ensure minority representation?
Secondly, shouldn't new PAP candidates be given the opportunity to prove their own worth by running in SMCs? While there may be issues that arise in filling all SMCs with new candidates (less likely to field a minority candidate in an SMC), only 2 out 11 SMCs have new candidates (Hougang and Potong Pasir). With newly carved out SMCs, this is the best election to allow new candidates to receive a baptism of fire and allow them to have the people's mandate. The GRC system is now being used by the PAP to allow weak candidates to get into parliament. This is an abuse of the original intent of the GRC system that cannot be good for Singapore.
Thirdly, the frequent re-drawing of GRC boundaries (especially in Aljunied) has served to increase the popular belief that PAP does not play fair.

I belong to a segment of voters from Aljunied who love Singapore and are tired of the politics of negativity. We are tired of the opposition opposing for its own sake. We are tired of angry people venting nonsensically at a government who cannot be responsible for all their troubles. We are tired of the PAP's pettiness in denying opposition wards their full rights as citizens who pay taxes and serve NS. We are tired of unfair play by the PAP in manipulating the system for self-preservation of the party. We are tired of the scare-mongering by the PAP and WP that the fall of a GRC into either party would lead to a crippled, partisan government or a total collapse of the opposition.

We're better than that.

There are several issues that I wish to address:
1) The WP needs to reveal its plan for Aljunied GRC
I'm not sure why the party is keeping mum about this issue. It could be because they are unsure of the amount of funds they would receive to run the town council etc... but I'm just speculating. Or *shudder*, there is NO plan for Aljunied?
I encourage Mr Low to tell us your plans and anticipated difficulties in running this GRC? Surely we as voters have a right to know. Surely we as voters would make allowances for your parties' performance should there be problems from underhanded play from the ruling party!

2) Aljunied will NOT become a desolate desert after 5 years
Mr Low TK and Ms Sylvia Lim are also people with track records. Please stop treating Aljunied voters in such a condescending manner. Having said that, I still retain a whole lot of respect for you MM Lee.

3) The PAP will still win a 2/3s majority in this election and Parliament will not be crippled
4) There is absolutely nothing wrong if the WP ends up winning more GRCs in the next election or sets up the government one day
If WP do win Aljunied GRC and do such a good job both in Aljunied and in Parliament, what's to keep them for winning more GRCs in the next election? This can only bode well for Singapore. Naturally, the people of Singapore need to be discerning in deciding if the WP candidates have been constructive rather than destructive in Parliament and evaluate their performance based on that. A little more debate in Parliament never hurt anyone and may just be the catalyst to revive interest in good people joining the PAP again.
Thanks for making it to the end of this long rant from me. I welcome any feedback although I may choose not to reply. If I have offended you in any way, please accept my apologies.