President Nathan is aware that there are those who feel he has not done enough as President
By Nigel Tan
Chief Editor
Outgoing President S R Nathan, who has been criticised for having done nothing of note during his 12 years of office, issued a passionate defence of his record in an interview with The Straits Times. President Nathan has been compared unfavourably with his predecessor, President Ong Teng Cheong, largely because the latter was known for being vocal in his dealings with the People’s Action Party government which he was once a part of.
President Nathan, on the other hand, has been described as a “rubber stamp” President – but he insists that he was right in deferring to the government with regards to the use of his powers, including the power to grant Presidential pardons to those who have been sentenced to death.
It doesn’t help his case that he was twice elected unopposed, with the Government going to great lengths to prevent a contest in 2005. He was also endorsed by the PAP as its preferred candidate during both the 1999 and 2005 Presidential Elections.
President Nathan admits that he has not used any of his executive veto powers, and when his permission was sought by the Government to draw on past reserves in 2009, he duly gave his blessings. But he feels that the President should work together with the Government, and that those who feel otherwise “misunderstand the role of the President”.
Here are some excerpts of The Straits Times’ interview with President Nathan:
Is it an important the president to be seen as independent from the Government?
Not only you have to be, but you have to be seen as independent. It’s a statement of fact. Frankly, I can’t see, independence from what? As an individual I’m independent. I have my independent opinions, but I don’t have to beat the drums every day to say that I’m independent, like Singapore is independent. After 1965, we didn’t go around saying, ‘I’m independent’.
Some people seem to think that the office of the president should stand in opposition to the Government.
They misunderstand the role of the presidency. The executive power lies with the elected Parliament and the ministers who come out of Parliament. That’s the Government. Even the ability to change the Constitution doesn’t lie with the president. It lies with Parliament.
What do you make of the plans of potential candidates to produce statements of the state of the country’s financial health or have a state of the union address?
We’re not America. And the president is not an executive president. The executive function is that of the prime minister. It’s he who will make the statement. Budget sessions come up, they make a statement. It’s for the Government to do. It’s not for the president to do. We can pretend to do it, but I don’t think it’s right.
How often do you meet with the Council of Presidential Advisers?
I meet with the Council on a regular basis – at least four times a year – to keep ourselves updated with the latest development of the protected entities and Government initiatives. I also meet with the Council chairman regularly. Besides these regular meetings, I also initiate briefings by the relevant ministries, such as briefings by the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Trade and Industry, Monetary Authority of Singapore, the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation, Temasek Holdings and other fifth schedule entities such as the Housing and Development Board and Jurong Town Corporation, and not just during the financial crisis in 2008-2009.
Have you rejected the appointment of certain individuals?
No, so far none. I’m guided by the Council of Presidential Advisers. They interview the candidates and they come up with a consensus. So far, we have had no reason to do that.
Have you had to make difficult decisions to do with the Internal Security Act, Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau investigations, or the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act?
Even if I had, I couldn’t tell you because I’ve taken the oath of secrecy.
Was there any point during your presidency that you felt frustrated?
No, I didn’t. I engaged them. They showed deference to me. And whenever I wanted something, apart from the Cabinet papers that kept me abreast of what was going on, what policy was being contemplated and so on, they kept me abreast. And I met the Prime Minister from time to time. I met the Finance Minister from time to time. I met other ministers too.
Do you meet regularly with the Prime Minister?
Yes. And also with Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong. We have lunches every alternate month. He hosts one and I host one. And that’s the occasion when we are able to exchange views, talk about things, things current.
A lot of what you do is behind the scenes. Do you think that contributes to a lack of understanding as to what the office of the president is?
I don’t believe that the vast majority of Singaporeans have a lack of understanding. For most of them, as long as the institution is there, it’s respected, and if the institution hasn’t done something harmful to them, they take it in the strides of each day.
My life in the presidency is somewhat reserved. I cannot go and mingle in the way the politicians do – Meet-the-People Sessions and so on. So my sense of judgment is essentially my feel of things, from what I read, from what I hear from people, from what I know. For the people, the presidency is an institution, it is there, it symbolises them.
Can you tell us three things that you now know about the presidency or Singapore that you didn’t 12 years ago?
Number one, I know the extent to which our brand name Singapore is pervasive, respected and much admired in the world in world affairs. Secondly, the public has acknowledged the position of the presidency as something that’s high in their esteem. It is not distant, it is not imperial. People are comfortable with the position, and I think they respect it, which I do not think was so publicly known at that time. But having been in it, I can feel it. I can say, look, they have acknowledged you. The third is, I have the satisfaction of making a contribution at the end of my career without any blemish, to make my exit.
What has given you the most satisfaction?
The way I’ve been accepted by people of all races, of all strata of society, of all persuasions, who have embraced me and accepted me as their President. I’ve tried to behave in a way not to let them down either locally or internationally. I’ve tried to preserve in some ways the aura of the presidency which must be kept because it’s an institution above politics.
How would you like your presidency to be remembered?
I’ve done the best I can. If it’s good enough for some people, fine. If it’s not good enough for some people, and there will always be noise in the environment, you can’t stop it. You don’t do it because you want to leave a legacy. You do the best you can.
–
The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club
I met Mr Nathan at this year’s National Day Dinner at the Istana. I observed him closly…. he did not smile (except to the few he know), was robotic in his interaction with the guest and hardly had a word for people like us who waited for him. He was unengaging and I thought to myself why do they call him the People’s President..We will wait for his book and judge him. At the other end of the spectrum on this National Day Dinner was the PM who was vibrant and engaging and took time to speak to all of us….he made my day!
Dr Tony Tan would do a better job than President S R Nathan with his experience. Vote for Dr Tony Tan for President!
Do you sincerely believe that PAP has 60.1% of the votes.
I think LKY and BG lhl know roughly the exact % they would get under FREE & FAIR conditions.
Yes,WE have always been FREE<but not FAIR.
It is getting fairer now thanks to Bill Gates & Goggle,etc
If you cannot undrerstand the situation,too bad.Sorry forv thinking differently from you
To all the radicalised extremists on this forum, how is it that you claim to support “democracy” while also making ridiculous personal attacks whenever anyone else offers a view different from yours?
Anyone who supports and appreciates the good things that the government has done is automatically a “mole”, “internet brigade” or paid by the PAP?
You guys don’t realise how foolish you look. By your logic, 60.1% of the whole country is working for the PAP?
Nani…Nani…
Not all 60.1%, but a high probability that you and a few others in TOC. Maybe even working foolishly for no renumeration.
Your most venerated master also says he is democratic, but also make vicious personal attacks on others in and outside parliament. You emulated your master well in this respect too. Go read your own posting.
And just who is my so-called “master”?
Just because I have a different view from you, it means that I am controlled by an invisible force? It means that I am “working” for someone (whether paid or not?) I challenge you to name who it is that I am being controlled by or working for? You have no evidence to back up your claim. Has it actually occurred to you that I might be expressing my personal opinion here just like you? If not, shall I also say that you are controlled by some invisible “masters”, namely the opposition parties? After all, we have already seen that the opposition parties are not averse to using puppets or moles. A good example of one is Tan Jee Say.
Nani…Nani…
So according to you Mr. Tan Jee Say is a puppet and a mole.
And in your original post in this topic you said of forumers “radicalised extremists….making ridiculous personal attacks whenever anyone else offers a view different from yours.?” As I said before, go read your own post.
You also, in the same breath, said “Anyone who supports and appreciates the good things that the government has done is automatically a “mole”, “internet brigade” or paid by the PAP?” So Mr Tan J S cannot have his own appreciation and conviction of Singapore’s situation? He is a to you “a mole and a puppet”? Again I say go read your own ranting and see how ridiculous you are.
@Nani,
You are entitled to your views just like everyone else on this board. There is no question about that. However, others have conceded that the PAP policies may have worked in the past when the other senior founding members of the PAP were in place, and are also prepared to debate the merits or otherwise of the current PAP policies and direction that is now hampering the socioeconomic development of our country. You on the other hand, in all your posts, appear only propagate and justify the PAP stand that this is the only way forward for Singapore. You fail to produce even a single argument that is balanced in any shape or form. While you accuse others on this forum of badgering and complaining against the PAP regardless of what they have done for Singapore, it is ironic that you do the very same thing when it comes to the alternative views, suggestions etc. of the opposition parties and other forum members. You simply dismiss everything that others put forward, and sweep every poor policy making of the PAP under the rug. Yet, you proclaim that you do not agree 100% with everything that the PAP does.
Despite the ‘noises’ over the appointments at Temasek Holdings and the chairman of GIC. President Nathan, who had the veto power to these appt., chose to remain silent. Be it that he acquiesce to these appt., but as the ‘people’s president’. IMHO he should express publicly the reasons for his approval, since there were ‘noises’. By remaining silence, he is not fulfilling his responsibility to the people.
Pingback: Daily SG: 10 Aug 2011 « The Singapore Daily
Mr Nathan, I do not think that singaporeans want you to be ‘always’ opposing the PAP like the oppostion parties.
What we need is for you to speak up & look after our interests – is this impossible & asking too much of you to even do this bit for the people?
All we see & hear of you in the past 144 mths are only high praises & cheers on everything the PAP did. You’re completely blinded to the sufferings of the people.
Or was it that you don’t care (if you’d heard the sufferings), becos it’s not what the PAP instructed you to do (i.e. speak up for the people).
Please go enjoy your $million$ & do stay out of sight & hope never to hear from you ever again.
Guys let just ignore Nani like the troll that he is. Its just sad that some people just follow and accept blindly every single thing the PAP and mainstream media says.
@Nathan Fan. Our reserve is over $1 trillion. Can the Nathan whose done his best please confirm this??
The sooner Nathan leaves, the better.
He is really a good for nothing.
My only regret is that he lacks the GUTS to contest in the Presidential Election.
He would have become the first presidential election candidate in SG history to lose his deposit. He should have contested. Then we can see how he justify and defend after losing his deposit. The embarrassment alone will be worth $4.2 million.
To be honest, it is not easy to do President Nathan’s job.
He has had to work hard behind the scenes and to refrain from doing anything unconstitutional. Even if he disagrees, he has to so quietly in order to preserve the dignity of his office. It is not an easy job. He has done well in terms of complementing, supporting and working alongside the government.
President Ong unfortunately made some mistakes during his tenure that resulted in him being disgraced later on. He was a formidable minister and excellent politician, but he was simply not cut out for the role of President (which requires a more dignified, non-partisan approach). I hope that the next President, whoever he may be, follows the positive example that President S R Nathan has set.
Oh give us a break you prick. You called President Ong a disgrace!!! You piece of shit – you yourself is an unforgiveable ass who do nothing but worship blindly the garment on your home pedestal – or perhaps you are paid so well to do this that you have to resort to undermining our revered ex President Ong. I strongly urge Stay Club to post Nani this recent remark on a brand new page so that all who visit this web can flame him like nobody business. Please put it on Temasek site too. Unfucking believable. Its bad enough that we see all your nonsensical post but calling President Ong disgrace is simply too much.
Good grief…..You just don’t give up do you? Whatever gave you the idea that the ceremonial role of the Presidency is not an easy job to do? Perhaps you’re right, it wasn’t an easy job to do and he took the easy way out – he didn’t do it! President Ong Teng Cheong tried to do the right which didn’t sit too well with the cabinet. The last thing Singapore needs right now is a repeat performance of President SR Nathan example.
James, calm down. You are jumping up and down like a monkey. I did not say that President Ong Teng Cheong was a disgrace. I said that he was “disgraced later on” i.e. he was the first president not to be given a state funeral. This certainly qualifies as being “disgraced”, doesn’t it? He did not disgrace himself, but he did make mistakes. As a result of his mistakes, others chose to penalize him, which resulted in him being disgraced. Does this make things clearer now? You can sit down now. The sky is not going to fall. And you need to wash your mouth clean using soap.
Nani,
Your this post reveals your ignorance. The family of the late president Ong Teng Cheong declined a state funeral not that he was refused one. His funeral was one of the most dignified I had ever attended. Mind you, most cabinet members were there to pay their respect. Just because he exercised his informed dissent it does mean he was disgraced. Where did you get your facts from?
Nani,
Your this post reveals your ignorance. The family of the late president Ong Teng Cheong declined a state funeral not that he was refused one. His funeral was one of the most dignified I had ever attended. Mind you, most cabinet members were there to pay their respect. Just because he exercised his informed dissent it does NOT mean he was disgraced. Where did you get your facts from?
@Liz,
Nani doesn’t have any facts…that’s the problem! He is only interested in twisting basic facts to fit his own delusional perception.
M Bellagio: on the other hand, how do you know that the job of President is an easy one to do? Have you been a President before? Or perhaps you have friends who are former Presidents? Until you can say for sure that you have first-hand experience of the job, you can’t decide whether or not it’s ‘easy’. Your haughty attitude is in need of adjustment. I am just stating my belief that the job of President is a tricky, delicate and difficult one. I gather that you dislike President Nathan. However, is it really reasonable for you to say that he did not do his job? Why not wait until his book comes out, then you can see his account of what he did or did not do. Unfortunately, some people refuse to see reason and already have their minds made up. Anything associated with the PAP-led establishment is evil (even if they are not actually associated with the PAP itself). Anything that goes against the establishment is good. This is what I mean when I say that some people in Singapore have become extremists and radicals. This is dangerous.
Reading History brings along Factual Interpretation. Late President Ong attempted to do his job as stipulated ironically by his colleagues who then hindered his attempts when it became too potentially nuclear for them to handle the face-losing and other cans of unopened worms they potentially had to face. He simply tried to do his job as a Head of State who was accountable for our reserves, not a Beheaded one like Nathan who was obviously following orders to keep his trap shut for an astounding 12 years. What Pres Ong did caught everyone’s attention and drew Respect. Ignorance is dangerous. Nani….don’t put yourself in harm’s way.
@Nani,
You are way off the course in deliberating in this forum. You seem to lack an objective view in everything you say. The ceremonial Presidency is neither a complicated job nor is it an easy one in that an elected president has to take an independent stand on how he looks out for the citizens’ sentiments on the ground. He also needs to bring to the fore any issues relating to the country’s assets that are clouded in a lack of transparency. This is what the late former President Ong Teng Cheong did and which you invariably labeled as “mistakes”.
As for your assertion that I dislike SR Nathan – well you can’t be further from the truth. In my view he is a good bureaucrat but doesn’t fit the role of the Presidency. I like the man but not the work he did as a President. Finally, as to the topic of being haughty, really! It is you who has been expounding the merits of elitism all along on this board not me. Why not take a poll here and find out as to who has been haughty.
Agreed Bellagio,
Nani also controls the silent majority.
Its no easy doing his job? My foot! Since when has he really been doing his job? I can name 1001 issues he could have raise with the Govt but he didn’t
Instead all we hear is his high praises for the PAP and understandably so since they were the ones who put him there against the people’s wishes in the first place. In short, he is nothing but a Govt stooge as many have seen him to be.
It s really a great injustice to Ong Teng Cheong for you to speak so ill about him when he even clashed with his former colleagues in Govt just so he could uphold the oath of his office for the people
Please point out WHERE I “spoke ill” of President Ong?
I said that he was an astute politician. I said that he made some mistakes while serving as President. Everyone has made mistakes including you and me. If not, we would not be human. As a result of his mistakes, he was “punished” by being denied a state funeral, but that again is normal because every single person in the world has to account for his mistakes. Even PM Lee had to account for his mistakes by apologizing to the entire country, that was his “punishment”. So President Ong made some errors and was made to account for them, resulting in him being disgraced. This is just a factual statement. I never spoke ill of him. I do not think that he himself is a disgrace. However, President Devan Nair was a disgrace because he totally embarrassed himself and his country.
Mistakes… What mistakes? By upholding his oath of office to check on the PAP government? Or what mistakes did you have in mind?
It seems you are not reading the response… @ Liz is clearly stating that President Ong Tenfold Cheong’s family refused the state funeral, not like others who are nothing but have to lay in state at the istana? Afraid nobody know who she is? A piece of nothing
nani, it is you who are a disgrace! If Devan Nair had been such a disgrace why did the PAP hold that memorial service for him? Go and review the movie clips, your god LKY is even seen dabbing his eyes because in paying his last respects to his erstwhile colleague he is reminded of his own mortality.
Do a straw poll to find out who is the most and least popular President of Singapore
What he meant was the president should work for the government because they are his pay master. No need to twist around the words.
All these questions are so irritatingly irrelevant. How much is the reserve???
There’re few questions that I think an open and democratic society of a first world country should have :
–1) Why must his action on ISA or Religious Harmony Act be sworn under oath of secrecy? I can understand about the CPIB but why can’t he share the other two? I think is important that Singaporeans can learn about such existence, and thereby appreciate our history or President’s role better. Hiding behind the constitution and oath of secrecy only serve to aggravate the misunderstanding more.
2) “For most of them, as long as the institution is there, it’s respected, and if the institution hasn’t done something harmful to them, they take it in the strides of each day.” I disagree with his assessment here. That might have been the impression & case prior to the GE and post GE, the reality is different. For him to say that statement only goes to show how out-of-touch he was with the society’s sentiments. It’s no wonder he has approved the Ministers’ salaries without an eye bat.
3) “I’ve tried to preserve in some ways the aura of the presidency which must be kept because it’s an institution above politics.”
Again, this statement shows another aspect of him being out of touch with the ground. The aura he has preserve is the “mysterious & invisible” president that can only be seen , but not heard. I feel sorry he failed to recognized and acknowledged that, but I suppose that’s because he has been “cocooned” by the constitution and hemmed in by the council..which he just readily accept. I am disappointed he has not questioned or champion certain things such as our Reserves/CPF for more transparency for example.
4) If it’s good enough for some people, fine. If it’s not good enough for some people, and there will always be noise in the environment, you can’t stop it.
I suppose in the end, since he was not elected by the people, is not surprising that he didn’t feel he owes them any explanation. Even some are unsatisfied, so be it kind of attitude. Granted you can’t please everybody, but in the end, the public view of him is that he has waste 12 yrs of the Presidency where there were great opportunity for him to achieve even more. Then again, since SPH and the Cabinet/PM are the ones that’re giving him his report card , what do you expect – it can only be a A+ right?
I am tired of all these bs. Lets just do away with the presidency all together.
If the EP is there only to shake hands, cut ribbon for shopping mall opening, VIP the silly Star Awards and chair fund raising activities. Our overpaid ministers can split the “work” amongst them. Then again, it may be cheaper to just buy that robot from Japan to do all these “work”.
Overpaid . I think that’s called dealing with corruption
Haha, Nathan is trying to clutch at straws. He knows that he is the most unpopular SG president in history and that history will remember him as a useless clown and crony.
The sooner he leaves office the better. In fact, it pisses me off that the election is to be held after NDP because it only means that he gets one final chance to inspect the NDP parade.
Right on! What is the mark of his presidency? His quiet unremarkableness. And the price is some 32 million dollars. Oops!