PAP MP Charles Chong admitted that the PAP was having to field "second and third-tier candidates" since the 2006 General Election

In yet another revelation following the release of classified US diplomatic cables by anti-secrecy site Wikileaks, it seems that the PAP was having difficulties recruiting candidates since as far back as the 2006 General Election. PAP MP Charles Chong revealed to US officials that the PAP had failed to recruit a number of “high flying” business leaders, and was forced to field “second and third-tier candidates to fill out its ticket”.

The problem appears to be even more apparent now, judging from the slate of PAP candidates that was fielded in the 2011 General Election. Only six out of 24 new candidates were from the private sector, including Ms Tin Pei Ling, who is married to the Principal Private Secretary of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. The 2011 slate has been regarded as one of the weakest fielded by the PAP in recent history, with PM Lee even admitting that the ruling party was finding it difficult to recruit new members because they did not want to take on the “risks” of entering politics.

In contrast, opposition parties were able to recruit the type of candidates that the PAP would traditionally describe as being “high flyers” from both the private and public sectors – including top lawyer and current MP Chen Show Mao (Workers’ Party) and former scholar and civil servant Tan Jee Say (Singapore Democratic Party).

Mr Chong seems also to have implictly admitted that the GRC system serves to insulate new and untested candidates from tough electoral battles, allowing them to hide behind experienced veterans such as former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong. While this is an open secret as far as most Singaporeans are concerned, the PAP continues to insist that the GRC system is meant to ensure minority representation in Parliament.

The full text of the leaked cable was as follows:

C O N F I D E N T I A L 

SIPDIS 

SIPDIS 

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/26/2016
TAGS: PGOV ECON SN
SUBJECT: SINGAPORE ELECTION: OPPOSITION TO MAKE A RACE OF IT 

REF: A. SINGAPORE 1326
     ¶B. SINGAPORE 1289 

Classified By: EP Counselor Laurent Charbonnet.  Reasons 1.4 (b)(d) 

¶1. (C) Summary: For the first time since 1988, the opposition
parties will contest more than half of the seats for
parliament in the May 6 general election, denying the ruling
People's Action Party (PAP) an automatic majority on
nomination day.  The economy and local issues will dominate
the nine-day election campaign and the PAP will benefit from
a booming economy and generous handouts in the recently
enacted budget.  Despite media hype about how "breathless"
one should be about the PAP's 24 new MP candidates, they are
a mixed lot.  Some are of ministerial caliber, but others
were drawn from the second or third tier, noted one PAP MP.
The opposition parties, especially the Workers' Party, have
put together a better set of candidates than in the past --
but can realistically hope only to begin the process of
improving their public image.  End Summary. 

An Actual Contest
----------------- 

¶2. (SBU) For the first time since 1988, the opposition
parties will contest more than half of the seats for
parliament in the May 6 general election.  At the April 27
nomination deadline, the opposition put forward 47 candidates
for the 84 seats in parliament.  In the last three general
elections, the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) was
automatically returned to power on nomination day as more
than half of its candidates won "walkovers" when the
opposition failed to field an opponent.  In addition, this
year, the Workers' Party (WP) decided to run a slate in Prime
Minister Lee Hsien Loong's electoral district -- giving the
PM his first electoral challenge in 18 years.  Institute of
Policy Studies Research Fellow Jeanne Conceicao characterized
it as a "suicide mission" for the WP slate, but should reduce
the time the PM can spend campaigning outside his district. 

All Politics is Local
--------------------- 

¶3. (SBU) The economy and local matters will be the central
issues in the nine-day election campaign.  The PAP will
benefit from the strong state of the economy, which has been
booming for the last few years.  Economic growth in 2005
exceeded 6 percent and should be 4-6 percent this year.
Furthermore, unemployment has fallen to a four-year low of
2.5 percent.  Nevertheless, Singapore faces growing income
inequality with the bottom 20 percent of households suffering
a real decline in income.  Opposition parties plan to focus
on this issue as well as on the rising cost of living in
general, Singapore People's Party (SPP) Chairman Sin Kek Tong
told us.  To deal with this, the PAP approved a government
budget for this year that included a S$2.6 billion giveaway
to voters -- dubbed the "Progress Package."  Singaporeans
will receive hundreds of dollars each and more money will be
targeted for the elderly and working poor.  The payouts are
timed for May 1, just five days before the election. 

¶4. (U) The vast majority of Singaporeans live in
government-built apartments that they buy.  Over the last six
months, the PAP government has rolled out plans for housing
estate upgrades and new amenities in many key districts.  The
two opposition districts have generally been last in line for
any such upgrades.  For example, Foreign Minister Yeo's
electoral district received more than five times as much
grant money on a per-household basis than WP MP Low Thia
Khiang's, according to press reports.  The PAP has promised
to give the opposition wards far more assistance if they
elect PAP candidates this time. 

¶5. (C) One concern for the PAP is a decline in the
maintenance standards in the housing estates, PAP MP Charles
Chong told us.  In order to create more jobs for
lower-skilled Singaporeans, the local town councils have had
to replace cheaper foreign labor with more expensive
Singaporeans to do the cleaning, painting, and repair work. 

PAP "Self-Renewal"
------------------ 

¶6. (C) The new group of 24 PAP MP candidates has benefited
from extensive and glowing media coverage starting well 

SINGAPORE 00001379  002 OF 002 

before the announcement of the election date, while
opposition candidates have been given cursory attention.
Despite the media hype and the fact that they still outshine
the opposition, the new PAP MP candidates are a mixed lot.  A
few of them look like they have ministerial potential,
notably former Chief of Navy Lui Tuck Yew and former
International Enterprises of Singapore CEO Lee Yi Shyan.
Some of the others we have met look quite weak, with limited
political skills or policy experience.  It looks as if the
PAP was trying to meet an overall profile -- so many
community activists, so many union officials, a few business
figures, commented Conceicao. 

¶7. (C) PAP MP Chong admitted that the party had not succeeded
in recruiting a number of "high-flying" business leaders to
run.  In fact, the party had to reach down to some of its
second and third tier candidates to fill out its ticket.
Those new candidates will all run in the Group Representative
Constituencies (GRCs) helmed by higher profile ministers --
for example, four of them will run in Senior Minister Goh
Chok Tong's uncontested district.  Overall, the opposition
will compete in only 7 of the 14 GRCs. 

Opposition Hopes
---------------- 

¶8. (SBU) The opposition parties, especially the Workers
Party, have put together a better set of candidates than in
the past -- with more education and professional
qualifications.  Running on their resumes has long been a
foundation of PAP campaigning, but it has acknowledged that
the WP has done a better recruiting job this time.  In what
will undoubtedly be one of the most watched districts, the WP
Chairman Sylvia Lim is leading a slate against Foreign
Minister George Yeo in the Aljunied GRC.  Although several
political observers say FM Yeo's frequent travels have
affected his support at the grassroots level, the WP slate
looks doomed. 

¶9. (C) Most opposition leaders are not sanguine about their
chances this year.  Non-Constituency MP Steven Chia said he
will likely abandon politics if he loses again.  SPP Chairman
Sin told us he thinks the PAP might win a clean sweep of all
84 seats.  Dr. Chee Soon Juan's Singapore Democratic Party
(SDP) appears on the verge of collapse (Ref A.)  The
heavy-handed defamation suit brought by PM Lee and Minister
Mentor Lee Kuan Yew against the SDP and the printer of its
newspaper has fractured the party's leadership.  It is
unclear if the SDP will even be able to print campaign
posters and flyers for the election after its part-time
printer (and part-time taxi driver) promised to not do any
work for them when he settled with the PM and MM. 

¶10. (C) The opposition should focus on changing the public's
impression of them, observed National University of Singapore
(NUS) Professor Kenneth Tan.  Opposition politicians have a
reputation for being "clowns" or pursuing "vendettas" against
the PAP.  By demonstrating their professionalism this time,
the opposition could lay the groundwork for electoral gains
down the road. 

¶11. (C) Comment: The PAP enters the campaign period confident
of victory.  At the same time, it is eager to talk down
expectations for its final vote total -- to ensure that PM
Lee is seen as securing a mandate -- and continues to put
forth that 65 percent of the popular vote is a stirring
victory.  Winning a GRC would be a major breakthrough for the
opposition, but remains a long shot.  A more realistic goal
would be to win two or three seats and leave the voters with
a more positive impression.  End Comment.
HERBOLD

Former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew is alleged to have described Islam as a 'venomous' religion in discussions with US officials

In yet another shocking revelation following the release of leaked US diplomatic cables by anti-secrecy website Wikileaks, it has been disclosed that former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew described Islam as a “venomous” religion in a private discussion with United States Congressman Charles B. Rangel in 2005.

Mr Lee, who was then holding the cabinet-level position of Minister Mentor, said that Islamic terrorists would continue to use violence until it could be proven that their methods would not succeed. His views seemed to be in contrast to those of former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, who was at the time serving as Senior Minister in the Prime Minister’s office. Mr Goh was of the view that Islam and democracy were “compatible”.

Mr Lee made headlines earlier this year for his remarks on the Malay-Muslim community in Singapore in his book, Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going. In the book, Mr Lee accused Malay-Muslims of not trying hard enough to integrate into society. He said that Singapore has managed to assimilate the various races and ethnic groups over the years, with the exception of Malay-Muslims because of their insistence on adhering to their own traditional practices.

After being lambasted by the general public, Mr Lee was later forced to admit that his views were outdated and issue a statement saying that he “stood corrected”.

The full text of the leaked cable was as follows:

C O N F I D E N T I A L
SIPDIS 

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/06/2015
TAGS: PGOV PREL ECON SN
SUBJECT: VISIT BY SEN. CLINTON TO SINGAPORE (JULY 5-7) 

Classified By: Amb. Franklin L. Lavin.  Reasons 1.4 (b)(d) 

¶1. (C) Summary: Singapore's senior leadership discussed the
challenges of combating Islamic terrorism, the need for
moderate Muslims to speak out, and the importance of success
in Iraq in meetings with visiting Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
(D-NY).  GOS leaders told the Senator that cross-Strait
relations were calmer than last year.  While China did not
want a collision with the United States, it could not allow
Taiwan to pursue independence.  At the same time, they urged
the United States to continue to play a major role in Asia
since it was the only country capable of balancing China's
rising power.  Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong encouraged the
U.S. military to be more engaged with its regional
counterparts.  PM Lee also reviewed Singapore's border
controls and immigration policies.  End Summary. 

¶2. (U) Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) visited Singapore
from July 5-7.  She was accompanied by staff member Huma
Abedin.  The Senator met with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan
Yew on July 5.  Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) also participated
in the three meetings. 

Islamic Radicalism and Iraq
--------------------------- 

¶3. (C) The problem of Islamic terrorism would not be easily
extirpated, observed MM Lee.  While Muslims in Southeast Asia
were traditionally moderate and tolerant, they had been
affected by radicalism emanating from Middle East and the
spread of wahhabism from Saudi Arabia.  Singapore's Muslim
leaders were rational and educated in English and the GOS
kept a limit on madrassah-based education.  He stressed that
moderate Muslims had to be encouraged to stand up and speak
out against radicalism.  They needed confidence that they
could win.  We could get to the tipping point, noted MM Lee,
but he didn't know how long it would take. 

¶4. (C) MM Lee said Islamic terrorists would continue to use
violence until shown that their methods would not succeed.
If they were successful in Iraq, they would try to topple
secular governments in other countries, such as Indonesia.
PM Lee said Singapore supported U.S. efforts in Iraq; it was
important to get the Iraqi government working, with a
security force that could take over from U.S. forces and fend
for itself. 

¶5. (C) Asked by Rep. Rangel how organized terrorists were
internationally, MM Lee responded that orthodox Islam was a
powerful force capable of recruiting volunteers for terrorist
groups.  He noted Singapore's experience in 2001 and 2002 in
dealing with Jemaah Islamiyah's terrorist plots in Singapore
and characterized Islam as a "venomous religion." 

Democracy and Islam
------------------- 

¶6. (C) SM Goh told the Senator that democracy and Islam were
compatible.  It was necessary, however, to first carry out
economic and social reforms to prepare the ground for
democracy -- such as empowering women and encouraging
education.  Democracy was not just elections.  He noted that
some Middle Eastern countries had been looking at Singapore
as a model for economic development.  Many of these countries
also preferred the "Singapore model" of democracy to that of
the United States, given the ruling People's Action Party's
consistent electoral success.  MM Lee questioned the wisdom
of pushing hard for greater democracy in Egypt.  He urged a
more gradual political opening to avoid ending up with a
government like in Iran.  Do not be dewy-eyed about the
situation, he admonished, since one man, one vote would put
the radicals in charge of Egypt. 

Cross-Strait Relations
---------------------- 

¶7. (C) SM Goh commented that cross-Strait relations were
calmer than last year, due to the joint U.S.-Japan security
statement in February, China's Anti-Secession Law, and the
visits by Taiwan opposition leaders to China.  The PRC
leadership had become more flexible and subtle in its
approach to Taiwan, SM Goh argued.  President Hu Jintao was
more patient about Taiwan and was willing to put the issue
aside for a decade or more. 

¶8. (C) China had no interest in a collision with the United
States, according to MM Lee.  The PRC wanted peace and
stability so it could concentrate on promoting economic
growth, which was critical to the regime's legitimacy.  The
one issue they could not overlook was Taiwan.  While China
supported the status quo, the People's Liberation Army (PLA)
would continue its build up to dominate the Taiwan Strait to
deter the United States from getting involved in any
cross-Strait conflict. 

U.S. Role in Asia
----------------- 

¶9. (C) All three GOS leaders urged the United States to
continue to play a major role in Asia.  MM Lee commented that
the United States was the only power capable of balancing the
rising power of China.  SM Goh observed that India had to
become more involved in the region as well to balance China.
Singapore wanted all outside powers to be active in Asia so
that "no dominant country could call the shots for its
neighbors." 

¶10. (C) Noting that he had attended the Army Command and
General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, PM Lee urged the
U.S. military to be more engaged with its counterparts in the
region, especially Indonesia and Pakistan.  The Indonesian
Armed Forces (TNI) had been cut off for a long time.  The
United States was fortunate to have invested in the right
friend in President Yudhoyono, according to PM Lee. 

Regional Situation
------------------ 

¶11. (C) The regional situation had improved over the last
year, according to SM Goh.  Indonesia had conducted
successful elections and President Yudhoyono understood the
West and could reach out to it.  He was a decent man who was
taking action against corruption, but the problem was endemic
in Indonesia.  In Malaysia, the change in prime minister was
for the better.  SM Goh commented that former PM Mahathir
enjoyed fighting with everyone.  The long-term problem was
what type of Islam would dominate in Malaysia.  He expressed
concern that a more radical version of Islam was gaining
ground and forcing moderates to take more extreme positions. 

Border Controls and Immigration
------------------------------- 

¶12. (SBU) Asked about Singapore's border control system, PM
Lee said it helped that Singapore was an island.  While some
people were able to sneak into the country, it was far easier
to control than the Rio Grande.  Rep. Rangel noted that
Singapore's sanctions for illegal immigrants were different
than in the United States and PM Lee noted that they were
caned and then deported.  Employers and landlords of illegal
immigrants also faced sanctions.  The GOS was experimenting
with biometrics to speed up the entry process, especially for
the tens of thousands of people entering from Malaysia every
day. 

¶13. (SBU) While unemployment was 3.9 percent, there were many
jobs that Singaporeans no longer wanted to do, such as in
construction and domestic positions, observed PM Lee.  The
GOS allowed in some 200,000 workers in these fields.  The
GOS, however, did not want these workers to "establish roots"
in Singapore and encouraged turnover.  At the same time, the
GOS was trying to attract skilled workers, notably scientists
and engineers, to come and stay in Singapore.  They were
needed to help offset Singapore's low birth rate and to help
the country develop new industries, such as its emerging
biotechnology sector.
LAVIN

Journalists in Singapore are getting increasingly frustrated with government press controls, according to leaked US Embassy cables

The latest batch of confidential US diplomatic cables released by anti-secrecy website Wikileaks has revealed that a growing number of Singapore journalists were getting frustrated by press controls imposed by the ruling People’s Action Party government.

The diplomatic cables confirmed that there was a growing disconnect between younger journalists and their editors. The younger journalists, who possess strong journalistic ideals, are turning their sights to overseas postings and possibly overseas jobs because they find that they are not able to express themselves freely when writing about Singapore news.

The cables also quoted a senior Singapore Press Holdings staff member as saying that SPH editors were all hand-picked by the PAP government, and trained for years to tow the party line. In fact, editors often receive calls from overzealous ministers who were anxious to ensure that a story comes out in a particular way.

The Singapore press has been tightly controlled since the PAP came into power through the use of the draconian Newspapers and Printing Presses Act. Singapore Press Holdings, which is the leading publisher of newspapers in Singapore, has been chaired by a succession of PAP loyalists and stalwarts, including former President S R Nathan, former cabinet minister Lim Kim San, and most recently by current President Tony Tan.

The full text of the leaked cable is as follows:

C O N F I D E N T I A L

SIPDIS 

STATE FOR EAP - M. COPPOLA
NEW DELHI FOR J. EHRENDREICH 

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/14/2029
TAGS: PGOV SOCI PREL SN
SUBJECT: JOURNALISTS FRUSTRATED BY PRESS CONTROLS 

REF: A. SINGAPORE 1143
     ¶B. SINGAPORE 1067 

Classified By: By DCM Daniel Shields for reasons 1.4 (b and d). 

¶1. (C) Summary:  Singapore journalists say they are
increasingly frustrated with GOS-imposed limits on their
domestic reporting.  Political leaders put pressure on the
Straits Times (ST) staff to ensure that the paper's domestic
coverage follows the government line.  Reporters say they are
eager to produce more investigative and critical reporting,
but they are stifled by editors who have been groomed to tow
the line.  Some reporters seek an outlet for their
journalistic passions by serving as overseas correspondents,
where ST allows reporters much greater latitude; others
consider plying their trade elsewhere.  Given that media
restrictions are no greater now than in the past, reporters'
increasing frustration may reflect this generation's rising
expectations.  End Summary. 

¶2. (C) Comment: The traditional media in Singapore are
certainly no more restricted today than they have ever been,
and other than on race and religion, online speech is
generally unrestricted.  That raises the question why
reporters seem to be complaining more, or at least more
openly.  We suspect this reflects in part a generational
shift; younger Singaporeans are accustomed to having more
latitude, and it likely grates on reporters not to be able to
say in print the kind of things people routinely say in cafes
or online.  It may also be that the leaderships, own
frequent suggestions of the need for (incremental) political
reforms may be raising expectations that so far have not been
met.  End Comment. 

Government Ensures Positive Local Press Coverage
--------------------------------------------- ---- 

¶3. (C) Singapore journalists tell us they are increasingly
frustrated with the obstacles they face in reporting on
sensitive domestic issues.  Reporters have to be careful in
their coverage of local news, as Singapore's leaders will
likely come down hard on anyone who reports negative stories
about the government or its leadership, Chua Chin Hon
(strictly protect), the new Straits Times (ST) U.S. Bureau
Chief (former China Bureau Chief) told Poloff January 6.
There is a growing disconnect between ST's reporters and its
editors, with the reporters wanting to do more investigative
and critical stories than the editors will allow.  Chua
lamented that the ST editors have all been groomed as
pro-government supporters and are careful to ensure that
reporting of local events adheres closely to the official
line.  Chua said that unless one of the editors is a "Trojan
Horse," someone that for years has successfully concealed any
non pro-government leanings, none of them has the courage to
publish any stories critical of the government. 

¶4. (C) The government exerts significant pressure on ST
editors to ensure that published articles follow the
government's line, Chua said.  In the past, the editors had
to contend only with the opinions of former Prime Minister
Lee Kuan Yew (now Minister Mentor) and former Deputy Prime
Minister Goh Chok Tong (now Senior Minister).  However, a
younger generation of government ministers is now vying for
future leadership positions and one way for them to burnish
their credentials with the old guard is to show they can be
tough with the media, Chua said.  As a result, several
current ministers and second ministers (Chua did not say
which ones) routinely call ST editors to ensure that media
coverage of an issue comes out the way they want it.  While
Chua admitted that he knew of no editors who had been fired
or otherwise punished for printing articles critical of the
government, he said that is because all of the them have been
vetted to ensure their pro-government leanings. 

¶5. (C) Chua speculated that while Lee's eventual passing may
encourage the media to open up, the current crop of ST staff
would only dare to buck the government's line if it were
clear that the majority of Singaporeans were already opposed
to the government's policy.  Even then, the media would tread
carefully as the government has an established track record
of using the press, the ST in particular, to shape public
opinion. 

¶6. (C) Chua admitted that domestically focused ST articles 

SINGAPORE 00000061  002 OF 002 

often read like Public Service Announcements.  Chua noted
that how the government intends to push a certain policy is
often foreshadowed by extensive media coverage (published
before the official policy announcements).  As an example,
Chua pointed to the government's recent decision to assist
retirees who lost investments in "mini-bonds" following the
collapse of Lehman Brothers (ref A). That decision followed a
spate of media coverage casting the retirees, plight in
sympathetic terms. 

¶7. (C) In contrast to the informal restrictions placed on
domestic reporting, ST reporters are given wide latitude in
their coverage of international events. Chua said he enjoyed
a great deal of freedom during his stint as ST's China Bureau
Chief, and he expects to enjoy similar freedom during his new
assignment as U.S. Bureau Chief.  However, due to the
expectations placed on editors, Chua said he would likely
never advance higher up the ladder at ST. 

ST Reporter Confirms Local Media Restrictions
--------------------------------------------- 

¶8. (C) Lynn Lee (strictly protect), a reporter for ST,
confirmed the disconnect between editors and reporters.  Lee
highlighted the internal debate over the amount of coverage
that the paper would dedicate to opposition icon J.B.
Jeyaretnam (JBJ) following his death in September 2008.  Lee
said that while the editors agreed with reporters' demand for
extensive coverage of JBJ political career and funeral (ref
B), they rejected reporters' suggestions to limit the amount
of coverage devoted to (relatively long) eulogies provided by
Singapore's leaders.  The leaders' statements took up a
significant portion of the allotted space, Lee lamented. 

¶9. (C) Lee also admitted that reporters practice
self-censorship.  Recalling the case of a journalist in
Malaysia who was arrested for reprinting a politician's
racially charged comments, Lee noted she would never write
about any racially sensitive issues.  However,
self-censorship is not really needed as most censorship is
done by the editors, Lee said.  Lee, who is now one of ST's
Indonesia correspondents, echoed Chua's comments about having
greater freedom to report stories (without censorship) while
abroad.  Highlighting her discouragement with her life as a
Singapore journalist, Lee said she considers her current
Indonesia assignment as a one-year test case that will
determine whether or not she stays in the profession. 

Novice Journalists Also Wary of System
-------------------------------------- 

¶10. (C)  Singapore's journalism students think twice about
building careers at home in the first place, according to
online student journalist Chong Zi Liang (strictly protect).
Chong and two classmates in the journalism school at Nanyang
Technological University started their own online newspaper,
The Enquirer, to write free of editorial interference after
the existing University-funded student newspaper refused to
cover a campus visit by opposition politician Chee Soon Juan.
 When asked how he would reconcile his journalistic ideals
with the realities of a career in Singapore, Chong told
Poloff that he feared it would be too "stifling" to remain
here.  Instead, he foresaw spending one or two apprentice
years here before working somewhere else. Many of Chong's
journalism-school classmates think the same way, he said.

A senior MOE official told US diplomats that there were no plans to encourage more Singaporeans to pursue higher education

In the latest batch of US diplomatic cables released by anti-secrety website Wikileaks, it was revealed that the Singapore government is stifling entrepreneurship and innovation, and has run out of ideas as to how to encourage the spontaniety Singaporeans need in order to stay economically competitive.

Amongst other things, it was revealed that:

- GLCs control 60 per cent of the Singapore economy

- As of February 2007, only 23 per cent of Singaporean students who enrol in Primary 1 attend university

- A senior Ministry of Education official told US diplomats that there were no plans to encourage Singaporeans to get a higher education

The full text of the leaked diplomatic cable is as follows:

C O N F I D E N T I A L 

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/12/2017
TAGS: ECON PGOV PREL ETRD SN
SUBJECT: BURLESQUE AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS LATER, SINGAPORE
STILL SEEKING SPONTANEITY 

REF: A. 05 SINGAPORE 2058
     ¶B. 05 SINGAPORE 2609 

¶1. (SBU) Summary: The Government of Singapore (GOS) is
attempting to steer the economy to become more
knowledge-based and entrepreneurial to counter the
competitive challenges China, India and other lower-cost
exporters pose.  Characteristically, the GOS is taking the
lead, putting schemes in place to encourage creativity and
entrepreneurship, particularly in "strategic" sectors.  It
has even tinkered around the edges of its tight political
controls, mandating a relaxation in social mores in order to
give Singapore "buzz."  But the dominance of
government-linked corporations in Singapore's economy, an
educational system that stifles independent thinking, and the
continued presence of the government in many aspects of
Singaporean life perpetuate "habits of constraint" that may
hinder the development of entrepreneurship in Singapore.  The
recent failure of a French topless revue franchise, part of a
GOS-led effort to pump up Singapore's nightlife, has laid
bare the limits of such top-down efforts.  End Summary. 

------------------
Creativity by Fiat
------------------ 

¶2. (U) A strong record of economic success notwithstanding,
Singapore's leadership recognizes that further growth will
depend on finding economic advantages over the rapidly
growing and low-cost economies of China, India, and ASEAN
neighbors.  As a developed nation, Singapore must also
compete with other developed economies.  To continue
thriving, the GOS believes that Singapore must transform
itself from an efficient platform for manufacturing and
logistics into a global, knowledge-based and more
entrepreneurial economy.  With a small population, no natural
resources, and a trade-heavy economy, the GOS is acutely
aware of the need for Singapore to develop a strong
entrepreneurial class that can adapt. 

¶3. (SBU) Pursuing the objective with its usual vigor, the
government is pouring in resources.  Prime Minister Lee Hsien
Loong chairs a Research, Innovation and Enterprise Council
(RIEC), established in 2005 to promote R&D and innovation in
"strategic" sectors of the economy.  In 2006, the RIEC
announced it would provide $916 million (SGD1.4 billion) over
the next five years to fund entrepreneurs.  Also in 2006, the
Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) unveiled its Science and
Technology 2010 Plan (STP2010) which commits $4.9 billion
(SGD7.5 billion) over the next five years to encourage
raising R&D spending to 3 percent of Singapore's GDP by 2010. 

-------------
The Challenge
------------- 

¶4. (SBU) GOS efforts to promote entrepreneurship continue to
encounter a risk-averse Singaporean mindset, government
domination of the economy, and discouragement of critical
thinking and inflexibility in the educational system.  The
2007 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Report (GEM) showed
that, among the surveyed OECD and developed economies,
Singapore was consistently below the mean for all indicators
of social and cultural attitudes toward entrepreneurship.
For example, only 57.8 percent of Singaporeans believed that
new business success was accorded high status in their
country, compared to an average of 66.2 percent among all the
countries in the survey, ranking Singapore 21st of 24. 

-------------------------
Government Itself a Cause
------------------------- 

¶5. (C) Entrepreneurs continue to face obstacles in a number
of sectors in the form of Government-Linked Corporations
(GLCs), which account for nearly 60 percent of the national
GDP.  Temasek Holdings, the government's investment arm, is
by far the largest investor in Singapore, with an estimated
50-percent stake in Singapore's GLCs.  GLCs often compete
against each other in key markets, making entry by an
independently-held company difficult.  For example, SingTel
and Starhub, both Temasek Holdings companies, compete
directly in the wireless service market and will soon do the
same in the cable television market.  The strong GOS role in
directing the economy likely has the unintended result of
"crowding out" natural economic development, according Dr.
Sha Reilly, Chief Knowledge Officer at the National Library
Board (NLB), which has a mandate to encourage creativity and
entrepreneurship among young Singaporeans.  She believes 

SINGAPORE 00000394  002 OF 003 

Singaporeans look first to the government, rather than the
private sector, to be the innovation leader. 

¶6. (C) Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) -- a
potential source of innovation and commercial nimbleness --
find it difficult to secure financing for their businesses
since financial institutions, accustomed to an abundance of
large corporate customers, are reluctant to lend to riskier
SMEs.  The 2007 GEM report ranked Singapore 17 out of 21
countries for venture capital availability.  The Singapore
Stock Exchange (SGX) is similarly inhospitable to SMEs, with
many Singaporean entrepreneurs opting to list in other
countries.  SGX Executive Vice President Lawrence Wong told
us that the SGX targets SMEs with a capitalization of SG$500
million to SG$5 billion ($327 million - $3.27 billion).  Wong
characterized the amount as "not a lot," but it does put SGX
listing out of the range of many SMEs.  He says a GOS
proposal to develop an exchange catering to smaller firms was
"still under discussion." 

7.(C) While the government has allocated various funds to
encourage SMEs, a number of business leaders told us that
funding is still inadequate.  They suggested that even if
sufficient funding were available, it would still take at
least a generation before an entrepreneurial culture would
truly take root.  Of the $4.9 billion STP2010 budget, less
then two percent has been allocated for SME financing.
Inderjit Singh, a Member of Parliament and an entrepreneur,
told us that the proliferation of entrepreneurial schemes for
SMEs was "government lip-service that fails to address the
critical need to divest GLCs and open markets." 

----------------------------------------
Political System Discourages Risk-Taking
---------------------------------------- 

¶8. (SBU) The GOS's tight political control and the "habits of
constraint" it fosters have inhibited the development of an
entrepreneurial spirit and risk-taking culture, according to
Nominated Member of Parliament Kum Hong Siew and others.  G.
Jahyakrishan, Assistant Director of International Enterprise
Singapore (IE), a government entity responsible for helping
Singaporean companies grow globally, believes that a
prevailing atmosphere of restraint "subtly" leads to less
risk-taking behavior by firms and individuals.  Siew believes
the government's attempt to encourage economic risk-taking
while limiting political and social freedoms is unsustainable
because it discourages the kind of critical thinking required
for entrepreneurship. 

----------------------------
Education System Not Helping
---------------------------- 

¶9. (C) Singapore boasts a highly competitive and
well-regarded primary and secondary education system, but the
number of Singaporeans completing a tertiary education is
relatively low.  Only 23 percent of Singaporean students
entering primary school complete a degree at a local
four-year university.  In other knowledge-economies such as
Japan's, around 50 percent of students complete a university
degree.  However, according to Cheryl Chan, Assistant
Director of the Planning Division at the Ministry of
Education (MOE), the government does not plan to encourage
more students to get a higher education.  The university
enrollment rate will continue to be maintained at 20-25
percent because the Singaporean labor market does not need
everyone to get a four-year degree, she asserted. 

¶10. (SBU) Singapore's education system has been criticized
for being heavy on memorization and light on critical
thinking and creativity.  Based on the British model, the
system is highly test-focused and separates students (a
process referred to as "streaming") at an early age between
high, middle, and low achievers.  The GOS has slowly begun to
introduce greater flexibility into the system by allowing
"streaming" in subjects (rather than based on total average
scores) and has created new magnet schools focused on
mathematics, the arts, and sports.  But there are only three
such schools, and the overall education system has changed
little. 

-------------------------------
Some "Strategic" Sectors Suffer
------------------------------- 

¶11. (SBU) Growth in the "strategic" media sector may be
hampered by limits the government sets on freedom of speech
and expression.   Filmmakers such as Martyn See (reftels) or
productions that touch on sensitive issues often find their 

SINGAPORE 00000394  003 OF 003 

distribution and broadcasting rights disapproved by the Media
Development Board (MDA), a governmental agency responsible
for regulating and promoting media industries.  Cheah Sin
Liang, Deputy Director of International Relations at MDA,
admitted to us that the GOS's tight control over
controversial political, religious, or social topics does
limit growth in the media sector, but argued that such
controls are necessary to prevent negative social
consequences. 

¶12. (SBU) Singapore's approach to promoting R&D development
in the biomedical field, another government-identified
"strategic" sector, has also been criticized by foreign
education specialists as too focused on quick economic gains
rather than fostering the "holistic approach" necessary for
sustained innovation in science and technology.  Dr. William
Broady, President of Johns Hopkins University, told the local
press in January that in order to be a leading center for
R&D, Singapore had to get away from "trying to measure
short-term economic returns.  There has to be a mindset
change... in tolerating and being comfortable with failure
and ideas that don't seem to be going anywhere."  (Note:
Johns Hopkins stopped development of a $53 million (SGD82
million) Biomedical Sciences research unit after its
Singapore Government partner, A*Star, accused Johns Hopkins
of not meeting performance benchmarks. End Note.) 

----------------------------------
Casinos, Kumar and the Crazy Horse
---------------------------------- 

¶13. (SBU) The GOS appears to recognize the need to give
citizens freer rein in order to foster creativity and
entrepreneurship.  Unwilling to loosen political controls, it
has focused so far on easing social restrictions.  The
government made a highly controversial decision to allow
casinos, and has awarded contracts to open two integrated
resorts in 2009.  Kumar, a popular transvestite nightclub
comedian whose material focuses on taboo subjects including
race, sex and the foibles of government personalities, has
been allowed to perform on television and in public venues.
Singaporeans returning from long stays overseas have told us
of being shocked at the mushrooming of racy billboard
advertising.  MDA's Cheah pointed to the opening of the Crazy
Horse French Burlesque in December 2005 (which subsequently
closed in January 2007 due to poor attendance), and to the
"success" of the Singapore Biennale (an arts festival) as
further signs of greater social openness. 

-------
Comment
------- 

¶14. (C) Ever thinking strategically, Singapore's leadership
will keep pushing innovation in order to stay competitive in
a rapidly changing Asia.  To its credit, the government
appears to recognize that its own penchant for control --
however enlightened its policy choices or soft its
authoritarian touch -- may be at odds with the kind of
free-wheeling atmosphere it needs to achieve its economic
objectives.  Time will tell whether it can promote
creativity, critical-thinking, and innovation in society by
loosening up on social issues and tinkering with the
education system while keeping politics in quarantine.  One
way or another, Singapore's flirtation with openness will
provide another interesting chapter in its unique history as
a social-engineering petri dish. 

HERBOLD

Dr Tony Tan was elected as Singapore's President despite securing just 35.19 per cent of the votes

By Nigel Tan

Chief Editor

Although Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam will be sworn in as Singapore’s seventh President in just a matter of days, his victory in the recently-concluded Presidential Election was a phyrric one. Despite being the only candidate to receive strong endorsements from trade unions, business federations, clan associations and other groups, and despite the fact that PAP-affiliated grassroots organisations were not so subtly campaigning for him, he only managed to score a dismal 35.19 per cent of the votes.

This means that two-thirds of Singaporeans do not want Dr Tony Tan as their President.

In addition, one suspects that the 65 per cent of voters who voted against Dr Tony Tan would also be vehemently and strongly opposed to having him as President, while many of those who voted for Mr Tan Jee Say, for example, would not have minded Dr Tan Cheng Bock as their President.

Considering that the other candidates had to make do with limited resources, Dr Tony Tan’s performance was truly underwhelming. He fought the election solely on the basis of his experience in cabinet, and did not have any strong campaign messages. At no point did he reveal what he truly stood for, which was probably a wise decision, since he might have alienated even more of his voters had he made this known.

Dr Tan is going to be faced with the Herculean task of trying to be a unifying figure for a deeply-divided nation. His work will be made even more difficult because of his unpopularity. He is seen as a person with strong personal and social ties to the inner circle establishment elite, and the cover-ups involving his son’s National Service stint suggest that he will continue to adopt a “see no evil, hear no evil” approach that was made (in)famous by his predecessor, outgoing President S R Nathan.

One truly wonders if Dr Tan will even attempt to heal the nation. Though it might sound extremely cynical, there are those who believe that his true motive behind standing for the Presidency is simply to protect the power base of the inner circle to which he belongs. This does not refer merely to the ruling People’s Action Party; it is an inner circle of ultra-elites within the PAP that are bound together by family and social ties to the country’s top leaders.

With Dr Tan’s election as President, all of the country’s key institutions, including the Prime Ministership, the Presidency and the two sovereign wealth funds, are now helmed by a group of individuals who are literally one big family.

If Dr Tan wants to dispel these notions, he is going to have to work doubly hard to demonstrate his independence and transparency. He is going to have to show that he is able to empathise with common people, even though he has been the heir to a banking dynasty since the day he was born.

In the meantime, Dr Tan and his small coterie of inner circle backers will be left to ruminate on how close they were to losing their grip on absolute power. Having won a five-year reprieve, they will have to find solutions to the country’s problems, and find them fast – it is almost unfathomable that Singaporeans will continue to be so forgiving, not to mention so gullible, come 2016.

–

The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club

Dr Tony Tan was elected Singapore's 7th President yesterday even though he garnered only 35.19 per cent of the popular vote

By Shahril Mohd Talib

Contributor

65 per cent of Singaporeans woke up with a nasty hangover yesterday morning, as the nightmarish reality set in. Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam is the new President-elect of the Republic of Singapore, even though nearly two-thirds of the electorate chose to reject him at the polls. He defeated Dr Tan Cheng Bock by just 7,200 votes, or a margin of 0.34 per cent.

The real surprise, however, was not that Dr Tony Tan won. The outcome had already been sealed on Nomination Day, when all of the four eligible candidates chose to throw their hats into the ring.

The surprise was that Dr Tony Tan’s share of the vote was lower than expected. Despite the plethora of endorsements,  Singaporeans overwhelming rejected the notion of another six years of “business as usual” from the small cadre of inner circle elites who run this country – another six years of whitewashing and covering up, as well as another six years of grace-and-favour for those linked to the highest echelons of the establishment through their family and social ties.

Yet, even though a Tony Tan presidency had been expected, the manner in which it was served up was heartbreaking.

A large proportion of the more than 600,000 people who voted for Mr Tan Jee Say and Mr Tan Kin Lian would not have minded a Dr Tan Cheng Bock victory. The 37,000 who spoilt their votes probably did so because of their objections to the Presidential Election system in general. Had just slightly over 1 in 100 of these people voted for Dr Tan Cheng Bock instead, Singapore would be a very different place today.

Those who did not vote for Dr Tony Tan would all have been vehemently opposed to him and everything that he stands for. Those who did not vote for Dr Tan Cheng Bock simply did not know who to vote for. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine anyone with a strong and visceral dislike for the kindly village doctor who treated patients for free. Yet, because the electorate allowed itself to be divided, it allowed itself to be conquered. The result is that Singapore has a head of state that two in three of its citizens cannot tolerate.

Far from being an election to unify the nation, the 2011 Presidential Election has created an even greater rift in Singapore society. The discord between the moderate middle-ground opposition elements and the hardcore anti-establishment elements has been made clear. While the majority agrees that the current status quo is unacceptable, it cannot agree on how to go about changing it – with some believing in evolution, while others insist on revolution.

For as long as the forces for change remain disunited and in conflict, the country’s current rulers will be able to maintain their vice-like grip on power, however unpopular they may be. The outcome of this election should serve as a stark reminder to those who are fighting for change. In order for success to be achieved, they will need to keep their own egos in check and be willing to take on a supporting role.

Mr Tan Kin Lian, for example, was advised by many to withdraw his candidacy, but he insisted on staying the course despite having no political power base and no organised machinery behind him. The result? He lost his $48,000 deposit, was thoroughly humiliated, and is now being blamed for Dr Tony Tan’s victory. At the end of the day, he lost, his supporters lost, and Singapore lost.

Mr Tan Jee Say claimed right until the very end that he represented a very different proposition to the two Dr Tans, because he had never been a member of the PAP. Campaigning on a platform that promised more radical change, he pledged to hold the government to account through “checks and balances”. The result? He was not able to garner more than the traditional core opposition vote of 25 per cent. He lost, his supporters lost, and Singapore lost.

With the country’s rulers no longer able to count on genuine popular support from the electorate, they will be forced to resort to Machiavellian political machinations to retain their grip on power. The only way for Singapore to see any change for the better is by putting behind aside all party affiliations and uniting behind a common cause. Anyone who supports the cause should be warmly embraced. Yes, even if he comes from the PAP.

–

The author is a self-employed professional. Aged 32, he was able to vote for the first time in the 2011 Presidential Election. He holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Economics from the University of Western Australia.

President Ong Teng Cheong is fondly remembered as the People's President because he was never afraid to hold the government to account

By Nigel Tan

Chief Editor

As Singapore prepares to elect a new President this Saturday, this would be as good a time as any for us to spend a moment remembering the late President Ong Teng Cheong. President Ong is fondly remembered as “The People’s President”, and his name is often invoked as a symbol of fairness, justice and public service.

In fact, his Presidency is still very much used as a benchmark against which all Presidential candidates are measured. One of the candidates for the coming election, Tan Jee Say, even went so far as to say that President Ong was his “role model”. For many people, it is also the benchmark that must be used to measure the 12-year reign of his successor, President S R Nathan. Most Singaporeans agree that President Nathan failed to fill the shoes of President Ong – which, to be fair, are very big shoes indeed.

Ong Teng Cheong was the second of five children from a Chinese middle class family. His English-educated father felt that the Chinese language was important in order to be successful in business at that time, and so, he sent all his children to Chinese medium schools.Ong Teng Cheong attended The Chinese High School (now known as Hwa Chong Institution), where he was a top student.

Having completed his university and then his postgraduate students, he started his own architecture firm, Ong & Ong, which remains one of Singapore’s top architecture firms to this day. Through his involvement in grassroots activities in Seletar, he soon became acquainted with then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, and his political career began not long after.

The People’s Action Party first fielded him as a candidate in Kim Keat in the 1972 general election, where he faced a three-cornered fight against the Workers’ Party’s Seow Khee Leng and the United National Front’s Winston J Paglar. Mr Ong trounced his opponents, obtaining 74 per cent of the vote. He went on to defend his seat in subsequent general elections in 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, as well as in 1991, when it was merged into the newly-formed Toa Payoh GRC.

Shortly after his first electoral victory, Mr Ong was made Senior Minister of State for Communications. It was during this time that he pushed for the development of Singapore’s Mass Rapid Transit system, something we all know of today as the MRT. He later held other appointments, including Minister for National Development and later Deputy Prime Minister. He also became the Secretary-General of the NTUC.

As NTUC Secretary-General, Mr Ong sanctioned a strike in the shipping industry, the first for about a decade in Singapore, without telling his cabinet colleagues. He said that he did not inform the cabinet or the government because they would probably stop him from going ahead with the strike.

There was a major backlash against his decision, with the most vocal criticism coming from the then Minister of Trade and Industry, Dr Tony Tan. Dr Tan, who was then the Advisor to the Sembawang Shipyard Employee’s Union, had preferred a less confrontational approach, and was reportedly “very angry”.The strike that took place eventually lasted only two days, and a deal was struck.

After 21 years as an MP and minister, Mr Ong resigned from Parliament in 1993 to contest the first-ever Presidential Election. Under the new election rules, he also had to resign his membership of the PAP, as Presidential candidates were all required to be non-affiliated to any political party. He stood against Chua Kim Yeow, a former accountant-general, and won with over 56 per cent of the votes.

Mr Ong entered the election as the PAP-endorsed candidate. However, soon after his election, President Ong was tangled in a dispute over the access of information regarding Singapore’s financial reserves. The government said it would take 56 man-years to produce a dollar-and-cents value of the immovable assets. President Ong discussed this with the accountant-general and the auditor-general, and eventually conceded that the government only had to declare all of its properties, a list which took a few months to produce. Even then, the list was not complete – it took the government a total of three years to produce the information that President Ong requested.

In the last year of his presidency, President Ong discovered through the newspapers that the government aimed to submit a bill to Parliament to sell the Post Office Savings Bank (POSB) to the Development Bank of Singapore (DBS). POSB was, at that time, a government statutory board whose reserves were under the president’s protection.

To President Ong, this move was procedurally inappropriate and did not give due regard to the President’s status as the guardian of the reserves. A frustrated President Ong had to call and inform the government of this oversight. In spite of this, the sale proceeded.

Ong Teng Cheong launching the first-ever double-decker SBS bus as Minister for Communications (1977)

After the expiry of his term, President Ong decided not to run for a second term.

The PAP, apparently, informed him that they would not endorse his candidacy, and subsequently made several public statements about his health – it was well known that he had previously suffered from lymphoma.

Knowing that President Ong was by this time hugely popular and would almost certainly trounce its newly-endorsed candidate, S R Nathan, senior government leaders spoke to him in private and attempted to dissuade him from running. Mr Nathan was later ‘elected’ unoppposed.

Speaking to reporters from AsiaWeek after his retirement, President Ong said that he had an elected duty to fulfil, and it did not matter whether the government liked it or not.

“I am satisfied with what I did. I hope it was all for the best. I was elected to do a job. And I had to do that job whether the government — or anyone else — liked it or not. Even as a minister, I was never afraid of doing something that my cabinet colleagues disagreed with. If they don’t like it, I (could) always have come back here, to my architecture firm,” he said.

He also revealed that the government had tried to stonewall him on the question of the reserves, and expressed his disappointment regarding the episode involving POSB and DBS:

“What happened actually was, as you know, in accounting, when you talk about reserves, it’s either cash reserves or assets reserves. The cash side is straightforward: investment, how many million dollars here and there, how much comes from the investment boards and so on. That was straightforward — but still we had to ask for it. For the assets, like properties and so on, normally you say it’s worth $30 million or $100 million or whatever. But they said it would take 56-man years to produce a dollar-and-cents value of the immovable assets.”

“Even in my last year as President, I was still not being informed about some ministerial procedures. In April, the government said it would allow the sale of the POSB to DBS Bank. In the past, when there was no elected President, they could just proceed with this kind of thing. But when there is an elected President you cannot, because the POSB is a statutory board whose reserves are to be protected by the president. You cannot just announce this without informing him (the President). But I came to know of it from the newspaper. That is not quite right. Not only that, but they were even going to submit a bill to Parliament for this sale and to dissolve the POSB without first informing me.”

“My office went to tell them that this was the wrong procedure. You’ve got to do this first, do that first, before you can do this. It was question of principle and procedure. We had to bring all this to their attention. It’s not that we are busybodies, but under the Constitution we have a role to play and a responsibility. Sometimes in the newspaper I came to know of things that I am responsible for, but if it had not been reported in the newspaper I would not know about it.”

“So, yes, I was a bit grumpy. And maybe not to the liking of the civil service. They did not like what I said. But I have to be a watchdog all the time, you see. So this is where they are supposed to help me to protect the reserves. And not for me to go and watch out when they do right or wrong.”

President Ong eventually suffered a relapse of his lymphoma and passed away at the age of 66 on February 8, 2002. He was one of only two former Presidents – the other being President C V Devan Nair – not to have been given a state funeral.

FURTHER READING:
ONG TENG CHEONG IS OUT BUT NOT DOWN

ONG TENG CHEONG WENT MOST UNWILLINGLY

PM GOH DEFENDS CRITICISMS FROM PRESIDENT ONG

–

The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club

Aljunied MP Chen Show Mao has been barred by the People's Association from attending local events in his own constituency

By Cheryl Chan

Contributor

In the past few days, the internet space has been abuzz at news at the barring of Aljunied MP Chen Show Mao from attending a local event in his own constituency. Mr Chen, a first-term MP from the Workers’ Party, was part of a team of five MPs who defeated the incumbent People’s Action Party team helmed by former cabinet ministers George Yeo and Lim Hwee Hua in the May 2011 general election.

In a post on his Facebook page, Mr Chen revealed that he received an invitation to be the guest of honour at a Seventh Month dinner in his Paya Lebar ward. He revealed:

The organizers as in previous years had planned to hold the festivities on a hard court in the HDB estate, but this year were told by the Paya Lebar CCC (Citizens’ Consultative Committee under the People’s Association) that, as a condition for receiving CCC approval to use the venue, they may no longer invite their MP to the event.  Future approvals will be withheld from errant organizers.  The organizers were profusely apologetic.  It pains me that they felt so embarrassed to pass me the news.  Regrettably, this is not the first time it has happened since I was elected.  See photos of an invitation and retraction from another distraught organizer who applied to use a different venue in the same ward.

The People’s Association, a statutory board funded by taxpayers’ money, has in the past claimed to be independent and non-partisan. However, many believe that the PA is an extension of the ruling PAP, not least because its chairman is Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. There have been various reports of PA resources being used for party political purposes in the past, with discriminatory practices that border on being petty.

For instance, supporters who turned up to attend a rally held by the opposition National Solidarity Party were not allowed to use the public toilets at a community centre during the general election campaign in May.

The fact that such acts are still being carried out at a time when PM Lee and other senior government figures have been calling for national reconciliation and unity smacks of sheer hypocrisy. Singapore is more divided than it has ever been at any other point in its post-independence history, with a once apolitical generation in serious danger of getting carried away with the same partisan bickering that has polarised countries such as Taiwan. However, what the PM ought to realise is that it is not the opposition, but rather, his own colleagues at the PA and PAP who are chiefly responsible for this widening political divide.

That opposition MPs are being stonewalled or blocked from carrying out their duties is, sadly, nothing new in Singapore. In the 1980s, MPs J B Jeyaretnam and Chiam See Tong had to build their own makeshift town council offices because they were not allowed to take over the premises that had been left behind by their defeated predecessors. Low Thia Khiang, the former MP of Hougang, had to conduct his meet-the-people sessions in void decks for 20 years.

The PA's banning of opposition MPs from local events casts doubts on the independence of Yam Ah Mee, its chief executive director

What is really a cause for concern is that the People’s Association seems to have subtly and surreptitiously involved itself in the Presidential Election as well.

Despite claims that the candidates are all meant to be independent and that the President has to be above politics, posters and banners of Dr Tony Tan – the candidate widely believed to be endorsed by the PAP – have been spotted on notice boards and railings owned by Residents’ Committees and Citizens’ Consultative Committees, all of which fall under the ambit of the PA.

Moreover, the Returning Officer for the election is Yam Ah Mee of “chicken dance” fame. Despite his efforts to come across as a kindly and adorably geeky uncle, he is the PA’s Chief Executive Director and reports directly to the PA Chairman, a.k.a. the Prime Minister.

If the powers-that-be in Singapore are serious about national reconciliation, it is time to take politics out of grassroots organisations. You can’t go around telling people to be “above politics” without practising what you preach. Any attempt to subliminally impose your dogmatic political paradigms on the electorate is likely to get ripped apart, with voters being more educated and more sophisticated than ever before.

–

The author is a political correspondent at The Satay Club. She works as an analyst in a leading multinational research firm.

Presidential candidate Tan Jee Say accepted an invitation to a "good luck tea" at the Hainanese Clan Association

By Nigel Tan

Chief Editor

Presidential candidate Tan Jee Say accepted an invitation from the 800-member Hainanese Clan Association to a “good luck” team at 3.00 pm today.

However, the clan association – which is the first one to express support for any candidate other than government-endorsed Dr Tony Tan – stopped short of officially endorsing Mr Tan Jee Say. The association’s spokesperson explained that its constitution does not allow it to “indulge in any political activity”, so its members are free to vote for the candidate of their choice.

Association president Tan Boon Hai also told reporters that the specific clause in its constitution prohibiting political activity was added at the advice of the Registry of Societies in April this year when the association updated its constitution. Association members, however, told reporters from Channel NewsAsia that they are proud to have a Presidential candidate as a fellow member.

Several other clan associations, as well as NTUC-affiliated trade unions, have officially endorsed Dr Tony Tan.

Mr Tan Jee Say, who was a former high-flying civil servant and banker, stood as a candidate for the opposition Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) at the General Election in May this year. He resigned from the SDP to contest the Presidential Election, and insists that it is important for the President to provide checks and balances on the ruling party.

Mr Tan will be continuing his outreach efforts this weekend by breaking fast with the Muslim community at Geylang Serai and going for a walk/jog at East Coast Park on Sunday morning. He will also be holding a rally at Toa Payoh Stadium on Tuesday evening.

–

The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club

Presidential candidates Tan Jee Say and Tony Tan were involved in a heated exchange over the issue of the Internal Security Act and how it has been used in the past

By Alan Mok

Contributor

Presidential candidates Tan Jee Say and Tony Tan Keng Yam clashed over the issue of the controversial Internal Security Act (ISA) during a dialogue session held at the Fort Canning Centre yesterday in a sign that the Presidential Election is starting to take on an inevitable political slant.

Responding to a question from the crowd regarding the arrest of the ‘Marxist conspirators’ in 1987, Tan Jee Say offered his view that the ISA has “outlived its usefulness”. He continued:

“I don’t even know whether it was justified in the first place, because the ISA has been used on political opponents and those on the other political side of the law,” he said, adding that “the history is such that it’s been used for political purposes”.

At this point, the usually placid Dr Tony Tan jumped in and interrupted Tan Jee Say. Adopting a pointed tone, Dr Tony Tan said: “When one says this is used against political opponents, I think this is a very serious charge. You must be able to back it up.”

Tan Jee Say did not back down. Instead, he shot back: “The people who have been detained have opposed the government. That’s what I’m saying. Have they been pro-government?”

Moderator Viswa Sadasivan attempted to get Tan Jee Say to stop, but the latter continued: “No, no, no, Viswa. Let’s be fair. I have been attacked on my understanding on the English language. What is in his (Dr Tony Tan’s) English dictionary about political opponents?”

Dr Tony Tan did not respond.

On the case in question, 22 people were arrested under the ISA and accused of plotting a conspiracy to replace the government with a Marxist state. The ISA allows the government to arrest and detain people without trial for up to two years at a time. Several former members of the opposition Barisan Socialis were detained for decades between the 1960s to 1980s. Dr Tony Tan was a cabinet minister during the 1987 detentions.

He offered his view that the ISA was a “blunt tool” that could only be used in “extreme” situations. He went on to say that Singapore needs to be vigilant against the threat of terrorism, as it is not limited to any racial or religious group. To illustrate his point, he pointed out Anders Breivik, the Norwegian gunman who is currently on trial for killing more than 60 people and setting off several bombs. However, he did not not directly provide an answer as to whether or not he felt the law could be abused to detain political opponents.

The other candidates also offered their views – Dr Tan Cheng Bock wanted to see new evidence before taking any action, while both Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian proposed a commission of inquiry to find closure to the 1987 matter.

The video clip of the exchange can be viewed here.

–

The author is a second year student at the Nanyang Technological University. He has offered to contribute articles on a voluntary basis during the Presidential Election campaign.

Presidential candidate Tan Jee Say admits that his supporters were "not right" to boo rival candidate Tony Tan

By Nigel Tan

Chief Editor

Presidential candidate Tan Jee Say demonstrated that he could play a unifying role as Singapore’s President by admitting that his supporters were not right to boo rival candidate Dr Tony Tan at the People’s Association headquarters on Nomination Day. He added that he always tells his supporters to conduct themselves in a “civil” manner.

“I thought that was not the correct way to conduct our campaign. We should show respect to everyone,” he said.

Mr Tan has been described as having a direct and confrontational style, an image that is augmented by his past associations with the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP). However, the former senior civil servant insists that “being forceful shouldn’t be construed as being confrontational or combative”.

He further explained that Singapore could not to afford to have a “meek President”, since it was the President’s duty to stand up to a “strong and formidable government that has been in office for a long time”.

Mr Tan’s supporters jeered loudly when Dr Tony Tan was making his Nomination Day speech, chanting “jiak liao bee” (Hokkien for “good for nothing) and “Patrick Tan”, in an obvious reference to his son who was given a 12-year disruption from National Service while Dr Tan was Defence Minister.
Earlier, Dr Tan – who is widely seen as the candidate most closely associated with the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) – expressed that he was “deeply disappointed” by the jeers that he received at the nomination centre. He argued that Singaporeans should give all four Presidential candidates a fair chance to be heard.

Dr Tan has insisted that the President does not have the power to serve as a check and balance on the government, and that the office cannot be an alternative power centre. He says that he will raise issues informally and in private with the government, and believes that his views will be influential because the Prime Minister and other cabinet ministers know him well.

–

The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club

Presidential candidate Tony Tan was jeered and heckled as he addressed the 1,000 strong crowd on Nomination Day

By Nigel Tan

Chief Editor

As the Presidential Election campaign got fully underway this morning, government-endorsed candidate Dr Tony Tan was singled out by the more than 1,000-strong audience that had gathered at the People’s Association headquarters, where the four candidates filed their nomination papers.

As soon as Dr Tan appeared to address the crowd, he was greeted by a deafening chorus of boos. Even though his supporters, mostly from unions whose leaders endorsed Dr Tan’s candidacy last week, vastly outnumbered those of the other three candidates – Dr Tan Cheng Bock, Mr Tan Jee Say and Mr Tan Kin Lian – they were drowned out by chants of “Jiak Liao Bee”, “Patrick Tan” and “Bullsh*t”.

“Jiak Liao Bee” is dialect for “good for nothing”, while “Patrick Tan” was a reference to Dr Tan’s son, Patrick, who was given a 12-year disruption from National Service and allowed to serve in the unique vocation of defence medical scientist upon his return. Dr Tan was Minister for Defence when this incident took place.

Despite the heckling, Dr Tan kept his cool and read from a prepared speech. However, his supporters who went up on stage with him, including his wife and son Patrick, appeared nervous and uncomfortable.

Having already issued a statement of clarification, Dr Tan has steadfastly refused to answer further questions pertaining to his son’s NS stint. He has also repeatedly said that personal attacks on candidates’ family members are uncalled for, and during his two-minute nomination speech, he urged his supporters to convince their friends that the “President must be above politics”.

However, it appears that the Presidential Election is turning to be a highly partisan political affair despite efforts to keep it neutral. Dr Tony Tan is seen as the candidate that most closely represents the ruling PAP, while Mr Tan Jee Say is seen as the candidate that is most closely associated with the opposition. The other two candidates appear to be occupying the moderate middle ground, and there are worries that they could struggle to win popular support due to the increasingly polarised nature of Singapore’s political landscape.

Dr Tony Tan was a former PAP MP and Deputy Prime Minister. He is also a relative of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, and is understood to be a longstanding member of the Lee family’s closest inner circle. Prior to announcing his candidacy, he was chairman of Singapore Press Holdings and deputy chairman of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC), one of Singapore’s two sovereign wealth funds.

Mr Tan Jee Say was a former senior civil servant and aide to former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong. He left the civil service to join the private sector, and entered politics as a candidate for the opposition Singapore Democratic Party (SDP). He has won the endorsement of prominent opposition figures, including the highly popular Nicole Seah. Mr Tan is also campaigning on the principle that the President should serve as a check and balance to the power of the government.
The video of Dr Tan’s speech and the crowd reaction can be viewed here.

–

The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club