by Khairulanwar Zaini/
Low introducing his candidate for Hougang SMC Yaw Shin Leong
Walk with me, walk it off, the excess fat of misery and fear. Too much to carry around the heart. Walk free. – Jeanette Winterson, Gut Symmetries
And the legendary rally crowds have returned.
Election rallies by the Workers’ Party have a special pride of place in local political lore: one of the iconic and defining photographs of the 2006 electoral campaign was the aerial view of the WP’s rally crowd in an Hougang field. And last night, five years on, they were back in Hougang. And bigger – so much bigger that it led the network reception for mobile lines to crash.
The crowd had started trickling into the field as early as six; a steady stream of ‘rally veterans’ came prepared with mini-deck chairs to reserve choice spots in front of the stage. The excitement was palpable. The electoral carnival is in town, and the people on the field were not going to shy away from the party. The congregation was ebullient – punctuating the night with timely chants of ‘Workers’ Party! Workers’ Party!’, the appropriate ‘No!’ (‘Have your life really improved since 2006? More income? More savings?’) and boisterous boos (the loudest of which was directed at the mention of national development minister Mah Bow Tan).
The interplay of passion, conviction, and rhetoric that goes on in election rallies qualifies it as live political theatre at its very best – and in their maiden election rally of 2011, the WP was not found lacking in the necessary showmanship.
Or perhaps, it is more accurate to talk of ‘show-mao’-ship. Chen Show Mao, having teased his way into public recognition and affection in the preceding weeks, took over the podium to rancorous applause hitherto reserved for party chiefs Low Thia Kiang and Sylvia Lim. And the party’s new hero did not disappoint: he had stage presence, he had eloquence, and he had the game to speak in five languages – Malay (arguably a fillip to securing the Malay vote – it is an open secret that the party’s 2006 failure in Aljunied can be partly attributed to the popularity of the PAP’s Malay candidate Zainul Abidin Rasheed, ), English, Mandarin, Tamil, and Hokkien.
‘Brothers and sisters, it’s good to be home’, announced the former Beijing-based lawyer. The crowd roared its approval.
***
But if there is one place that the Workers’ Party can call home, it is none other than Hougang. The constituency of 24,560 first elected the party’s secretary-general Low in 1991, and had kept faith in him for the past twenty years. Hougang returned Low to parliament with a comfortable 62% in 2006, and the constituency had grown to become almost synonymous with the party. But even good sons must leave home someday – and Low was leaving his stronghold to join the party’s GRC team in neighbouring Aljunied. He has bigger dreams to chase, and a bigger home to build.
Reading excerpts of an open letter that he had circulated to residents, Low reminded the captive audience that ‘there are times when all of us have to make tough decisions.’ And for him and the party, the time is indeed now, he said. But their chase for that ever-elusive GRC does not leave Hougang abandoned. The mantle of perpetuating the Hougang legacy has been tasked to the steady hands of Yaw Shin Leong, the party’s organising secretary. He has been closely involved with the party’s grassroots and has deputised for Low during Hougang’s weekly meet-the-people session in the latter’s absence. His first baptism of electoral fire was in 2006, against the Prime Minister in the latter’s Ang Mo Kio ward. Yaw’s team, dubbed the ‘suicide squad’, garnered a commendable 33.8% of the valid votes casted. And if the WP were to falter in its other contests, while Hougang proves yet steady, he could be the first new face of full-fledged parliamentary opposition since 1991.
Not surprisingly, Yaw began his speech for the night in Teochew. This is a tacit nod to the Hougang demographics – Low’s popularity in the constituency has a lot to do with his rapport with the Teochew base. With big shoes to fill, Yaw was keen to burnish his credentials as a true Teochew nang. His efforts did not go unnoticed. Later that night, Low, potentially the last parliamentary representative who can lay claim to the distinction of being a Nantah graduate, delivered a playful jibe at his successor’s tentative command of the dialect.
But the transfer of the Hougang seat testifies to the trust between the two men. Yaw was to defend the fort, as Low ventures forth to throw his weight behind the party’s campaign to capture Aljunied. Whatever the outcome, the contest will prove to be a critical turning point for the party.
***
Underlying this risky strategy is the party’s promise for a First World Parliament – or in Low’s words, a legislature with ‘a critical mass of opposition MPs with full voting rights’. Throughout the night, the candidates took turns to rebuke the non-constituency MP scheme – the nine seats allocated for the best-performing electoral losers. Over the last few weeks, stalwarts of the ruling party have engaged in hard-selling the scheme as the perfect panacea against the clamour for alternative views: please return our PAP candidates, because we can assure you the presence of opposition voices with these NCMPs. The NCMP office is however endowed with a circumscribed register of voting rights; they are not allowed to vote in supply and constitutional bills, as well as in motions of confidence. It is thus imperative for the voters to elect more full-fledged opposition MPs – otherwise, Low said, ‘the PAP will ignore you’.
Low also took Law Minister Shanmugam to task. Shanmugam, who is facing off a Workers’ Party challenge in Nee Soon, has said that the WP’s aspiration for a First-World Parliament showed that the party wanted to be a ‘co-driver’. Low chastised this ‘usual PAP tactic of threatening the people’. He reminded Shanmugam that the Workers’ Party has the best interests of Singapore at heart, because ‘we are all inside the same vehicle. If the vehicle has an accident, all of us will get injured and die.’ The co-driver is essential: ‘The co-driver is there to slap the driver when he drives off course or when he goes asleep’, said Low.
Over the night, the candidates criticised the PAP’s self-belief in its infallibility. Gerald Giam, a former bureaucrat in the foreign affairs ministry, asserted that the PAP has grown ‘complacent and arrogant’ – and it was time to say enough to their ‘arrogance, lack of accountability, and complacency.’ Low continued this line of attack: ‘the PAP has taken your support for granted’.
But Low later built upon his co-driver analogy, maintaining that ‘if the driver is friendly and drives responsibly, we just keep talking to him to keep him awake’. And here Low hints to the key behind attaining a First World Parliament: whether parliamentary diversity leads to consensual and constructive engagement depends not so much on the opposition, but on the ruling party. If the PAP can play fair and be responsible, then it would not find a plural parliament as a problem.
And playing fair seems to be hard for the ruling party. Sylvia Lim called on the PAP to ‘treat citizens fairly’ – invoking the contentious use of public funds to discriminate against non-PAP wards. Hougang and Potong Pasir have often been overlooked for estate upgrading programmes as the ruling party prioritises its own constituencies. Considering that the residents of these two wards are required to pay the same amount of tax, Lim maintained that the ruling party’s policy was tantamount to using ‘Potong Pasir and Hougang [residents’] money to reward others.’ In a recent forum with university undergraduates, the Prime Minister had offered the residents of the two wards his solution for this quandary: vote the PAP.
But this is nothing short of ‘bullying’, thundered Lim.
***
The feisty jabs against the ruling party aside, the candidates reminded the crowd of the sobering truth of increasing hardships that confronts Singaporeans in their daily lives. Chen spoke of the ‘marginalized and underprivileged Singaporeans out there who need their voices to be heard in Parliament’. The clamour for more opposition MPs should not be construed as a luxury of progress, but a necessity of circumstances.
And living up to his heavyweight status, Chen was also responsible for the most memorable rallying call of the night: ‘Singapore, don’t be a cowardly lion!’ Recalling the classic tale of the Wizard of Oz, he implored Singaporeans to ‘bear in mind the lessons that Dorothy and her friends learned’:
“There’s a scarecrow, and he wanted a new brain. When we vote, we should use our heads. We should think about what is good for us, what is good for our children.
Second, there’s a Tin Woodsman who wanted a heart. So when you vote, also think about the Singaporeans who are worse off than you, having a harder time to make a good living in Singapore.
Third, there’s a cowardly lion who wanted some courage. So after you know what’s right to do, have the courage to do what’s right even if it means some changes from what you’re used to. Singapore, don’t be a cowardly lion!”
It is likely that he had been apprised by his party colleagues of the false hopes of 2006, where the sheer volume in rally attendance generated much excitement but translated into negligible gains in terms of parliamentary seats. But the redoubtable Chen and his party colleagues have the next eight days to convince the electorate to roar their loudest for the Workers’ Party on polling day. And for the next eight days, the rally crowds will walk with him, walking off the excess fat of misery and fear that has accumulated over the last five years. And perhaps, on 7th May, Singapore and the Workers’ Party can walk free into the promised First World Parliament.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
@imike.. how many times have you lied? Let me count the ways:
1. Attracting investments widened the economic pie for all Singaporeans. Does it only benefit FTs? Many thousands of S’poreans are in middle to senior management jobs.
2. The two child policy stopped years ago. Low fertility rate is due to urbanization just like many developed nations like Japan, Germany, Taiwan etc.
3. Singapore education system is one of the best in the world.. a well acknowledged fact and the number disciplines/choces are increasing (including music degres programs) Singaporeans go for tuition because they are kiasu not because of the government
5. Singapore public housing is one of the best in the world and has the widest coverage. HK has very limited public housing and as a result their lower 40% are stuck in much more dire straits with no clear options.
6. MAS SELAMAT? Good intelligence program with Msia allowed his capture and Singapore is one of the safest countries in the world. A lady can walk on the streets without fear. Try asking a Malaysian, South African etc about their crime rates.
7. When did GIC lose Billions? You only hear the losses but refuse to acknowledge the much higher profits made on many deals. Go ask the Finance professionals instead of bullshitting lies…
8.wasted $$ on CTE,KJE,TPE? Singapore road systems is one of the finest in the region and the congestion is far less than Bangkok, Beijing, Taipei, KL, Jarkarta etc
9. The 7% GST is tough? How about 17% in Europe and 10% sales tax in USA?
10.YOG? This was one of the significant international sporting event to happen in S’pore and it put S’pore proudly on the world stage thanks to hard work by Ng Ser Miang, Ser Luck etc. Many S’poreans including my kids enjoyed the high quality competition immensely!
12.no minimum wages? Lots of Economists and professionals are worry about the distortion caused by minimum wage:
Read this:
__________
- The vast majority of economists believe the minimum wage law costs the economy thousands of jobs.
- Teenagers, workers in training, college students, interns, and part-time workers all have their options and opportunities limited by the minimum wage.
- A low-paying job remains an entry point for those with few marketable skills.
- By not having minimum wage will allow businesses to achieve greater efficiency and lower prices.
- When you force companies to pay a certain wage, you increase the likelihood that those companies will outsource jobs to foreign workers, where labor is much cheaper.
- Non-profit charitable organizations are hurt by the minimum wage.
The minimum wage can drive some small companies out of business.
- Industry & sector differences in the economy makes a universal minimum wage difficult to set.
- Minimum wage has clearly caused employers to always prefer younger workers and eliminate aged workers at the low end of the scale
13.unable to attract higher pay jobs? Are you kidding? Hundreds of thousands good paying jobs are available and Singapore is at full employment. we are only limited by our own abilities, imagination and substance.
In short, you paint a biased view that is typical of cheap pot shots seen in TOC.
Hope that there will be more transparency in the Employment statistics reports.
Certain example of the companies might be taken from those with a higher percentage of Singaporeans.
On the other hand, other companies might have less than 10% to 20% of Singaporeans, excluding PRs.
Many of the PMET positions might be held by PR or FT.
Fair employment for Singaporeans:
=================================
In such companies where the hiring manager is not a Singaporean, how do we ensure that the hiring is really based on merits of the PMET candidates and not on the hiring manager’s preference for their native comrade? We have seen departments consisting of all non-Singaporean PMET employees with relatively high pay based on normal conducive working hours.
In some reports, Singaporeans and PRs are categorized together under the term “Singapore Residents” which does not show the actual percentage for Singapore Citizens.
Anyway, it cannot reflect many underemployed PMET Singaporeans who had been displaced by FT and PR previously.
Kudos to iPUSHleekingyouwheelchair and well said.
Anyway this Kim is just an ass-lickin zombie who just parrot what his master says. Must be paid > $15,000 each month working for the Masters and have to do his job to defend the Master in public forum.
He’s just being a nice dogie.
Why are the “servants” being paid salary equivalent of a Master?? 30 April 2011
Kudos to iPUSHleekingyouwheelchair and well said.
………….
thank you
1st to sell must also sell with intelligences lark…
hee hee
Among the five former presidents who have died, Ong is the first president who did not receive a state funeral. He received a state-assisted funeral instead.
________________________________________
Letter from Leong Sze Hian:
When former President Wee Kim Wee passed away in May 2005, I penned a letter (published in the Today newspaper on 10th May 2005), to ask why former President Ong Teng Cheong was not given a state funeral – a honour accorded to President Wee and all previous Presidents.
I wrote:
I refer to media reports that the honour of state funerals was accorded in the past to former presidents Yusof Ishak and Benjamin Sheares.
I would like to ask whether a state funeral was accorded to the late former President Ong Teng Cheong when he died in 2002.
If not, why is it that he is the only president who was not given a state funeral?
As Singapore’s first elected president, I think many Singaporeans may feel that he deserved a state funeral.
The late President Ong Teng Cheong dedicated 27 years of his working life to public service, as President for six years, Deputy Prime Minister for three years, Second Deputy Prime Minister for five years, Secretary-General of NTUC for 11 years, chairman of the People’s Action Party for 12 years, Minister for Communications, and Member of Parliament for 21 years.
Who decides whether a former president is to be given a state funeral? Is there some criteria for deciding on a state funeral?
I suggest that a state funeral be accorded to all former presidents who die in the future.
The Prime Minister’s press secretary replied on 13th May:
Honour rites still evolving; No formula for state funeral entitlement
Mr Leong Sze Hian (Today, May 10) and Mr Goh Choon Kang (Lianhe Zaobao, May 12) have asked why the funeral arrangements for Mr Ong Teng Cheong and Dr Wee Kim Wee, both former presidents, were not the same.
Mr Ong Teng Cheong received a state-assisted funeral, while Dr Wee Kim Wee received a state funeral. Mr Goh Choon Kang suggested that we should have definite rules on who is entitled to a state funeral.
When Singaporeans who have made major contributions to the country pass away, it is right and fitting that they be honoured and mourned by the nation. They may or may not be former Presidents. The appropriate way to do so will vary with each individual.
It is not feasible to have a set formula as to who should receive a state funeral, based simply on the person’s rank or the appointment that he or she had held. It depends on the person’s services to the nation, as well as other special circumstances.
Persons who have made truly exceptional contributions will receive a state funeral. The decision to hold one is made by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet.
If they decide to offer a state funeral, they will of course consult the family members and take into account their wishes.
Singapore is still a young country. Our practices and customs for public ceremonies and observances are still evolving.
As the years pass, we will gradually establish norms and traditions that will reflect the Singapore way of honouring our best sons and daughters who have passed away, that is dignified, restrained and expresses the gratitude and sense of loss of the nation.
Chen Hwai Liang
Press Secretary to Prime Minister
________________________________________
When the late President Ong Teng Cheong asked how much assets the Government had, he never got an answer because he was told that it would take 56 man-years to obtain the information for him.
We re-publish former President Ong Teng Cheong’s interview with AsiaWeek (10 March 2000) where he revealed the obstacles he faced when he asked for the copies of the government’s accounts on the reserves and investments.
President Ong Teng Cheong’s political career spanned 21 years. He was Member of Parliament, Cabinet Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, before he resigned to become Elected President in 1993. And it was as Communications Minister that Ong pushed for the development of the MRT system, the largest construction project in Singapore’s history. His next challenge came on the labour front, when he became NTUC Secretary-General in 1983. Ong was diagnosed with lymphoma-cancer of the lymphatic system in 1992. But this did not dampen his desire to continue serving. He became Singapore’s first Elected President a year later, and it was a presidency marked by many charitable projects, which touched the lives of many Singaporeans. Ong stepped down as President at the age of 63.
As chairman of the People’s Action Party (PAP) and secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress, Ong was considered a firm Lee Kuan Yew loyalist. In January 1986, he sanctioned a strike in the shipping industry, the first for about a decade in Singapore, without telling the cabinet. 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 corporate and Cabinet backlash against his decision; however, the strike lasted only two days, and a deal was struck. He was also a former Minister of National Development.
Source: Wikipedia
________________________________________
haha let’s hope aljunied doesn’t become a “slum” also if WP is elected… jkjk~!
anyway hougang is not even a slum. they even have $$$ to privatise some of the more atas HDB units… i don’t see that in other pap wards
only now got what “sinking funds” problem
http://www.straitstimes.com/GeneralElection/News/Story/STIStory_657498.html
The party that promises to practice the analogy of co-driver personally demonstrated the importance of co-driver by falling asleep while driving on the public road.
Imagine not only endangering his life but the lives of the public road users. So inconsiderate to even think about driving when he is fatigue.
Maybe Desmond from the ruling party should be train to slap Mr Yaw hard should he ever fall asleep while driving and endangering other lives.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1127551/1/.html
SINGAPORE : MP-elect for Hougang, Yaw Shin Leong from the Workers’ Party, met with a minor car accident in front of Rivervale Plaza in Sengkang on Sunday afternoon.
Nobody was hurt in the accident.
When contacted, Mr Yaw said he was driving very slowly when he dozed off and bumped into a barricade.
The car’s bumper was dislodged.
Mr Yaw said he has not had enough sleep with the intensive nine-day campaign leading up to Polling Day on Saturday.
Jessie Lum, U seems to have some inaccuracy and I would like to assist to provide a clear picture.
*anyway hougang is not even a slum. they even have $$$ to privatise some of the more atas HDB units… i don’t see that in other pap wards*
The atas HDB flats are HUDC, under the program they are entitled to privatise to condo after a defined number of years. Nothing to do with Hougang Town Council. This is HDB rules for HUDC.
*only now got what “sinking funds” problem*
Sinking funds issue is now those flats need an account of their entitled shares of $ as their flats are no longer under the charge of Hougang Town Council. Therefore TC needs to refund them the $ soon.
Talking about accountability.