Connect with us

Politics

Presidential Elections must not mirror general elections, advocates former PAP senior minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam

Former People’s Action Party Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, gearing up for the presidential elections, voiced concerns over politicizing the presidency, emphasizing its role as independent of politics.

He cautioned against treating the presidential election as a reflection of general elections, warning that such an approach would “weaken the system of the elected presidency.”

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the former senior minister and potential candidate for the upcoming presidential election, cautioned against treating the presidential election as a reflection of general elections, warning that such an approach would “weaken the system of the elected presidency.”

Speaking at a dialogue with members and guests of Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan on Saturday, Mr Tharman stated, “If you look at a candidate and say this person is PSP, this person is maybe more Workers’ Party, this person is more PAP. If that happens, you might as well just have a general election and let the government who is elected appoint a president. We should not let that happen. Because the president is meant to be independent of politics and government.”

Having been associated with the People’s Action Party (PAP) since the 2001 general elections and representing Jurong GRC throughout, Mr Tharman took a significant step on 8 June 2023, declaring his intention to resign from all his governmental roles and his association with PAP by 7 July 2023. This move is in preparation for his candidacy in the presidential elections.

He emphasized the importance of assessing a candidate’s contributions to society, values, empathy, and international reputation instead of viewing them through a political lens.

In response to concerns regarding the adequacy of the present presidential setup in addressing contemporary domestic and global issues, Mr Tharman voiced his apprehension. “If the system of the elected presidency becomes so politicised, then Singapore will eventually need a new system,” he commented.

Adding, “Singaporeans are still very fair. And they understand that this must not be a political election… For politics, please wait for the general election. That’s the way the system is meant to operate.”

Delving into the nuances of safeguarding the nation’s reserves, Mr Tharman described it as a more intricate role than is commonly perceived. “It’s not simple, where you wait in the office and one day the Finance Minister comes and asks ‘Can we please draw?’ The president must have a profound comprehension of the nature of a crisis and the nation’s response strategy,” he explained.

Due to his extensive background in governmental and international roles, Mr Tharman believes he is well-equipped to apply independent judgment to these situations.

Drawing attention to the independence of his thought process, he noted, “Even the opposition knows that I am independent-minded.”

He underlined the importance of a president maintaining a balanced mindset and collaborating with civil society and the government, stressing that a “solo player” would not gain respect from the public, government, or international community.

Discussing the unifying role of the president in fostering social cohesion, Mr. Tharman clarified, “My role as president would be to support initiatives on the ground, not so much introducing new policies. But I believe there is a connection between the two. Because policies will only last if there is action on the ground and if there is a culture among all of us to want to support and empower others. That’s the way which we can succeed with policies for a fair and just Singapore in the long term.”

Case for Appointed Leaders and the Risks of Partisanship

In line with what Mr Tharman has mentioned, it might be better to have the president appointed rather than elected. It should not be forgotten that the PAP changed the president’s appointment to an election following a constitutional amendment in 1991.

Back in November 2016, during a debate on the amendment of the Singapore constitution, Mr Dennis Tan, a Workers’ Party Member of Parliament for Hougang SMC, expressed a similar view.

He said, “The Workers’ Party studied the Constitutional Commission’s report and we concur with the Commission’s alternative suggestion to return to an appointed ceremonial Presidency and to establish a separate body for the custodial role. This body should be elected directly by the people.”

“The custodial role of the President necessitates a national mandate. The Commission noted that such an election could become politicised and divisive. Running in such an election could compel one to adopt a partisan stance, which might conflict with the President’s role as a unifier.”

Expanding on the idea of the President as a unifier, Mr. Tan elaborated, “The President must possess, in the Commission’s terms, ‘a premium on inclusivity.’ This surely encompasses the capability to connect with Singaporeans of every background, race, age, and class.”

“The stringent eligibility criteria and role combination have restricted the pool to an elite group, including former political officeholders, high-ranking public servants, or heads of large corporations.” said Mr Tan, noting how this limitation seems unnecessary as world leaders hail from varied backgrounds.

“There must be individuals from diverse professions who can unify Singapore without being a major company’s CEO or having prior political involvement. Potential leaders could emerge from charities, education, medicine, or journalism. President Sheares was a doctor, and President Wee Kim Wee a journalist. Neither would qualify under current regulations.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comments

Redditors question support for PAP over perceived arrogance and authoritarian attitude

Despite Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s warning that slimmer electoral margins would limit the government’s political space “to do the right things”, many Redditors questioned their support for the ruling PAP, criticising its perceived arrogance. They argued that SM Lee’s remarks show the party has ‘lost its ways’ and acts as if it alone can determine what is right. Others noted that the PAP’s supermajority allows for the passage of unfavourable policies without adequate scrutiny.

Published

on

In a recent speech, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong warned that “if electoral margins get slimmer, the government will have less political space to do the right things.”

Mr Lee, who served as Prime Minister for 20 years, highlighted the risks associated with increasingly competitive politics.

“It will become harder to disregard short-term considerations in decision-making. The political dynamics will become very different,” he stated during his speech at the Annual Public Service Leadership Ceremony 2024 on 17 September.

“Singaporeans must understand the dangers this creates, and so must the public service,” SM Lee stressed.

SM Lee pointed out that Singapore faces formidable internal and external challenges in the years ahead, with rising expectations and demands from citizens.

As growth becomes harder to achieve and politics becomes more fiercely contested, he warned, “Things can go wrong for Singapore too.”

He urged vigilance in preparing for an uncertain future, noting, “As the world changes, and as the generations change, we must do our best to renew our system – to ensure that it continues to work well for us, even as things change.”

Critique of PAP’s Arrogance and Disconnect from Singaporeans

The People’s Action Party (PAP) experienced a notable decline in its vote share during the 2020 General Election, securing 61.24% of the votes and winning 83 out of 93 seats, a drop from 69.9% in 2015.

A significant loss was in Sengkang GRC, where the PAP team, led by former Minister Ng Chee Meng, was defeated by the Workers’ Party (WP).

In discussions on Reddit, some users questioned why they should support the ruling PAP, criticising the party’s perceived arrogance.

They pointed out that SM Lee’s recent remarks illustrate that the party has strayed from effectively serving Singaporeans and seems to believe it has the sole authority to decide what is right.

Others highlighted that the PAP’s super-majority in Parliament enables the passage of unfavourable policies without sufficient scrutiny.

One comment acknowledged that while many older Singaporeans remain loyal to the PAP due to its past achievements, younger generations feel the party has failed to deliver similar results.

There is significant frustration that essentials like housing and the cost of living have become less affordable compared to previous generations.

The comment emphasised the importance of the 2011 election results, which they believe compelled the PAP to reassess its policies, especially concerning foreign labor and job security.

He suggested that to retain voter support, the PAP must continue to ensure a good material standard of living.

“Then, I ask you, vote PAP for what? They deserve to lose a supermajority. Or else why would they continue to deliver the same promises they delivered to our parents? What else would get a bunch of clueless bureaucrats to recognise their problems?”

Emphasising Government Accountability to the Public

Another Redditor argued that it is the government’s responsibility to be accountable to the people.

He further challenged SM Lee’s assertion about having less political space to do the right things, questioning his authority to define what is “right” for Singapore.

The comment criticised initiatives like the Founder’s Memorial and the NS Square, suggesting they may serve to boost the egos of a few rather than benefit the broader population. The Redditor also questioned the justification for GST hikes amid rising living costs.

“Policies should always be enacted to the benefit of the people, and it should always be the people who decide what is the best course of action for our country. No one should decide that other than us.”

The comment called for an end to narratives that present the PAP as the only party capable of rescuing Singapore from crises, stating that the country has moved past the existential challenges of its founding era and that innovative ideas can come from beyond a single political party.

Another comment echoed this sentiment, noting that by stating this, SM Lee seemingly expects Singaporeans to accept the PAP’s assumption that they—and by extension, the government and public service—will generally do the “right things.”

“What is conveniently overlooked is that the point of having elections is to have us examine for ourselves if we accept that very premise, and vote accordingly.”

A comment further argued that simply losing a supermajority does not equate to a lack of political space for the government to make the right decisions.

The Redditor express frustration with SM Lee’s rhetoric, suggesting that he is manipulating public perception to justify arbitrary changes to the constitution.

Concerns Over PAP’s Supermajority in Parliament

Another comment pointed out that the PAP’s supermajority in Parliament enables the passage of questionable and controversial policies, bypassing robust debate and discussion.

The comment highlighted the contentious constitutional amendments made in late 2016, which reserved the elected presidency for candidates from a specific racial group if no president from that group had served in the previous five terms.

A comment highlighted the contrast: in the past, the PAP enjoyed a wide electoral margin because citizens believed they governed effectively. Now, the PAP claims that without a substantial electoral margin, they cannot govern well.

Continue Reading

Comments

Tan Kiat How: Police called after resident ‘became aggressive’ at meet-the-people session

Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How shared on TikTok that police were called to his meet-the-people session (MPS) in Bedok on Monday (17 Sept) evening after a resident ‘became a little more aggressive’, reportedly over a job issue. While the PAP MP emphasized the efforts made to assist residents, some netizens questioned the volunteers’ handling of the situation and urged more proactive measures from the MP.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Police were called to a meet-the-people session (MPS) in Bedok after a resident became aggressive, causing a disturbance, according to Member of Parliament (MP) for East Coast GRC Tan Kiat How.

Mr Tan, who represents the Kampong Chai Chee ward, addressed the incident in a TikTok video posted on Monday (17 September).

In the video, Mr Tan, who is also Senior Minister of State for National Development, emphasised the need for mutual respect at these sessions, which are intended to be safe spaces for both residents and volunteers.

“It was unfortunate that the police had to be called to MPS today when a resident became a little more aggressive,” Mr Tan said, acknowledging the incident that occurred during the Monday MPS session at Block 408 Bedok North Avenue 2.

Mr Tan expressed empathy for the challenges faced by residents but urged individuals attending MPS to remain respectful towards volunteers.

“Sometimes you see such cases at MPS, where one of the residents get more aggressive and can be a little bit more violent,” he noted.

He added that while efforts are made to assist residents, certain matters are beyond their control.

“For example, we can’t write to a government agency to demand the agency to offer a job to a person … but we can facilitate and make sure that opportunities are available for our residents,” he explained.

@tankiathow

It was unfortunate that the police had to be called to #MPS today when a resident became a little more aggressive. We always do our best to help #KampongChaiChee residents, but some things are beyond our control. Let’s work towards mutual respect and ensure MPS remains a safe space for both residents and volunteers. #caringeastcoast

♬ Future – Official Sound Studio

Netizens Question Volunteers’ Handling of Situation and Call for Greater Action from MP

The incident drew numerous responses on TikTok, with some expressing support for Mr Tan and others sympathising with the unnamed resident.

One comment suggested that the individual may have been “desperate” for a solution to their issue, while another urged patience, noting that not all cases can be resolved immediately.

Separately, Mr Tan responded to one user by confirming that he had previously helped the resident’s parents.

Some questioned whether the issue arose from a lack of tact by certain volunteers in handling the situation, suggesting that they receive proper training to address residents’ concerns effectively.

In response, Mr Tan emphasized that his volunteers always do their best and that empathy is crucial in such situations.

Another user noted that empathy should be mutual, suggesting that while residents are trying their best, they may feel they have no other solutions, urging Mr Tan to show greater understanding.

One comment pointed out that something significant might have affected the resident, possibly leading them to drastic actions, and called for more proactive measures from the MP rather than just expressing empathy.

This is not the first time an MPS has been marked by aggression.

In 2018, Jurong GRC MP Tan Wu Meng was assaulted by a 32-year-old man, leaving him with injuries.

The assailant was arrested after rushing into the MPS area and attacking Dr Tan.

Similarly, in 2009, Ang Mo Kio GRC MP Seng Han Thong was attacked when a resident doused him with paint thinner and set him on fire. Mr Seng survived but required extensive medical treatment.

Continue Reading

Trending