Written by Ng E-Jay
29 May 2009
Lamenting the
fact that the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) currently
dominates the House, can amend the Constitution freely, and
controls key levers of power in the country, Worker’s Party chief
Low Thia Khiang told Parliament on Monday that only an elected
opposition can provide effective checks and
balances.
He was commenting on the opening speech made by President SR
Nathan last Monday as well as remarks made by other PAP MPs on how
Singapore politics had to evolve over time to accommodate the
changing aspirations of the electorate.
Mr Low however hastened to add that “we cannot blame the ruling
party” for its “winner takes all, loser is a
bandit” mindset, because the electorate had given it a
clear mandate at every election.
I disagree with Mr Low Thia Khiang. As
long as elections are neither free nor fair, as long as the ruling
clique regularly resorts to pork-barrel strategies like the HDB
upgrading carrot, and as long as our media is not independent, the
PAP’s self-serving attitudes should be met with disdain
rather than token respect. Mr Low should not miss the forest for
the trees.
Mr Low was however correct to say on Thursday, a day after PM
Lee Hsien Loong had announced the changes to the Parliamentary
system, that “Parliament should consist of elected members
… and should not become just a token of airing the people’s view
without any significant working of the system“.
Both Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia
Lim, as well as SDA’s Chiam See Tong, were also right in asking for
the GRC system to be abolished.
But as usual, these points were drowned out by a chorus of silly
arguments advanced by PAP MPs.
Indranee Rajah, Deputy Speaker and MP for Tanjong Pagar GRC,
replied on Tuesday that the citizens of Singapore have the right to
vote against the PAP, and that Mr Low’s suggestion of
having more opposition to provide checks and balances is
unsound, because if the day ever comes that the PAP
becomes corrupt, then “the people are at liberty to vote
out the PAP government and should do so in that
situation“.
Indranee Rajah said: “The premise of Mr Low’s suggestion
is flawed … … if you apply the same logic, then the argument can
also be made that if you vote in the opposition, then they may
become corrupt in the future, so in order to avoid that, you might
as well vote for PAP now.”
I am unsure what to make of this twisted logic.
If the electorate does not first take the initial steps of
progressively installing more opposition MPs in Parliament, how can
they be realistically expected to peacefully change Governments
overnight without any major upheavals if the ruling party is one
day shown to be unfit for office? Our political system has to be
progressively adapted to one of multi-party democracy if the will
of the people is to be effectively expressed.
Ms Indranee Rajah also said that going by Low Thia Khiang’s
logic, we might as well vote PAP to check on the opposition in case
the opposition becomes corrupt. What nonsense is this? If you have
a multi-party system, each party should check on one another.
Besides, what is this ludicrous logic of having a House of 95% PAP
MPs check on the remaining 5% Opposition MPs?
Ms Rajah asserted: “Going by Mr Low’s argument, the
logical outcome is that every other country in the world with an
opposition in it should be squeaky clean, and in Singapore, in
which a large majority of the Parliament comes from a single party,
then Singapore should be the most corrupt country in the world.
That as we know is not the case.”
Indranee Rajah should seriously take English lessons. That
argument here is not that the lack of Parliamentary opposition
directly results in the ruling party becoming corrupt, although the
unchanging laws of human nature often suggests that is a likely
outcome. The crux of the issue here is that without true democracy
and a robust system of checks and balances, the electorate is
disempowered and have no way of protecting their rights or
defending themselves should the ruling party misgovern the
country.
Josephine Teo, MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, said: “Is it
better for Singapore to support an opposition — even if it is not
up to mark — in the hope that it could govern well when it
overthrows a corrupt PAP? Or is it better to make sure that the PAP
does not fail Singaporeans, that it has the strongest team to serve
Singaporeans?”
My reply to her is that it is laughable notion to think that
people will be able to prevent the ruling party from failing
Singaporeans if they at the same time allow the ruling party to
enact repressive laws that deny them their fundamental liberties
and democratic rights.
In an apparent response to the flurry of criticisms directed at
the political changes tabled by PM Lee Hsien Loong, Youth and
Sports Minister Vivian Balakrishnan told Parliament on Thursday
that these changes are not aimed at keeping the PAP in power, and
stressed that “Singapore’s political system is one that is
slanted in favour of ensuring that only political parties which can
form strong governments will be serious contenders in the general
elections“.
Again, this is
blatant disregard for the basic tenets of parliamentary democracy,
which is supposed to give a fair fighting chance to any prospective
candidate, not just to political parties whom in the eyes of the
ruling elite have the necessary clout to form the
Government.
As you can
see, the parliamentary debates about the supposed opening-up of
political space and making cosmetic changes to the system to allow
more opposition voices to be heard is going nowhere, because the
fundamental issues of electoral reform and upholding the tenets of
democracy remain unaddressed.
The token
goodies dished out by the ruling party can easily be taken away at
whim. That is the real crux of the issue — that while the ruling
party still holds on to the ability to employ undemocratic means to
stifle dissent and deny citizens their constitutional rights, the
supposed liberalization of political space is nothing more than a
mirage aimed at distracting the people, including opposition
candidates, from the real issues that matter.
Make no
mistake, the ruling party has no intention of restoring
democracy.
http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=3157
Indranee Rajah, MP for Tanjong Pagar GRC, FUCK YOU.
Don't think you are in Lee Kuan Yew's GRC, can act big talk
filth in parliament.
I look down on you for going into parliament by free riding with
Lee Kuan Yew and walkovers.
I despise you Indranee Rajah.
