To the ST Forum Editor
Chen Show Mao
I refer to the letter by Dr Ng Eng Hen entitled “Writer’s query on Chen reasonable, says PAP” (19 April).
Voters have every right to scrutinize candidates. However, Dr Ng must know that, even before Chen Show Mao has been formally introduced as a potential WP candidate, he has already been interviewed extensively by various mass media, including Lian He Zao Bao, The Straits Times, Mediacorp TV and most recently, The Business Times. His responses to questions about his decision to return to Singapore, and his motivations for joining the Workers’ Party (WP), have been widely reported. At WP’s formal candidate introduction, there will again be opportunities for the media to pose questions to him.
The fact is that Show Mao’s roots are here. His parents have lived here since 1972. His only sibling and her family are here. He attended our schools, and voluntarily underwent National Service as an infantry officer before he became a citizen. Though he has been abroad due to the nature of his work, he has returned to Singapore typically 4 to 5 times a year, and made contributions to Singapore such as serving on the Advisory Board of the Singapore Management University Law School. He has also said that his wife and children will be joining him in Singapore permanently, and has committed to continuing political work here, regardless of the outcome of the elections.
By again raising the question of Show Mao being outside Singapore for a long time, is the PAP signaling to Singaporeans that the return of a successful Singaporean is not welcome? Or is his loyalty being questioned simply because he is with WP?
SYLVIA LIM
CHAIRMAN, WORKERS’ PARTY
To ST Forum Editor,
I refer to the letter by Ms Lee Hwai Jiin entitled `Full voting rights? Sure, get elected’ (ST April 16).
My comments on the different voting rights between Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMPs) and elected MPs were made precisely to highlight that the two offices are not the same. I was not arguing for equivalent powers for NCMPs.
The public should therefore also not be confused that having opposition NCMPs is the same as having opposition elected MPs, nor buy into the ruling party’s exhortations in this direction.
If the public wants a more direct and effective check on the ruling party, they should elect opposition MPs who will provide political competition, both in Parliament and on the ground, so that Singapore will have insurance for the future if the ruling party declines.
SYLVIA LIM
CHAIRMAN, WORKERS’ PARTY
Dear ST Forum Editor,
First World Parliament
I refer to the letter by Eugene Tan (ST 13 April) entitled: “UK, US? Give him a S’pore MP anyday”.
In responding to the Workers’ Party’s (WP) campaign slogan “Vote Workers’ Party – Towards A First World Parliament”, the writer has misunderstood the term “First World” used in the slogan.
It was made clear at the launch of the slogan that WP is not taking any particular developed country as a model. Singapore should evolve its own model which works for Singaporeans. WP’s vision of a First World Parliament was detailed in our media release and Manifesto, as a robust institution which works in the national interest by functioning as a strong watchdog and check on the ruling party. This can be the case even when one political party has a clear majority, so long as there is at least one other party with a significant presence to have political weight as a check.
A First World Parliament would consist of MPs from different political parties with a mandate to represent their constituents. The national interest is served because the government is kept on its toes, thereby promoting good governance. There would be more rigorous scrutiny of government policies, promoting transparency and accountability. Singaporeans would also be building insurance for the future, having established a political party which can develop into an alternative, capable of taking over in the future should the PAP fail.
There is an urgent need at this stage of our nationhood to return to fundamental principles of governance, and ask whether the huge imbalance in PAP dominance in Parliament is good for Singapore in the long run. PAP MPs are subject to their party whip, and they must support government agenda. How far can the government be held to account with an 82-2 majority in the PAP’s favour now?
Even PAP Ministers have acknowledged in recent weeks that a strong, credible opposition is good for Singapore, and that stronger competition just meant the PAP had to work harder. Surely Singaporeans would benefit from having a government which works harder, and from a credible opposition which works in the national interest and does not oppose everything for the sake of it.
Eventually, what shape the First World Parliament takes will depend on Singaporean voters. WP is offering its vision to Singaporeans for their assessment and decision.
SYLVIA LIM
CHAIRMAN
To: ST Forum Editor
I refer to the letter by Benjamin Chow titled “About Chen: Time will tell”.
Mr Chow has cast aspersions on Chen Show Mao, questioned his motives and concluded his letter with “only time will tell”.
I agree that many things in life are proven by time. There is a famous saying in Chinese, “路遥知马力，日久见人心“. However, why does this apply only to Chen Show Mao and not the PAP’s new candidates as well?
Show Mao has been in contact with the Workers’ Party since 2007. He has participated in WP’s ground outreach such as Hammer sales and other party functions. He is not returning only when “the pickings are ripe” as baselessly accused by the writer.
Show Mao’s decision to come home and stand for election as a Workers’ Party (WP) candidate should be seen in a positive light. There is no certainty that he will win the election. He is at the peak of his career and has nothing to gain being on an opposition ticket. WP is glad that we are able to attract good people today and provide a credible choice to the voters.
Show Mao’s decision has also helped raise the political interests of many Singaporeans including those based overseas. It also stirred an “apolitical 50-year-old native citizen” to write to the ST forum page. This is indeed the positive impact Chen Show Mao has generated.
Low Thia Khiang
Secretary-General
Workers’ Party
Campaign Slogan:
“Vote Workers’ Party Towards A First World Parliament”
“把票投给工人党 迈向第一世界国会”
The Workers’ Party (WP) will campaign on the slogan, “Vote Workers’ Party – Towards A First World Parliament”.
WP has chosen this slogan for the coming General Elections because it believes that it is vital at this juncture of our nation building to critically assess whether our institutions of government are functioning properly, in particular Parliament. As we move towards Parliamentary elections in our 46th year of independence as a nation, we should ask ourselves what kind of Parliament is needed to ensure that Singapore endures for the future.
While Singapore has achieved First World standards in certain areas such as economic development and infrastructure, the same cannot be said of our model of governance. With an overwhelmingly dominant People’s Action Party (PAP) in Parliament, there are severe limitations as to how far Parliament can check the Government, which is supposed to be one of Parliament’s key functions. Ruling party Members of Parliament must support Government agenda, which means that the Government can steamroll its plans through the House easily.
The Workers’ Party believes that it is not in the national interest for Parliament to continue to be so overwhelmingly dominated by the PAP. There is a real danger that Parliament will appear to be a rubber stamp for the government agenda.
No government is perfect, or infallible, or lasts forever. The ruling party must be subject to scrutiny and challenge, and competition to keep it on its toes. It is also critical that Singaporeans are not stuck with just one party able to govern, and no fall-back plan. Alternative governments do not spring up overnight to take over when a government fails. Political experience must be built, and having members of other political parties being elected into Parliament with the people’s mandate is the start to building the necessary political insurance.
Characteristics of First World Parliament
In our view, a First World Parliament for Singapore would have the following characteristics:
- It would consist only of Members of Parliament elected in free and fair elections, all of whom have similar voting rights due to their mandate from their constituencies;
- It would function as a robust check and balance against the Government. For this to happen, there must be a critical mass of elected MPs from opposition parties.
- The Opposition in Parliament must also be responsible for defending national interest viz. to ensure that the Government does not take steps which hurt the people;
- Parliament must respect the Constitution and people’s constitutional rights.
How A First World Parliament Would Benefit Singaporeans
If Singaporeans vote towards a First World Parliament, WP believes the following benefits would accrue to improve Singaporeans’ lives:
- There will be more thorough public examination of policies, subject to public scrutiny. This will promote greater accountability and transparency, and empower Singaporeans to make informed choices;
- The ruling party would be kept on its toes due to political pressure. It would also have to think twice about implementing harsh policies or pay a political price;
- Singaporeans will have some insurance in the event of ruling party decline;
- More diverse interests and viewpoints would be represented in the House, for better representation.
View the Workers’ Party 2011 Manifesto: Towards a First World Parliament.
For Key Highlights from The Workers’ Party 2011 Manifesto, click here.
(first released to media on 24 Feb 2011)
The Workers’ Party notes that the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) Report dated 24 February 2011 has created several new constituencies and dissolved others. As usual, no specific reasons were given for the changes. However, indications of gerrymandering are apparent.
Read more
The Workers’ Party wishes all a Happy Lunar New Year! 祝国人在新的一年里，心想事成；祝我国在兔年里国泰民安！
WP Chairman Sylvia Lim participated as a panellist in the Singapore Perspectives Conference organised by the Institute of Policy Studies on 17 Jan 2011 at Raffles City Convention Centre. About 700 people attended.
Read more
Workers’ Party wishes all a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
Face to Face, a political forum organised by socio-political website The Online Citizen (TOC) was held on 16 Dec 2010 at the Quality Hotel ballroom. Six political parties were represented on the panel, together with about 350 members of the public, the media, bloggers, civil society and party supporters in the audience.
The Workers’ Party was represented by Mr Gerald Giam, a member of the Party’s Central Executive Council (CEC). The other panellists consisted of Mr Chiam See Tong (Singapore People’s Party), Dr Chee Soon Juan (Singapore Democratic Party), Mr Goh Meng Seng (National Solidarity Party), Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam (Reform Party), and Mr Chia Ti Lik (Socialist Front). The forum was moderated by Mr Choo Zheng Xi, co-founder of TOC.
In response to a question on how to tackle the problem of income inequality, Mr Giam pointed out that WP had spoken on this issue on many occasions. He said that the current quantum of payouts under the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) scheme was inadequate, and argued that WIS should be increased significantly to ensure that low-wage workers have enough to meet their living needs. He also proposed reducing the inflow of foreign workers, so as to give Singaporean workers more bargaining power to ask their employers for higher wages.
A member of the audience asked the parties what they planned to do to help people with disabilities. Mr Giam said that WP chairman Sylvia Lim had argued in Parliament for concessionary fares on public transport to be extended to people with disabilities. Mr Giam also called for all public buses to be made wheelchair accessible. This would require all bus stops to be modified to be made barrier-free. He added out that the WP had called for the creation of a Board of Equal Opportunities, which could prevent employment discrimination against people with disabilities.
On the question of public housing affordability, Mr Giam pointed out that the government had failed to adequately plan for the huge influx of foreign workers and immigrants in the past decade. This had created huge demand pressures on the housing market, leading to the current high prices. He said the government should increase the supply of new flats to keep pace with population growth. He also suggested that the prices of new HDB flats should be pegged to median incomes of Singaporeans, instead of the current pricing mechanism, which is based on the valuation of resale flats in the vicinity. He added that a 30-year housing loan—as is commonly the case now—was too long, and suggested that a 20-year loan should be used as a benchmark of affordability.
Under the topic of civil liberties, questions were asked about the Internal Security Act (ISA)—a law which provides for detention without trial in cases of alleged subversion. Mr Giam reiterated the WP’s position that the ISA should be abolished. Nevertheless he said that WP recognised the necessity of tackling the threat of terrorism, and had suggested enacting a dedicated anti-terrorism law which allows for preventative detention of terrorist suspects, but with judicial oversight whereby a judge can order their release if he or she is not satisfied with the basis of detention.
In response to a question on the perceived bias of the mainstream media, Mr Giam said that the current system which allows the Government to exert control over the media by way of the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act was undesirable.
All of the panellists were in agreement that they may have to implement unpopular policies if they came to power. Mr Giam pointed out that the onus was on the government of the day to enact policies which are in the best interests of Singaporeans, then persuade the people to support their policies. With regard to a perception that government leaders were out of touch with the public, Mr Giam felt that the PAP was in fact not out of touch, given its extensive grassroots network, but had chosen to ignore much of the feedback of the people.
In his closing remarks, Mr Giam urged members of the audience to share their views on politics with family and friends. He encouraged everyone to take the time to find out more about the candidates standing for election and the parties they represented, before casting their votes.
