The PAP in crisis (Part 5): Reforming the party and state to level the playing field
September 17th, 2009 | 
Author: By Eugene Yeo, Consultant Editor
[In this classic five-part series, Eugene Yeo will examine the inherent weaknesses of the ruling PAP, its implications for Singapore and possible scenarios in the post-LKY era.]
PM Lee: Will he be a Chiang Ching Kuo or Kim Jong IL?
In modern-day Asia, there are only two political leaders who manage to pass their positions directly to their sons.
The first “dynastic succession” occurred in Taiwan in 1975 when Chiang Ching Kuo succeeded his father Chiang Kai Shek as President. The second happened in North Korea 19 years later following the demise of Kim IL Sung who managed to make his son Kim Jong IL the de facto leader of the country.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong, like both men, are sons of founding fathers of their respective nations. Is he a reformer in the mold of Chiang or a conservative like Kim who is only interested in perpetuating his party’s political hegemony?
Chiang Ching Kuo wasn’t a liberal or democrat to begin with. When he was the Director of Taiwan’s secret police, many political dissidents were arrested and make to “disappear” overnight. He once told an American journalist that the main reason why the Kuomintang (KMT) lost the civil war to the Chinese communists was because they didn’t kill enough people.
During the last 18 months of Chiang’s rule, he did something unexpected: he lifted martial law over Taiwan and liberalized the political landscape. Opposition political parties were allowed to form. The media ceased to become the mouthpiece of the KMT. The police was made to account to the state rather than to the party. Most importantly, he handpicked a reformist Lee Teng Hui to succeed him rather than to pass his position to his (illegimate) son John Chiang.
Before his death, Chiang Ching Kuo introduced a series of reform which would usher in democracy for Taiwan and change its course of history forever. Taiwan today is a shining example of a vibrant democracy in a Chinese-speaking nation. Will Mr Lee follow the footsteps of Chiang?
A pivotal moment in Singapore’s history
We are now standing at the crossroads of history and Mr Lee has the unique opportunity to determine the political future of Singapore: will it become a first world democracy or continue as a third world one-party dictatorship which does not commensurate with its lofty status as one of the wealthiest nation in Asia.
At this moment, the power of the state is still largely concentrated in the hands of the ruling party and that of its leader.
Mr Lee will have all the necessary clout and resources he need to initiate reforms at both the party and state level to make our political system more competitive, accountable and transparent.
While the ruling party has no obligation to promote the growth of the opposition in Singapore, it is its duty to ensure a level playing field for all in strict accordance to our Constitution instead of manipulating it to maintain and perpetuate its rule.
Mr Lee has introduced a series of reforms lately to allow more alternative voices in Parliament, but this is hardly enough. The system is still tipped in favor of the incumbent.
Urgent reforms are needed to level the playing field for all parties, be it the ruling or opposition parties so that each will have an equal opportunity to make their views heard and to represent the people who voted for them in Parliament.
Whether Singapore is better off having a one-party or multi-party system is not for PM Lee to decide, but for the people of Singapore to decide.
Reforms at the party level:
1. Prevent concentration of power:
Set an age limit, e.g. 65 for CEC members to prevent party elders from retaining power longer than it is necessary to ensure a proper system of party renewal and succession. CEC members above the age limit should be barred automatically in contesting in party elections to make way for younger leaders.
2. Promote intra-party democracy:
All the top party posts as well as positions on the CEC should be opened for competition. An aspiring candidate for the position of the Secretary-General, for example, must be able to garner enough nominations from the party cadres before he/she is allowed to contest for it.
3. Permit freedom of criticism within party ranks:
Party cadres should be given the freedom to criticize party leaders without any restrictions. A feedback system should be put in place to promote exchanges between the senior and junior leadership.
4. Grooming of young leaders:
Potential MP and minister candidates should be given leadership positions in the party first to allow them time to establish their own support base as well as to familiarize themselves with the party setup and modus operandi instead of simply being “parachuted” into important senior positions after the elections.
5. Devolution of power:
Branch secretaries should be allowed a bigger say in the running of party affairs in their respective constituencies such as recruitment of new members, hosting of events and other activities.
Reforms at the state level
1. Abolish the GRC system:
The GRC system should be abolished completely and revert back to the single ward system which has served Singapore so well before 1988.
Ethnic minorities will not lose out in representation at the Parliamentary level. The late opposition leader J.B. Jeyaretnam won twice in the Chinese-majority ward of Anson against Chinese opponents.
PAP candidates must fight the electoral battle on their own instead of hiding behind the coat-tails of ministers. If they cannot even stand and fight on their own feet, then they do not deserve to be in Parliament in the first place.
2. Remove draconian laws curbing civil liberties:
Under Article 14 of the Singapore Constitution, Singaporeans are guaranteed of the freedom of speech and assembly.
Singaporeans should be permitted to organize rallies, gatherings and protests at any parts of the island subjected to the same regulations as outlined for similar activities at Hong Lim Park currently, e.g. no speeches on racial or religious issues.
The police are most welcome to maintain public order and discipline, but at no time should they be allowed to interfere with the event. Singaporeans must be given the freedom to criticize and even curse their leaders openly in public without any fear of reprisals.
3. Liberalize the media:
SPH should be made an illegal entity under the an anti-monopoly law and forced to break up into two or three separate units to be privatized and run entirely by businessmen with no links to the ruling party.
Local journalists should be allowed to report, write and comment freely on political affairs without being harrassed, sued or arrested. The foreign media’s opinions are welcomed as well.
In fact, a new law should be passed to prevent leaders of any political parties from holding a majority stake in any mass media companies.
4. Lower the damages for defamation laws:
Singapore has one of the highest, if not the highest “damages” in the world being rewarded given for civil defamation.
In some cases, the plaintiffs don’t even need to prove their case in court to obtain a huge settlement via a summary judgement.
The amount of compensation given should be moderated to ensure that justice is served while not overly punishing the offenders to the extent of bankrupting them.
For example, when ex-Taiwanese President Chen Shui Bian sued a KMT legislator for defamation in 2003, he was awarded only a token $NT1 by the judge.
5. Role of police:
The police should adopt a hands-off approach towards politics and be fair to all parties, be it the incumbent or the opposition.
As long the laws are not broken, opposition politicians should be permitted to carry on their political activities freely without any undue monitoring, harrassment or intimidation.
The secret police should not be involved in conducting background checks on opposition candidates without applying the same level of scrutiny to those from the ruling party too.
Chance for PM Lee to make history
SM Goh said recently that PM Lee is now scouting for a potential successor to take over him.
PM Lee is already 55 years old this year. He can probably continue leading the nation for another good 10 years.
What legacy does PM Lee want to leave behind for future generations of Singapore? He still has ample time to reform the system to bequeath a truly “democratic society built on justice and equality” to his successor.
If he reform and liberalize the political system now to allow a strong alternative to emerge to challenge the PAP, it may well be kicked out of power like what happened to the KMT in the year 2000. However, he will be leaving behind a strong, robust and accountable system with proper checks and balances to prevent a rogue leader from abusing his power just like how the Taiwanese system managed to show up the corrupted ways of its ex-President Chen Shui Bian.
If he does nothing and continue to entrench the PAP in all institutions of the state, Singaporeans will have to pray very hard that no Chen Shui Bian will ever become the Prime Minister of Singapore one day for there will be no way for anybody to remove him via legal channels.
In Part 4 of this article, I quoted MM Lee as saying that (western) democracy is incompatible with Asian society. He has been proven wrong already. All over Asia, dictatorships and one-party autocracies are crumbling to make way for vibrant multi-party democracies like Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia and Indonesia.
The father of modern China, Sun Yat-Sen once said: “Those who go against the trends of the world will soon find themselves becoming irrelevant”. PM Lee should know better what the current global trends are – is it towards greater democratization or autocratization.
Reforming the PAP and the state to allow for more political competition and pluralism will not only benefit the opposition, but the PAP as well.
After 50 years in power with a track record that few political parties in the world can boast of, the PAP should have the confidence in its own capability to win an election fairly without having to depend on the sycophantic media to demolish the opposition or the use of defamation lawsuits to cripple its adversaries.
Giving some space for a genuine alternative political elite to emerge and grow in Singapore will give us a backup in the wings ready to replace the PAP should it become corrupted one day.
That will be the best gift and legacy that PM Lee can leave behind for Singaporeans: a tested, robust and vigilant system to ensure that only honest, upright and capable people are allowed into the august house of Singapore’s Parliament.
Other articles in the series:
>> Part 1: An ossified internal structure
>> Part 2: A disjointed party support base
>> Part 3: Lack of leaders in a team of technocrats
>> Part 4: Implications for Singapore
Other articles by Eugene Yeo:
>> An analysis of the UBS study (Part3): Paupers in a first world economy
>> Singapore’s limits: An unthinking and unquestioning citizenry
>> Singapore’s limits: The curse of the GDP
EDITORS’ NOTE:
If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account (temasekreview@gmail.com). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively you can help us boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed on our site. Thank you!
Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview
Join our facebook at: http://www.facebook.com and search for “Temasek Review”
Posted in Opinion
25 Responses to “The PAP in crisis (Part 5): Reforming the party and state to level the playing field”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
I think outright abolishment of GRCs is not necessary. There are enough enclaves in Singapore as it is. No further encouragement in that area should appear.
However, the number of seats one GRC can hold has to stop at 4. Minimum number 3? The 5 seaters and 6 seaters we are really not happy about is quite off. We are talking parliament seats here not buying a MPV.
Our media industry does have a constraint of working within a limited market. Perhaps if Starhub is granted a news media license so that they can hold their own news channel (buy most of the overseas news from AFP or Reuters and other content providers, which Mediacrap is doing anyway). Even in failing to do so, I think it is high time we introduce the skepticism that is present in society at large into the media. Which in my opinion is a fair reflection. Of course, the MSM can curb their language a little and leave the more robust barbs to the invited guest and always leave the disclaimer text in the ending credits.
I’m a little disappointed with the last article. The first 4 was good, exposing the inner workings of PAP, if this is not conjecture on your part. If not, it means you have sources inside, somehow, perhaps speaking as a voice of a former PAP member.
What I am mainly disappointed is after all is said and done, there seems to be hope that PAP, even LHL, will change from within. That is too idealistic. You have better chance to hope for opposition to change for the better and form a united front against PAP.
The first law of motion states that an object at rest or in constant motion will remain as its state unless an external force is applied to change it’s state, otherwise known as inertia law.
This inertia law applies to PAP most aptly. Unless there is an external force (be it presence of a significant opposition party/alliance, disaster, popular revolt or some other similar events), PAP is unlikely to change. Even if there is a perception of change, it will be piecemeal. Look at the foreigner issue, instead of immediately curtailing them, after so many have written in to the authorities about them, all they can do is they will consider “tweaking” the system. You can’t expect serious change from “tweakers” because they simply love their system. They would not want to demolish it or cause too much changes.
So hoping LHL will change for the better is just wishful thinking. A more concrete solution, one not based on just one man, needed to be presented.
Even for the sake of argument, LHL will liberate everything, does he dare to dig up the past on things like the HPL dealings, his wife’s dismal failure in Temasek and PAP’s injustice done to their opponents? It’s like the reformed Japan who became liberal democracy but still does not acknowledge and compensate their wartime atrocities.
Once we have a two party system, all the reforms at any level will be moot point, as the stronger more capable party will automatically install this, especially if it is a former opposition party, who has no qualms to dig up the past.
You forgot that Chen Shui Bian can have his dirt dug up because the current administration is from KMT. If it is a DPP president, do you think Chen Shui Bian’s dirt can be dug up?
And how certain are we that we don’t already have a Chen Shui Bian in the upper Echelon? After all, without a free press, we know nuts about anything in the government right now.
I think GRC system should be abolished. Because we are the only country in the world having this unfair system. And it is also the excuse for non-by-election if a MP dies.
Looking at the way the PAP has conducted itself, it’s clear to see they are trying to entrench themselves in power.
No one in the party wants change. Even knowing how unhappy Singaporeans are at they way they conduct themselves their only reply is lip service (strategic purpose? HDB is affordable? etc) before continuing on their way.
It’s a blank cheque for them. Will they give it up? I highly doubt it.
Chiang gave up because of internal(his own party and the opposition who will willing to go to jail) and external pressure (US)
do we have these ingredients in singapore? i afraid not
I have better chances flipping a coin than hoping the current establishment changes itself. It is already rotting from inside out, how does anyone expect something to change from within out of nowhere? Currently I’m not seeing any insane hero from within the system out to set changes and put things right. Like us anonymous cowards, they’re just speaking words, just mere WORDS, but openly. You want some change, Drill the current system down, then build from scratch. Or take another thousand years to slowly chip your way through, whichever way it is, I’m set to loosing some dogs during the next elections. I’d rather have a monkey hopping around and doing tricks than old goats chewing on a rotting gold plated apple.
“You forgot that Chen Shui Bian can have his dirt dug up because the current administration is from KMT. If it is a DPP president, do you think Chen Shui Bian’s dirt can be dug up?”
Not true, the Switzerland authorities sent several documents to the Taiwanese authorities highlighting the money laundering operations Chen’s family was carrying out in various places and their offshore accounts. The head of National Security initially tried to cover up the case and even passed the information to Chen (who was the subject of said document). Chen’s family moved several accounts before the Swiss moved in to freeze some of their accounts in Switzerland.
A KMT MP then went public with information that she had procured regarding Chen’s 7 billion NT abroad. This disclosure forced the investigators into action. They were already investigating Chen for suspect activities regarding the sale of SOGO franchise in Taipei. Chen’s wife was alleged to have received several million dollars worth of SOGO vouchers as some sort of “gift”. Chen was further exposed to have been using the secret funds available to him as president to pay for his family’s day to day expenses. The investigators decided to charge Chen’s wife for graft and misuse of public funds while suspending the charge on Chen as he had immunity as president.
Chen’s wife then went on MC 17 times not attending court session which earn the anger of the people. When KMT was voted back in, people demanded justice and wanted the whole truth regarding Chen and wanted to see “how deep the rabbit hole goes”. Taiwan’s political landscape is different and had Chia won the presidential election over Ma he would still have to allow the prosecutors to go through with the case or risk his own political career for trying to pardon Chen. Note that pardon means that Chen was proven guilty already before that can be considered.
I do not think anyone in their right mind would want to repeat what President Ford did by giving Nixon a pardon.
Those who are familiar with the history of China know that changes could only come after the death of the Emperor.
It is a nice dream, now wake up and go make money to pay for your HDB flat.
no… he will be like the Pahlavi Shah of Iran…
@cy
“Chiang gave up because of internal(his own party and the opposition who will willing to go to jail) and external pressure (US)
do we have these ingredients in singapore? i afraid not”
we do have opposition members who are willing to go to jail and had. but do the people care? not only they don’t, many criticise the very man who fought for their freedom.
as for the US, until very recently, Singapore was a gas station for the US Navy. With Muslim nations potentially hostile to them, why would they care? Singapore is even one of the “coalition of the willing” for Bush. As for Obama, Singapore is just a tiny dot for him to bother.
pls dun give false hopes and stop building castles in the air
Chiang Chin Kuo did not direcctly succeed Chiang Kai Shek. Like LHL, he had someone to warm the seat (albeit much more briefly than GCT) before taking over as President of ROC.
I think it is quite impossible for LHL to change from his comfort zone to somewhere alien to him. The way he dealt with sudden global crisis without any solution prove strongly that he will not shift his loft out of the well even when it dried out. Likewise, it is possible for Singaporeans to change him, change our system thru the ballot box. If we don’t believe in ourselves that we are a strong force to change Singapore system, no one will, LHL will not.
Don’t wait for him to act. We must act if we want change – the effect is immediate.
Coalition of willing? We are a bunch of fools risking Singaporean lives for imperialism of Uncle Sam – herd mentality. The British public are longing to pull out of Afghanistan. Americans know that Afghanistan is a lost cause of an unwinnable war. That is why Obama is not committing more boot soldiers deployment until he receive his new general’s report.
Recently, Xinhuanet in China reported we sent additional two detachment in some of the most dangerous war zone in Afghanistan to detect where Tiliban fire their rockets into allied military encampment.
There is nothing in MSM here of this news.
Uncle Sam not sending additional soldiers of their own in for now. We did.
Why are we so eager to risk our Singaporean lives for even to those Yankies that watch and wait to see what if??
“Taiwan today is a shining example of a vibrant democracy in a Chinese-speaking nation.”
I read until this sentence and decided to stop reading this article.
It’s just another piece of crap by shallow monkey here.
Ha ha ha!
Hello Great Asia, did not hear from you for a long long time.
For once, I was under the impression that you have gotten married to a delicious babe, produced tons of children and making millions, not forgetting tons of mistress outside.
I told myself that you should be very busy entertaining your mistresses back in Sinkapore so no time to visit TR and spill your usual cock and bull.
But then, I realised that you are IN Sinkapore, which means:
1. That you won’t be able to marry a delicious babe cause Sinkaporean women are mostly stuck up and materialistic and you being a Lesser Mortal and NOT an FT, won’t make that kind of money to afford marrying one. If you do get married, it would probably be to one of the China Meis Meis rejects from her homeland absorbed by Sinkapore as New Citizens?
2. That you, being a Lesser Mortals in the eyes of your OWN Gahment, would not make as much as the FTs and New Citizens, how then can you afford any mistresses? Sinkaporeans can’t afford to buy (or lease rather) their own HDB homes!
Ouch! Did that hurt? My apologies, I forgot that caterpillars and Lesser Mortals back in Sinkapore shun Reality, they would rather bury it and pretend that it doesn’t exits.
Got to go, have an appointment with my 3rd mistress. Catcha next time on TR
Is Ah Loong his father’s man ? Will he stand up and be his own man, or does this presupposes that he WANTS to be his own man, that he wants to emulate Gorbachev of the Soviet Union?
Perhaps his “fix the opposition ” remark in the last election gives us a clue to his reformist inclination.
Presented with a golden opportunity, how will he want to be remembered by Singaporeans for his legacy ?
This article is the best so far, the quality type that will never be written by a ST journalist.
i agree. the first 4 parts were good. the one.. paints too much of a pretty picture.
no wonder LKY says…singaporeans are too naive about politics.
If PAP “see us no up”, then we have to wake up and show them who is the master by voting in more opposition to check on them (and by more, I mean MANY MORE, as many as 40% to 45%.
If they still dare to be arrogant, we’ll do what the Japanese did, kick them out of the government. The Japanese voters have much, much more balls than us.
[...] Road to Perdition Repression Election – Diary of A Singaporean Mind: Is a tsunami of good news about to hit Singapore? – Hard Hitting in the Lion City: Did I Miss Something? – TOC: Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy on leadership succession – The Temasek Review: The PAP in crisis (Part 5): Reforming the party and state to level the playing field [...]
As an American who has lived in Singapore for years, i recommend that you be careful what you wish for. A true multi-party democracy may sound good, but the US government is a good example of how ineffective it can be.
I, like many Americans, am disgusted with the outright ineffectiveness of my government. Healthcare, education and many social services are in complete shambles because most in Congress are more interested in ensuring their own futures through pleasing special interest groups than doing what’s best for the nation.
I’m not saying that the Singapore system isn’t in need of some reforms (freedom of speech and assembly), but i’d caution about wanting to go too far in the opposite direction.
As sda said, I’m not sure what I really want for Singapore.
Ideally, there are many political voices with their own unique opinions, and voters get to choose the party which represents their ideals. Too bad it never really happens.
In practice, there are countries like Singapore and Vietnam with basically one ruling party which does everything. It’s efficient but the people don’t have much of a say.
On the other hand you have countries like the US and Taiwan, where the opposition basically yells at the ruling party and says their policies suck, regardless of what the policies are, and whether they’re beneficial or not. It’s barely a choice when the opposition is simply defined by what the ruling party is not.
Actually I disagree with doing away with GRC.
Using JBJ as an example is not accurate.. how many JBJs are there in Singapore?
I would agree with making it smaller but not getting rid of it.
I am also of the idea of having some GRC based on mixture of religious affiliation… this would allow people of different faith a voice in the parliament (and not be dominated by a single one).
Your analysis seems to be good… but the recommendations seem to be too idealistic and some are not very practical.