Straits Times: GRCs: 20 years on INSIGHT SATURDAY Twenty years after the birth of GRCs, Insight looks at how the growth of group representation constituencies, an innovation unique to Singapore, has shaped the electoral landscape BY LYDIA LIM & ZAKIR HUSSAIN “BUAY song.” That Hokkien phrase sums up the dissatisfaction that GRCs arouse among a significant number of Singaporeans. The reason: These giant constituencies have hampered the ability of opposition parties to contest elections, and hence deprived many Singaporeans of the chance to vote. Mr Philip Low, 60, a kitchen steward in a hotel, says: “I haven’t voted in 20 years. People should have a choice.” The Government introduced group representation constituencies, or GRCs, in 1988 to ensure a minimum number of representatives from the minority races in Parliament. At that time, each of the 13 three-member GRCs had to have at least one candidate of a minority race. Today, though, GRCs have swollen in size and dislike of them seems to cut across age and race. Ms Kumari Ravendran, 22, who is studying for a diploma, says: “GRCs make it hard for us to vote out an MP we dislike.” Mr Razali Puasa, 27, a teacher, is against the way GRCs are used to “swallow up” areas where opposition support is strong. “I think people are race-blind now,” he adds. GRC critics like them could make up close to half of the voting population, going by an Insight straw poll of 100 Singaporeans of voting age carried out this week. If given a choice, they would opt for smaller GRCs or more single-seat wards. On the other side of the fence, however, were those who said they have no issues with the current five-member and six-member GRCs. These formed the majority, albeit a small one at 53per cent. This group was split evenly between those who support GRCs because they are the choice of a government that remains effective and efficient, and those who have no preference because they have no interest in politics. Housewife Salamah Matnam, 48, believes GRCs help to “guarantee multiracialism”. Mr Sivam Pillay, 40, a company vice-president, believes GRCs are “a good thing”. “It’s not the job of the Government to make things easy for the opposition,” he says. Mr Tan Chwee Kee, who at age 81 still works as a clerk, says: “I leave it to the Government. I’m happy with the way things are.” To be sure, the poll was far from scientific. A number of people were left out because they did not know what GRCs are and it proved difficult to do proper interviews with them. But beyond these perceptions, how have GRCs actually changed the electoral landscape over the last 20 years? The GRC growth path THESE were the vital statistics of GRCs at birth in September 1988: 13 three-member GRCs meant 39 GRC seats in all, out of a total of 81 elected seats in Parliament. But by the November 2001 polls, there were nine five-member GRCs and five six-member GRCs. The number of GRC seats rose to 75, or 89 per cent of all elected seats. The number of single-member constituency seats fell to just nine. That configuration remained unchanged at the most recent polls in May 2006. The People’s Action Party (PAP) Government has all along regarded GRCs as a way to achieve both minority representation in Parliament and efficient management of housing estates. But as National University of Singapore adjunct professor Kevin Tan pointed out in his 2005 book on Singapore’s Constitution, that conflation begs the question: Which objective has priority? The Parliamentary Elections Act was changed in 1991 and again in 1996 to increase the maximum number of MPs per GRC from three to four, and then to six. Both times, the Government cited estate management concerns rather than multiracialism as reasons. In 1991, it said the change was to minimise boundary changes for GRCs which had grown too big for the number of MPs serving them. In 1996, it said the new community development councils needed a critical mass of residents to be effective. These changes have diluted the importance of multiracial representation as the reason for GRCs. Now that GRCs can each have up to six MPs, the minimum number of MPs from minority groups required under the law has actually fallen to 13, or 15 per cent of all MPs. That is lower than the 25 per cent share of the population that is non-Chinese. In practice though, the percentage of non-Chinese MPs has risen steadily in the last 20 years, from 16 per cent in 1988 to the current 27 per cent. But the fact that the statutory minimum stands at just 13 MPs shows how the twin goals of multiracial representation and municipal rationalisation can pull in different directions. As larger GRCs took shape, the share of constituencies where the PAP enjoyed walkovers also rose, from 13.6 per cent in 1988 to a whopping 64.7 per cent in 2001. In that year’s general election, only 33 per cent of eligible voters had a chance to cast their ballots. That election galvanised a young law lecturer named Sylvia Lim into action. “Only one-third of the seats were contested,” recalls Ms Lim, now the Workers’ Party chairman and a Non-Constituency MP. “That was why I joined the opposition.” In 2006, the tide turned, with the opposition contesting 47 out of 84 seats. It marked the first time since 1988 that the PAP was not returned to power on Nomination Day. In a way, the opposition’s strong showing in 2006 undercut its longstanding argument that large GRCs render it near impossible for opposition members to mount contests against the PAP. But perhaps they were better able to do so in 2006 because Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong directed the election in a way that seemed fairer to the opposition. Electoral boundary changes were kept to a minimum. The boundaries of single-seat wards and GRCs that opposition members held or openly coveted remained unchanged. The gap between the release of the boundaries report and Polling Day was also the longest since 1996 - two months and three days. Workers’ Party chief Low Thia Khiang commended the longer notice as “an improvement” on previous polls. Political observers read the change of tactics as the Government’s attempt to address creeping cynicism about the electoral process. So, are further changes on the cards? Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong sparked speculation last week when he spoke about possible refinements to the political system at a National Day dinner in opposition-held Hougang. He also conceded that the “status quo cannot last forever”. Might GRCs morph further in the future? Various suggestions have been made on ways to ensure multiracial representation, but the decision on whether or not to take these up remains one for the ruling party. Singaporeans like brand manager June Soh, 30, accept GRCs for now. But if the Government slackened, she would want more political contests. She worries that GRCs will stand in the way. “If the Government is no longer as efficient as it is today, then large GRCs will be an issue because they mean people won’t have much choice at the polls,” she says. lydia@sph.com.sg zakir@sph.com.sg HER REACTION TO GE “Only one-third of the seats were contested. That was why I joined the opposition.” MS SYLVIA LIM, now Workers’ Party chairman, on the 2001 General Election AGAINST Tool to strengthen PAP’s hand? RAISING THE BAR “Eunos has been traditionally a Workers’ Party stronghold, but it’s now split into two GRCs. The intention of the PAP is crystal clear.” HOUGANG MP LOW THIA KHIANG, in 1996, when Eunos GRC, which the PAP won by close margins in two previous elections, was cut up and regrouped into new GRCs TO OPPOSITION members, group representation constituencies (GRCs) are a political tool to further strengthen the PAP’s hand. They point to how they are synonymous with gerrymandering, gobbling up certain seats and organising others to make them hard for the opposition to win, or even contest. For instance, when GRCs first came about in 1988, constituencies with a history of high opposition support, such as Anson, disappeared. In 1996, Eunos GRC, which the PAP won by close margins in two previous elections, was cut up and regrouped into new GRCs. And Braddell Heights, where Singapore People’s Party candidate Sin Kek Tong nearly won a seat in 1991 and planned to contest, was made part of Marine Parade GRC. Said Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang then: “Eunos has been traditionally a Workers’ Party (WP) stronghold, but it’s now split into two GRCs. The intention of the PAP is crystal clear.” Neither was Mr Low, the WP secretary-general, surprised when Cheng San GRC - which saw a fiery fight in 1997 - was split up in 2001. “I have said in Parliament before that, maybe, one day, there will be only five GRCs - north, south, east, west and central,” the WP chief said then. To date, the opposition has not won a single GRC. WP chairman Sylvia Lim says GRCs raise the bar for opposition parties, while lowering the bar for new PAP candidates. They also shift the focus of a fight away from the individual to the team and party. Ms Lim, who became a Non-Constituency MP after her WP team got 44 per cent of the votes in Aljunied GRC in the 2006 General Election, says that contest required a “considerable” amount of resources. There is also the feeling that the justification for GRCs seems to have moved away from multiracial representation and economies of scale for town councils, to saying that without them, women or fresh faces cannot be elected. There are other ways to ensure minority MPs, Ms Lim feels, citing proportional representation for minority candidates in other countries. “You should want to trust in the wisdom of the voters, that’s what democracy is about,” she tells Insight. To Potong Pasir MP and Singapore People’s Party chief Chiam See Tong, voters choose on the basis of merit, not race. Still, the WP is resolved to win a GRC. At its 50th anniversary celebration last year, Mr Low set his party the target of winning a GRC at the next election. Ms Lim tells Insight: “We want to break the GRC barrier, the mindset that we cannot win one.” Straits Times: Watching, waiting for a second awakening >> THINKING ALOUD BY PAUL JACOB Deputy Political Editor THE People’s Action Party has had its sights trained on the Workers’ Party (WP) for some time now. Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong’s remarks just last week, in the opposition-held Hougang constituency, was but the latest salvo fired. On the face of it, the critique of the party, the approach that its leaders take and their performance in Parliament suggest that the PAP will continue to spare no effort to win back the ward that has been in opposition hands since 1991. I’d like to suggest another theory. For the longest time, critical though the ruling party’s leadership has been of the opposition here, the presence of Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang and the long-serving Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong has been described as being the kind of opposition that Singapore can live with. Both MPs - Mr Low is in his 17th year and Mr Chiam is now 24 years in Parliament - have been lauded by their PAP opponents for having carved out a route of responsible, credible and non-confrontational opposition politics. They received kudos for having worked within the system. If such compliments have been embarrassing, I for one can scarcely recall anyone from either Mr Low’s or Mr Chiam’s camp disagreeing with or distancing themselves from that notion. Indeed, by his own admission, Mr Low is comfortable in having a role which is to serve as no more than a check on the Government - and not to be an alternative to it. “Since the Government has been elected to do a job and to deliver its promises to the people, it should be given the opportunity to perform and to prove its worth. I play the role of a watchdog to check whether the Government has delivered its promises or has short- changed the people,” he told The Straits Times in April. This was shortly after Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, interviewed by the newspaper Lianhe Zaobao, spoke about the standard of parliamentary debate and noted, among other things, that opposition MPs seldom debated in direct opposition to the Government. Mr Chiam did not speak as much now, and Non- Constituency MP Sylvia Lim - who is the WP chairman - spoke carefully and seemed restrained, he observed. As for Mr Low, PM Lee said the WP secretary-general seldom debated the core substance of policies and seemed more keen on catching the Government on its shortcomings, “so as to embarrass it”. In fact, as PM Lee and others also noted, the Nominated MPs have created much more buzz. PAP organising secretary (special duties) Ng Eng Hen, who is also the Education Minister, followed up PM Lee’s comments with a similar critique of Mr Low in the party’s newsletter in June. SM Goh, speaking on Mr Low’s own Hougang turf last Saturday, was the latest to deliver a blast. Such comments and criticisms mirror the increasing chatter online in recent months against the WP for what is arguably its muted performance in Parliament and on the political scene since its stellar showing at the 2006 General Election. That success translated into Mr Low’s re-election by a wider margin, Ms Lim’s entry into Parliament as Non-Constituency MP, and a weight of expectation that the party would build on its strong showing and be able to engage the PAP in a more concerted fashion, providing alternatives to policies and weighing in on big issues. Remarks of the kind that Mr Low have made about where he sees its role have drawn strong criticism from among expectant Singaporeans and non-PAP fans. They want to see sparks fly and appear attracted to a more combative and confrontational style. The preferred outlet for their political angst is increasingly the Internet where the WP lacks a significant presence. This means that the likely beneficiary of this disappointed crowd is the likes of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) and some of those in its leadership, like Dr Chee Soon Juan - notwithstanding his bankruptcy and the legal action against him. I don’t expect that this situation sits well with the PAP. While I’ve never believed that it has been concerned about the SDP per se, I would be surprised if it has not been perturbed by the kind of politics it advocates - especially given the PAP’s known preference for opposition politics of the sort that Mr Low and Mr Chiam have provided. But if the WP comes to be regarded by the PAP’s own critics as being no better than its political appendage, and with Mr Chiam being seen as an ageing opposition icon - relatively inactive, with no clear successor and seemingly content to operate within the boundaries of Potong Pasir - then where will such voters turn to fill their void? An all-PAP Parliament is not an impossibility given the right conditions and circumstances. But I do not think it will sit well with the electorate of this day and age. Nor, I daresay, with the PAP itself. Solution? I’d light a fire underneath Mr Low and the WP. Early. I’d want to prod them into demonstrating the political muscle they suggested they had after their showing at the polls in 2006. Mr Low cast that election as a referendum on the future of the opposition in Singapore and asked voters to signal that they wanted opposition politics to stay. Mr Low tends to keep his cards close to his chest and is not one to show his hand. And as he demonstrated in 2006 when the PAP threw considerable firepower and incentives in the attempt to win back Hougang, he will pick his moments and can respond aggressively when he needs to. As will residents there. It will be interesting to watch and see if the recent PAP salvos produce a second WP awakening. Or will Mr Low and the party choose to remain in their present comfort zone and risk others stepping in, by default, to fill any void that is then generated? pjacob@sph.com.sg Straits Times: Hougang residents keeping me on my toes: Low to SM Goh OPPOSITION MP Low Thia Khiang shot back a terse response last night to recent remarks by Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong. The Workers’ Party (WP) chief said he was already kept on his toes by the residents of Hougang. There was no need for grassroots leaders of the ruling People’s Action Party to do the same, he told reporters after his weekly Meet-the-People session. Said the Hougang MP: “All my residents are keeping me on my toes so far. They are very kind, they give feedback and I take that as positive.” Mr Low’s retort follows SM Goh’s call to grassroots leaders at a National Day dinner in Hougang last Saturday. Keep the MP on his toes, he told them then. He suggested that, among other things, they scrutinise the town council’s accounts and check on the maintenance of the estate. Last night, Mr Low was unable to resist injecting a dose of sarcasm in his reply. “I wish to thank the residents of Hougang and also many Singaporeans who support the Workers’ Party for giving feedback constantly on the work of Hougang Town Council, without the need for the reminder from SM Goh. “For the information of the Senior Minister, the Hougang Town Council’s accounts are on the website. He may want to take a look himself.” Mr Low also said that SM Goh had forgotten his $100 million promise made during the 2006 general election. Referring to Mr Goh’s presence in his ward last weekend, he said, “I thought maybe Senior Minister wanted to…provide some good news, and provide some funds after so many years. But to my disappointment he did not.” SM Goh had promised $100 million to improve Hougang, but only if the PAP candidate Eric Low won the poll. Last night the WP leader also defended his check-and-balance role in Parliament, a philosophy SM Goh had described as narrow. Mr Low argued that if the PAP wanted more from the opposition, it should give them more political space. “The PAP should allow the opposition more space in political participation, and not anyhow redraw the (electoral) boundaries,” he said. While any political party would aspire to form the government, he said the WP is realistic. “Being in a political environment like Singapore’s, and given the party’s resource constraint…we can’t.” He also said he was disappointed with the way the Government had moved to tear down nine blocks of flats in Hougang. He stressed he was not against development but was dismayed the residents would be moving to different parts of the island. Also, his town council had done a lot of improvement work on the blocks, he said. “Are they going to reimburse us? If they told us earlier, we could have saved some money.” JEREMY AU YONG Straits Times: Is MHA suffering from work overload, Sylvia asks PARLIAMENT Shanmugam replies that ministry is looking at issues of operational fatigue BY ZAKIR HUSSAIN IS THE Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) overstretched, as recent security lapses might suggest? In reply to this question from Non-Constituency MP Sylvia Lim, Second Minister for Home Affairs K. Shanmugam said his ministry was conducting a “human factor” study to look into issues of operational fatigue. The study will also look at resources and manning levels in the Home Team and “see if there are sub-optimal areas that need urgent attention”. Mr Shanmugam did not elaborate further on the study, but said the ministry was exploring whether it could continue to operate at current manpower levels. Contacted by The Straits Times, Mr Jay Jhaveri, Asia director for World-Check, a private-sector firm that maintains a database of high-risk persons and entities, said such a study would typically look at the issue of risk. “In areas where risks are greater, the study could identify where more technology or human resources or a combination of the two would have to be deployed,” he added. The study comes at a time when a number of Home Team agencies have been embarrassed by security lapses. In February, Jemaah Islamiah (JI) detainee Mas Selamat Kastari escaped from detention. In June, two robbery suspects escaped from police custody at the Subordinate Courts but were quickly apprehended. The same month, a 61-year-old retiree got past immigration controls at Changi Airport using his son’s passport. Ms Lim, who is the chairman of the opposition Workers’ Party and a polytechnic lecturer, acknowledged that for each of these breaches, there were many other times “when security was successfully provided”. “What I think is constructive…is to step back and have a thorough review of the increasing demands on the MHA, the resources needed and how to ensure that the public interest is protected,” she said. “I am aware of how heavily deployed the Home Team has been in recent years,” she added, citing counter-terrorism activities and the strain of hosting large-scale events like international conferences. She pointed to the growing population as another strain, as more firemen and police officers would be needed, for example. Mr Shanmugam acknowledged that the changed security landscape since the Sept 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States had “raised significant demands” on the Home Team. Front-line officers had been “stretched and strained” on high alert since end-2001, he said. That was when the authorities uncovered a plot by JI members to mount attacks in Singapore. The total number of overtime hours clocked by Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officers varies between 23,000 and 28,000 every month, Mr Shanmugam added. He also noted that last year, the ICA cleared some 143 million travellers through land, sea and air checkpoints, or close to 400,000 travellers each day. Of these, an average of five people carrying the wrong passports were detected every day. It also detected 37,800 cases of smuggling at the borders and more than 2,200 foreigners who tried to enter Singapore fraudulently. zakirh@sph.com.sg Channel NewsAsia: Recruitment biggest challenge for Singapore’s political parties, say analysts By Wong Siew Ying Sylvia Lim SINGAPORE: Political watchers have said the biggest challenge for all political parties - both ruling and opposition in Singapore - is to recruit credible members. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said on Friday that the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) is trying to force the opposition to gather good candidates that will equal the PAP in integrity and competence so that if the PAP fails, there will be an alternative. He added, however, that the opposition has not been able to do so. The opposition was out and about in the 2006 Singapore General Election. One political watcher said the parties need to keep up this visibility post elections, as well as to do more. Eugene Tan, Assistant Professor at Singapore Management University’s School of Law, said: “They need to be able to have that brain trust to be able to comment effectively on government policies and offer quality alternative. They need to rise above themselves, go beyond just being an opposition, to be - in a way - government-in-waiting.” Observers said another challenge for the opposition is to translate the good turnouts at the rallies to actual votes in the ballot boxes. Workers’ Party chairman Sylvia Lim is clearly aware of this. Her focus is to get enough credible people into Parliament. She admitted her party is far from being able to form a ’shadow Cabinet’, or offer policy alternatives. “Parliamentary presence is the first step, so we would still want to focus on getting credible people elected into Parliament,” said Sylvia Lim, who is a Non-Constituency MP (NCMP). “We may slog, we may work towards winning election, but in the end we may lose. So there has to be that spirit of perseverance to believe in the process - and getting Singaporeans to be involved in the process is just as important, if not as important as the outcome.” She admitted, though, that recruitment is a challenge. At a community event, MP Indranee Rajah told Channel NewsAsia that it is in the country’s interest to have a good pool of talent, be it from the PAP or the opposition. She said: “Just because we are a small country doesn’t mean there is a lack of people to step up to the plate, if need be. As for the opposition, if they want to grow, really I think they need to identify those good candidates, they need to identify how to have a good organisation.” PAP MP Michael Palmer feels that from the last election, younger Singaporeans seem more willing to associate with opposition parties. For him, the over-riding problem for all political parties is getting capable people with integrity into politics. For the opposition, this could mean some time before it can be an alternative to the PAP government. - CNA/ir Channel NewsAsia: Recruitment biggest challenge for Singapore’s political parties, say analysts By Wong Siew Ying Sylvia Lim SINGAPORE: Political watchers have said the biggest challenge for all political parties - both ruling and opposition in Singapore - is to recruit credible members. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said on Friday that the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) is trying to force the opposition to gather good candidates that will equal the PAP in integrity and competence so that if the PAP fails, there will be an alternative. He added, however, that the opposition has not been able to do so. The opposition was out and about in the 2006 Singapore General Election. One political watcher said the parties need to keep up this visibility post elections, as well as to do more. Eugene Tan, Assistant Professor at Singapore Management University’s School of Law, said: “They need to be able to have that brain trust to be able to comment effectively on government policies and offer quality alternative. They need to rise above themselves, go beyond just being an opposition, to be - in a way - government-in-waiting.” Observers said another challenge for the opposition is to translate the good turnouts at the rallies to actual votes in the ballot boxes. Workers’ Party chairman Sylvia Lim is clearly aware of this. Her focus is to get enough credible people into Parliament. She admitted her party is far from being able to form a ’shadow Cabinet’, or offer policy alternatives. “Parliamentary presence is the first step, so we would still want to focus on getting credible people elected into Parliament,” said Sylvia Lim, who is a Non-Constituency MP (NCMP). “We may slog, we may work towards winning election, but in the end we may lose. So there has to be that spirit of perseverance to believe in the process - and getting Singaporeans to be involved in the process is just as important, if not as important as the outcome.” She admitted, though, that recruitment is a challenge. At a community event, MP Indranee Rajah told Channel NewsAsia that it is in the country’s interest to have a good pool of talent, be it from the PAP or the opposition. She said: “Just because we are a small country doesn’t mean there is a lack of people to step up to the plate, if need be. As for the opposition, if they want to grow, really I think they need to identify those good candidates, they need to identify how to have a good organisation.” PAP MP Michael Palmer feels that from the last election, younger Singaporeans seem more willing to associate with opposition parties. For him, the over-riding problem for all political parties is getting capable people with integrity into politics. For the opposition, this could mean some time before it can be an alternative to the PAP government. - CNA/ir TODAY: Going green: It’s the attitude that counts SHERALYN TAY sheralyn@mediacorp.com.sg WHEN it comes to green issues, legislation can only go so far. Attitudes too are just as, if not more crucial. Speaking at a public forum yesterday, Environment Challenge Organisation (Singapore) founder and president Wilson Ang recognised that while green policies here can be enhanced, individuals must take ownership for the environment. Addressing a comment about the effectiveness of legislation, Mr Ang said: “Legislation is a short term solution to problems and is very top-down.” While regulations can have an impact, any changes in political agenda, for instance, can cause momentum to flounder, he said. “We have a National Recycling Programme, where there is one recycling bin every few blocks. Yes, it can be improved, but our attitudes are more important. We cannot rely on the Government for everything,” he said. Similarly, “experts” are not the only ones who can make a difference in the environmental stakes. Another speaker at the forum organised by the Workers’ Party Youth Wing said the “misconception” is that one has to be qualified or an activist to speak on the environment. But, by speaking in accessible terms, one can bring the message across, said Mr Nathaniel Koh, 24. For example, to cut down on the use of plastic straws, he told his parents how drinks taste better without using them because the flavours come into contact with more of the taste buds. “(One) does not need to know the intricacies of a problem (to make a difference),” said the Singapore Management University student. What it takes, he said, is to speak to people in their own terms and language. Mr Ang told about 20 people at the forum: “It’s not about being a ‘greenie’ but to think of yourself as a global citizen - and part of an environment that supports you.” Ultimately, he said, “think of it not just as saving the environment, but saving yourself.” Yesterday’s “YouthQuake” was the third in a series of four public forums. The final instalment will be held next month. TODAY: ‘It’s a learning process’ OPPOSITION ONLINE ZUL OTHMAN zul@mediacorp.com.sg THE main Opposition party in Parliament, the Workers’ Party, is turning to cyberspace’s most popular social tool to engage voters. While its monthly walkabouts and discussion forums remain a priority, a website like Facebook provides an instant link to its supporters, WP organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong told Today. “Communication is a two-way process, and this online platform offers an opportunity for Singaporeans to contact us directly,” he said. WP’s Facebook group of 56 members was initiated not by the WP leadership but party activists, known as E-Workers’ Party Singapore, last November. Still, the party’s two parliamentarians have a very basic profile on the social networking site. There are no “concrete” or “immediate” plans for WP’s online strategy moving forward, though. “It’s all an ongoing learning process,” said Mr Yaw. “We’re planning the right ways to engage our constituents and this takes time as we’d rather not rush things just for the sake of countering the PAP (People’s Action Party).” In 2006, it was reported that a headlong rush into online debates cost the party one of its Central Executive Committee members, Mr Goh Meng Seng, who took responsibility for creating a “bad image” for the party with his Internet postings. Mr Yaw also drew fire from netizens in May after writing in his blog that he voted for PAP MP Teo Ho Pin in the last General Election. Not surprisingly, he said, like any other media, “the Internet can be a double-edged sword”. When it comes to the PAP, NMP Siew Kum Hong believes that the resources at its disposal will be a big help in taking on new online platforms and technologies. Yet, given the current media environment, Mr Siew described Facebook as an “equaliser of sorts as it neutralises the advantages a party like the PAP has over its competition”. According to Mr Yaw, the WP Facebook site will enable the party “to get a pulse of how people feel about the issues that affect them”. But online mastery does not always lead to results for political parties, for whom the most important result is at the ballot box. The Singapore Democratic Party has the most visited political party website, and its chief, Dr Chee Soon Juan, was the first politician here to utilise podcasts to reach netizens. Yet, its performance at the polls lagged behind the other Opposition parties. The likes of the Singapore Democratic Alliance and the Reform Party, meanwhile, have no online sites, although their respective secretary-generals, Mr Chiam See Tong and Mr J B Jeyaratnam, do have pages on Facebook, supposedly started by supporters. Mr Gerald Giam, deputy editor of website The Online Citizen, thinks it commendable that political parties are using new platforms to engage Singaporeans. But it is “too early to tell if this will garner a following” or “just fizzle out in the end”. TODAY: Ripples but Yaw retains post TREVOR TAN NEW CEC MEMBERS: (From left) Ms Lilian Lee, Mr Png Eng Huat and Mr Koh Choong Yong. EVEN as discontent over his re-appointment surfaced online, Workers’ Party member Yaw Shin Leong retained his post last night as organising secretary in the party’s Central Executive Committee. Mr Yaw, 32, who made headlines in May after blogging that he voted for People’s Action Party MP Teo Ho Pin in the last elections, was apparently at the centre of debate on Sunday, when cadre members voted at the CEC election. But Mr Yaw does not think older members object to his reappointment. “I don’t think they’re paying any attention to the so-called controversy. I merely made known to the Chinese-educated members the things that transpired so far … and my eventual introspection on the matter,” said Mr Yaw, who has since blogged that he would no longer vote for the ruling party. He told reporters after a two-hour meeting last night that he would continue to contribute, as he remains “convicted about the cause”. Calling his role “a massive responsibility”, he vowed to “discharge (it) to the best of (his) ability”. The CEC has also appointed another member as organising secretary: Ms Ng Swee Bee, 27, was previously the deputy treasurer. Three new CEC members were also blooded into new roles. Mr Koh Choong Yong, who runs an IT consultancy, will assume the role of webmaster and will be assisted by businessman Png Eng Huat. Recruitment manager Lilian Lee, 29, is the new deputy treasurer. Party chairman Sylvia Lim said, with the infusion of the three new CEC members, the party remains on track in its renewal process and would continue with its outreach efforts. - LEONG WEE KEAT AND ZUL OTHMAN TODAY: Ripples but Yaw retains post TREVOR TAN NEW CEC MEMBERS: (From left) Ms Lilian Lee, Mr Png Eng Huat and Mr Koh Choong Yong. EVEN as discontent over his re-appointment surfaced online, Workers’ Party member Yaw Shin Leong retained his post last night as organising secretary in the party’s Central Executive Committee. Mr Yaw, 32, who made headlines in May after blogging that he voted for People’s Action Party MP Teo Ho Pin in the last elections, was apparently at the centre of debate on Sunday, when cadre members voted at the CEC election. But Mr Yaw does not think older members object to his reappointment. “I don’t think they’re paying any attention to the so-called controversy. I merely made known to the Chinese-educated members the things that transpired so far … and my eventual introspection on the matter,” said Mr Yaw, who has since blogged that he would no longer vote for the ruling party. He told reporters after a two-hour meeting last night that he would continue to contribute, as he remains “convicted about the cause”. Calling his role “a massive responsibility”, he vowed to “discharge (it) to the best of (his) ability”. The CEC has also appointed another member as organising secretary: Ms Ng Swee Bee, 27, was previously the deputy treasurer. Three new CEC members were also blooded into new roles. Mr Koh Choong Yong, who runs an IT consultancy, will assume the role of webmaster and will be assisted by businessman Png Eng Huat. Recruitment manager Lilian Lee, 29, is the new deputy treasurer. Party chairman Sylvia Lim said, with the infusion of the three new CEC members, the party remains on track in its renewal process and would continue with its outreach efforts. - LEONG WEE KEAT AND ZUL OTHMAN Straits Times: Under fire but WP leader re-elected He retains post in CEC despite flak over his voting for PAP man in 2006 General Election BY SUE-ANN CHIA & JEREMY AU YONG WORKERS’ Party leader Yaw Shin Leong has retained his post in the Central Executive Committee (CEC) despitesome objections from within the party ranks. According to party sources, Mr Yaw got a lot offlak during the CEC election on Sunday for making public in May that he had voted for the People’s Action Party (PAP) in the 2006 General Election. Still, he garnered enough votes to stay on the CEC, the party’s decision-making body. And, last night, when the leadership line-up for the next two years was finalised, Mr Yaw was named to his old post of organising secretary. However, an extra organising-secretary post was added to the CEC, which now has 14 members. Holding the position is the former deputy treasurer, Ms Ng Swee Bee, 28. Commenting on his re-appointment last night, Mr Yaw said: “This is a massive responsibility to discharge and I really respect the decision of the cadres.” Earlier, on Monday, he downplayed the criticism, saying that some cadres just wanted him to explain his actions. The 32-year-old businessman told The Straits Times: “Some cadres wanted to know exactly what transpired…So I gave them a brief summary of all that had happened and they accepted my explanation.” He had revealed in his blog that he had voted for the PAP’s Dr Teo Ho Pin over the Singapore Democratic Party’s Mr Ling How Doong in the Bukit Panjang constituency, as he believed in voting for the better candidate. The disclosure earned him criticism as well as praise. However, he changed his mind last month. He saidthat his actions contradicted the efforts to urge voters to value the choice provided by opposition candidates. When asked about the re-appointment, party chairman Sylvia Lim gave a non-committal reply: “Basically, he got re-elected by the cadres. I can’t tell you what was on the minds of the cadres at that time, but that was their decisionand that is how the party functions.” The new CEC saw no changes at the top: Ms Lim, a Non-Constituency MP, remained chairman and Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang, the secretary-general. Bank manager Eric Tan, 52, also kept the treasurer post. However, Ms Lim said, the party was continuing its leadership renewal process and pointed to three new faces on the CEC. But this was fewer than the seven introduced in July 2006, who replaced half the CEC. The current newcomers are Mr Koh Choong Yong, 35, who runs an IT consultancy; businessman Png Eng Huat, 47; and human resource trainer Lilian Lee, 29. Mr Koh is the webmaster, Mr Png, the deputy webmaster and Ms Lee, the deputy treasurer. Said Mr Png:”As a CEC member, I hope to raise the party’s profile as a credible opposition.” Meanwhile, the party has lost two young CEC members: senior sales coordinator Abdul Salim, 27, and editorial and translation executive Lee Wai Leng, 29. Both were in the six-man team that contested Ang Mo Kio GRC in the 2006 polls. sueann@sph.com.sg jeremyau@sph.com.sg Straits Times: Under fire but WP leader re-elected He retains post in CEC despite flak over his voting for PAP man in 2006 General Election BY SUE-ANN CHIA & JEREMY AU YONG WORKERS’ Party leader Yaw Shin Leong has retained his post in the Central Executive Committee (CEC) despitesome objections from within the party ranks. According to party sources, Mr Yaw got a lot offlak during the CEC election on Sunday for making public in May that he had voted for the People’s Action Party (PAP) in the 2006 General Election. Still, he garnered enough votes to stay on the CEC, the party’s decision-making body. And, last night, when the leadership line-up for the next two years was finalised, Mr Yaw was named to his old post of organising secretary. However, an extra organising-secretary post was added to the CEC, which now has 14 members. Holding the position is the former deputy treasurer, Ms Ng Swee Bee, 28. Commenting on his re-appointment last night, Mr Yaw said: “This is a massive responsibility to discharge and I really respect the decision of the cadres.” Earlier, on Monday, he downplayed the criticism, saying that some cadres just wanted him to explain his actions. The 32-year-old businessman told The Straits Times: “Some cadres wanted to know exactly what transpired…So I gave them a brief summary of all that had happened and they accepted my explanation.” He had revealed in his blog that he had voted for the PAP’s Dr Teo Ho Pin over the Singapore Democratic Party’s Mr Ling How Doong in the Bukit Panjang constituency, as he believed in voting for the better candidate. The disclosure earned him criticism as well as praise. However, he changed his mind last month. He saidthat his actions contradicted the efforts to urge voters to value the choice provided by opposition candidates. When asked about the re-appointment, party chairman Sylvia Lim gave a non-committal reply: “Basically, he got re-elected by the cadres. I can’t tell you what was on the minds of the cadres at that time, but that was their decisionand that is how the party functions.” The new CEC saw no changes at the top: Ms Lim, a Non-Constituency MP, remained chairman and Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang, the secretary-general. Bank manager Eric Tan, 52, also kept the treasurer post. However, Ms Lim said, the party was continuing its leadership renewal process and pointed to three new faces on the CEC. But this was fewer than the seven introduced in July 2006, who replaced half the CEC. The current newcomers are Mr Koh Choong Yong, 35, who runs an IT consultancy; businessman Png Eng Huat, 47; and human resource trainer Lilian Lee, 29. Mr Koh is the webmaster, Mr Png, the deputy webmaster and Ms Lee, the deputy treasurer. Said Mr Png:”As a CEC member, I hope to raise the party’s profile as a credible opposition.” Meanwhile, the party has lost two young CEC members: senior sales coordinator Abdul Salim, 27, and editorial and translation executive Lee Wai Leng, 29. Both were in the six-man team that contested Ang Mo Kio GRC in the 2006 polls. sueann@sph.com.sg jeremyau@sph.com.sg TODAY: New blood in Workers’ Party ZUL OTHMAN zul@mediacorp.com.sg THEY were the two youngest Workers’ Party candidates and stood against the Prime Minister’s team in the Ang Mo Kio Group Representation Constituency at the last General Election. On Sunday, editorial and translation executive Lee Wai Leng, 28, and sales personnel Abdul Salim bin Harun, 26, were replaced in the WP leadership by newer but older members, who joined the party around or after the time of the polls. With 11 WP Central Executive Committee members voted back to the fold - including secretary-general Low Thia Khiang, chairman Sylvia Lim and organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong - the injection of new blood came in the form of three new CEC members. Mr Koh Choong Yong, 34, who runs his own IT consultancy, recruitment manager Lee Li Lian, 29, and businessman Png Eng Huat, 47, were voted in after a three-hour closed-door meeting at the party’s headquarters at Syed Alwi Road. WP chairman Ms Lim declined to “speculate” about the reasons for the change, as “I am unable to tell you what was in each cadre member’s mind when he or she voted”, but the new faces have become well-known figures within the WP since they joined. Mr Koh and Ms Lee are members of the WP Youth Wing Executive Committee while Mr Png is one of the grassroots members at the Hougang constituency. When contacted about his election, Mr Png told Today: “Last time, I was just helping out; now I need to put in more effort because there is a lot of responsibility to institutionalise political diversity and to make Singapore aware that there are always two sides to a coin.” Making a return to the CEC are Ms Glenda Han, 30, Ms Jane Leong, 45, Mr Mohd Rahizan bin Yaacob, 50, Ms Ng Swee Bee, 26, Dr Poh Lee Guan, 44, Mr Brandon Siow, 31, Mr Eric Tan, 50, Mr Perry Tong, 35 and Mr Yaw, 32. The exacts posts of the 14 members - all of whom were present at Sunday’s meeting - will only be decided at a CEC meeting tonight. TODAY: New blood in Workers’ Party ZUL OTHMAN zul@mediacorp.com.sg THEY were the two youngest Workers’ Party candidates and stood against the Prime Minister’s team in the Ang Mo Kio Group Representation Constituency at the last General Election. On Sunday, editorial and translation executive Lee Wai Leng, 28, and sales personnel Abdul Salim bin Harun, 26, were replaced in the WP leadership by newer but older members, who joined the party around or after the time of the polls. With 11 WP Central Executive Committee members voted back to the fold - including secretary-general Low Thia Khiang, chairman Sylvia Lim and organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong - the injection of new blood came in the form of three new CEC members. Mr Koh Choong Yong, 34, who runs his own IT consultancy, recruitment manager Lee Li Lian, 29, and businessman Png Eng Huat, 47, were voted in after a three-hour closed-door meeting at the party’s headquarters at Syed Alwi Road. WP chairman Ms Lim declined to “speculate” about the reasons for the change, as “I am unable to tell you what was in each cadre member’s mind when he or she voted”, but the new faces have become well-known figures within the WP since they joined. Mr Koh and Ms Lee are members of the WP Youth Wing Executive Committee while Mr Png is one of the grassroots members at the Hougang constituency. When contacted about his election, Mr Png told Today: “Last time, I was just helping out; now I need to put in more effort because there is a lot of responsibility to institutionalise political diversity and to make Singapore aware that there are always two sides to a coin.” Making a return to the CEC are Ms Glenda Han, 30, Ms Jane Leong, 45, Mr Mohd Rahizan bin Yaacob, 50, Ms Ng Swee Bee, 26, Dr Poh Lee Guan, 44, Mr Brandon Siow, 31, Mr Eric Tan, 50, Mr Perry Tong, 35 and Mr Yaw, 32. The exacts posts of the 14 members - all of whom were present at Sunday’s meeting - will only be decided at a CEC meeting tonight. Straits Times: 4 schools of opposition politics Mr Low Thia Khiang succeeded Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam as Workers’ Party chief in 2001. Eight years earlier, Dr Chee Soon Juan took over the Singapore Democratic Party from Mr Chiam See Tong. No transition was smooth. In both style and substance, Mr Low and Dr Chee are hardly political heirs to the opposition veterans who once inspired and mentored them. Instead, Mr Low seems to have taken a leaf out of Mr Chiam’s book, focusing on specific policy issues rather than condemning the system as a whole. In 2006, Mr Low succeeded Mr Chiam as unofficial leader of the opposition in Parliament. Dr Chee, on the other hand, appears to have more in common with Mr Jeyaretnam. Both are strident in their criticisms against laws that, in their view, “disempower” people and “diminish” the electoral system. Over the years, the four opposition leaders have developed their own distinctive styles of politics. What best describes each approach? How have they succeeded, and where do they fall short? Zakir Hussain finds out. SLOW AND STEADY WINS THE RACE LOW THIA KHIANG, 51 >> 1988 Tiong Bahru GRC 42.2% >> 1991 Hougang 52.8% >> 1997 Hougang 58% >> 2001 Hougang 55% >> 2006 Hougang 62.7% >> Nurturing the ground Mr Low has “focused a great deal on nurturing ties at the local level” even as he presents himself as a check on government, says academic Dr Gillian Koh. The Hougang MP, who first entered Parliament in 1991, has meals in his constituency market, accepts wedding invitations and attends wakes. His Hougang Constituency Committee organises celebrations at major festivals, parties for residents, and pulls together aid for needy residents. The focus on local needs saw him up his vote share by close to eight percentage points in the 2006 General Election. >> Staying low-key Mr Low has declined most media interviews in his 20 years as opposition MP. In 1994, when then-senior minister Lee Kuan Yew singled him out as a “good MP” and “the only one worth listening to”, his only comment to the media was to thank Mr Lee, and say: “I think it is not for him to judge. It is for Singaporeans to judge, especially my constituents, whether I am good or worth listening to.” The flip side of his low-key approach? Detractors say it has not dented the ruling PAP’s dominance. >> Bread and butter rather than human rights Since Mr Low took over the Workers’ Party in 2001, the WP has become more focused on bread and butter issues, rather than issues of freedom and democracy. In Parliament, issues he has raised include increases in the goods and services tax, the rising cost of living, and the Mas Selamat escape. He has been careful to get his facts right. >> Building up the party Mr Low has attracted more professionals to join the WP, like law lecturer Sylvia Lim. “Together with Sylvia Lim, he appears to be very slowly but steadily building up a political party that is respected by Singaporeans, avoiding anything that could derail it,” says political blogger Gerald Giam. Some WP members have left, unhappy with the pace of change and attempts to regulate members’ conduct online. But the party retains a solid team at its core. >> Watchdog role Mr Low sees his role as one to scrutinise government policies and Bills, and to reflect the views of the man in the street “in a rational and responsible manner”. As he put it: “I play the role of a watchdog to check whether the Government has delivered its promises or has short-changed the people.” He is “sharp and quick in pouncing on loose statements from the front bench”, notes PAP MP Charles Chong. WHAT NEXT? CAN the mixed record of opposition politics over the past 40 years shed light on its future? Observers note that where electoral results are concerned, the accommodative approach of Mr Chiam and Mr Low has held up better than the combative politics of Mr Jeyaretnam and Dr Chee. But the various styles - and their results - are likely to remain for some time yet. “So long as the Group Representation Constituency system is intact, and the PAP continues to believe Singapore would be better off without an institutionalised parliamentary opposition, realpolitik needs to be appreciated,” said Associate Professor Hussin Mutalib of the National University of Singapore’s political science department. “Such a system favours opposition politicians and parties that ‘ride’ the mainstream political wave…rather than confront it head on.” “This is not the ideal, but so long as voters cannot devise an ‘alternative politics’…they will have no other viable choice but to work within the status quo in the foreseeable future,” he said. MP Charles Chong takes a different view, noting that voters here “appear put off by extremism”. “Alternative views expressed in moderate and sensible ways seem to have greater appeal to an increasingly sophisticated electorate, compared to extreme positions and silly antics,” he said. There will always be those against the establishment regardless of what it does, and there will always be those who are pro-establishment. “The party that can win the broad middle ground will invariably do much better than those who can appeal only to the two extremities,” he added. All four schools, however, share one common goal: Breaking the PAP monopoly and establishing a multi-party democracy. Said Dr Russell Heng, associate senior fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies: “All four are people who dare to lose and, somehow, we have never celebrated that. “They also have a certain doggedness which seems to be a rare thing among opposition figures, which is why the opposition is weak. “These four have kept at it.” Straits Times: WP leader now regrets voting for PAP candidate Yaw Shin Leong says change of heart partly prompted by criticism against him BY SUE-ANN CHIA ONLINE STORM: Workers’ Party organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong (above) had voted for Dr Teo Ho Pin in the Bukit Panjang ward. WORKERS’ Party (WP) leader Yaw Shin Leong, who won praise and criticism alike for disclosing that he had voted for the People’s Action Party (PAP) in the 2006 General Election, now regrets the decision. The 32-year-old businessman said his change of heart came after “introspection and contemplation” as he prepared to mark eight years of activism with the WP on June 24. “I have woken up from this matrix-like slumber. Voting for a candidate from the ruling regime based on my shallow personal liking and consideration had contravened the very ideals which I had originally entered opposition politics for,” he said in the latest posting on his blog. “It also contradicted our efforts in urging voters to value the choice provided by opposition candidates.” The Bukit Panjang resident said he would not vote for his MP, Dr Teo Ho Pin, at the next election, and urged Singaporeans to “vote in solidarity to deny the PAP”. Mr Yaw, the WP’s organising secretary, was caught in the eye of an online storm last month after saying that he had voted for Dr Teo over the Singapore Democratic Party’s Mr Ling How Doong. Dr Teo was the better candidate, he had said, adding: “There is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community.” That disclosure sparked criticism from opposition supporters who attacked him for voting for the “other side”, and for sending conflicting signals. He was, after all, head of the six-man WP team which stood against a PAP team led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in Ang Mo Kio GRC. But others praised him for his political maturity. Mr Yaw said, when contacted on Wednesday, that his change of heart was also prompted by the criticism he faced. Friends scolded him for letting them down. And strangers called or told him during his walkabouts that he had disappointed them. “I realised I had sent a confusing message to supporters,” he told The Straits Times. “Being an opposition member, I must put the need for pluralism as a higher priority than voting for a better municipal MP.” While party leaders did not rap him, WP chief and Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang did tell Mr Yaw that in voting for the better candidate, he had fallen into “the propaganda trap of the PAP”. Mr Yaw said in his blog that the main consideration for many who voted for the WP was “the need to have a balanced political system and a voice in Parliament…” And he accepted criticism that had Ang Mo Kio voters adopted his “better candidate” argument, “my team would not even come close to securing 33.86 per cent of the votes”. Despite what he said in his blog, Mr Yaw told The Straits Times that he did not want Singaporeans to vote for the opposition at all cost too. He said: “I encourage Singaporeans to vote with their conscience. If they really feel that the opposition candidates are not deserving, don’t support them.” Political observer Eugene Tan said Mr Yaw’s latest post showed he had decided to put on the hat of an opposition politician instead of being just a “responsible voter”. sueann@sph.com.sg Straits Times: WP leader now regrets voting for PAP candidate Yaw Shin Leong says change of heart partly prompted by criticism against him BY SUE-ANN CHIA ONLINE STORM: Workers’ Party organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong (above) had voted for Dr Teo Ho Pin in the Bukit Panjang ward. WORKERS’ Party (WP) leader Yaw Shin Leong, who won praise and criticism alike for disclosing that he had voted for the People’s Action Party (PAP) in the 2006 General Election, now regrets the decision. The 32-year-old businessman said his change of heart came after “introspection and contemplation” as he prepared to mark eight years of activism with the WP on June 24. “I have woken up from this matrix-like slumber. Voting for a candidate from the ruling regime based on my shallow personal liking and consideration had contravened the very ideals which I had originally entered opposition politics for,” he said in the latest posting on his blog. “It also contradicted our efforts in urging voters to value the choice provided by opposition candidates.” The Bukit Panjang resident said he would not vote for his MP, Dr Teo Ho Pin, at the next election, and urged Singaporeans to “vote in solidarity to deny the PAP”. Mr Yaw, the WP’s organising secretary, was caught in the eye of an online storm last month after saying that he had voted for Dr Teo over the Singapore Democratic Party’s Mr Ling How Doong. Dr Teo was the better candidate, he had said, adding: “There is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community.” That disclosure sparked criticism from opposition supporters who attacked him for voting for the “other side”, and for sending conflicting signals. He was, after all, head of the six-man WP team which stood against a PAP team led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in Ang Mo Kio GRC. But others praised him for his political maturity. Mr Yaw said, when contacted on Wednesday, that his change of heart was also prompted by the criticism he faced. Friends scolded him for letting them down. And strangers called or told him during his walkabouts that he had disappointed them. “I realised I had sent a confusing message to supporters,” he told The Straits Times. “Being an opposition member, I must put the need for pluralism as a higher priority than voting for a better municipal MP.” While party leaders did not rap him, WP chief and Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang did tell Mr Yaw that in voting for the better candidate, he had fallen into “the propaganda trap of the PAP”. Mr Yaw said in his blog that the main consideration for many who voted for the WP was “the need to have a balanced political system and a voice in Parliament…” And he accepted criticism that had Ang Mo Kio voters adopted his “better candidate” argument, “my team would not even come close to securing 33.86 per cent of the votes”. Despite what he said in his blog, Mr Yaw told The Straits Times that he did not want Singaporeans to vote for the opposition at all cost too. He said: “I encourage Singaporeans to vote with their conscience. If they really feel that the opposition candidates are not deserving, don’t support them.” Political observer Eugene Tan said Mr Yaw’s latest post showed he had decided to put on the hat of an opposition politician instead of being just a “responsible voter”. sueann@sph.com.sg New Paper: Opposition candidate stirs Net debate when he says he voted PAP. MP says: I knew because he told me By Karen Wong NEWS that Workers’ Party (WP) candidate Yaw Shin Leong voted for Dr Teo Ho Pin came as no surprise to the People’s Action Party (PAP) MP himself. Dr Teo, Mayor of the North West district, had known that WP candidate Yaw Shin Leong was going to vote for him, even before Nomination Day in the 2006 General Election (GE). When The New Paper called him yesterday to find out if he knew about Mr Yaw’s vote, Dr Teo replied matter-of-factly: “He told me himself, when I visited him at a block visit before the GE that he and his mother were going to vote for me.” That was a couple of weeks before the nine-day campaigning started, recalled Dr Teo. “That’s his choice. He has every right to decide who to vote for. I won’t say I was very surprised but I appreciate his gesture.” Dr Teo said that after Mr Yaw told him that he will vote for him, he then passed him a copy of WP’s election manifesto. “It was quite an interesting encounter,” he added. Mr Yaw, who is organising secretary of WP, has found himself at the centre of a heated Internet debate, after he revealed that he had voted for Dr Teo in the 2006 GE in his blog. Some of the accusations that the Internet community has flung at him include “contradictory” and “hypocritical”. NO CONTRADICTION But Mr Yaw himself does not see any contradiction in being an opposition member and voting for the ruling party. In the 2006 GE, Dr Teo was the PAP candidate at single-seat ward Bukit Panjang. Running against him was Singapore Democratic Party’s Ling How Doong. In the end, Dr Teo, trumped his opponent, winning 77.2 per cent of the vote. Mr Yaw himself had led the WP slate of candidates in Ang Mo Kio GRC - against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s team. The heated Internet discussion began on local forum Sammyboy last week, which pointed to a screen shot of Mr Yaw’s blog where the latter had included a link to Dr Teo’s blog. On that link, Mr Yaw added the postscript of Dr Teo: “Good MP. I voted for him in GE06.” The person, who started the thread on 8 May, said: “A leading opposition candidate from the Workers’ Party, who stood in the election against none other then PM Lee Hsien Loong, actually voted the PAP rather than… the opposition!” The netizen also called Mr Yaw’s act “hypocritical” of an opposition member. A couple of people also speculated that Mr Yaw was trying to “spite” SDP by “bragging” about his vote on his blog. Mr Yaw told The New Paper: “It doesn’t mean that you’re at the forefront of the opposition means you have to vote for the opposition. “It also doesn’t mean that just because you are in opposition politics, you must also oppose everything. I believe in voting for the deserving candidate regardless of the party.” He pointed out that Dr Teo knows the ground well and works really hard for the people and that was why he voted for him. When asked why he even revealed his vote on his blog, Mr Yaw said: “I was just stating my views. We should strive towards this level of transparency in political discourse.” Of the attention he has been receiving in cyberspace, Mr Yaw said: “I’m pleasantly stunned. I read some really good comments, both opposing and supporting my view.” WHAT POSSESSED HIM? When approached for comments, WP’s chairman Sylvia Lim, a Non-Constituency MP, said: “We respect that our members have the right to decide how to exercise their vote. “However, we would expect that if they live in a constituency which WP is contesting in, they would vote for the WP candidate(s).” Political observer Gillian Koh’s first reaction to Mr Yaw’s revelation that he had voted for Dr Teo was: “What possessed him to reveal that? “It was quite unnecessary and not in the least politically advantageous for him to do so. It would have been naive of him if he thought it was.” On Mr Yaw’s view that he did not believe in opposing for the sake of it, Dr Koh, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, commented: “One thing that is a bit more subtle or too subtle, is that WP sees itself as an alternative political party and not an opposition party. “So they always maintain that they do not oppose for the sake of opposing. “They may also be persuaded to take the PAP line based on the merit of the case. That is the WP line.” In view of the brickbats he has been getting, does Mr Yaw regret publicising his vote in the first place? “No regrets,” was his emphatic reply. New Paper: Opposition candidate stirs Net debate when he says he voted PAP. MP says: I knew because he told me By Karen Wong NEWS that Workers’ Party (WP) candidate Yaw Shin Leong voted for Dr Teo Ho Pin came as no surprise to the People’s Action Party (PAP) MP himself. Dr Teo, Mayor of the North West district, had known that WP candidate Yaw Shin Leong was going to vote for him, even before Nomination Day in the 2006 General Election (GE). When The New Paper called him yesterday to find out if he knew about Mr Yaw’s vote, Dr Teo replied matter-of-factly: “He told me himself, when I visited him at a block visit before the GE that he and his mother were going to vote for me.” That was a couple of weeks before the nine-day campaigning started, recalled Dr Teo. “That’s his choice. He has every right to decide who to vote for. I won’t say I was very surprised but I appreciate his gesture.” Dr Teo said that after Mr Yaw told him that he will vote for him, he then passed him a copy of WP’s election manifesto. “It was quite an interesting encounter,” he added. Mr Yaw, who is organising secretary of WP, has found himself at the centre of a heated Internet debate, after he revealed that he had voted for Dr Teo in the 2006 GE in his blog. Some of the accusations that the Internet community has flung at him include “contradictory” and “hypocritical”. NO CONTRADICTION But Mr Yaw himself does not see any contradiction in being an opposition member and voting for the ruling party. In the 2006 GE, Dr Teo was the PAP candidate at single-seat ward Bukit Panjang. Running against him was Singapore Democratic Party’s Ling How Doong. In the end, Dr Teo, trumped his opponent, winning 77.2 per cent of the vote. Mr Yaw himself had led the WP slate of candidates in Ang Mo Kio GRC - against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s team. The heated Internet discussion began on local forum Sammyboy last week, which pointed to a screen shot of Mr Yaw’s blog where the latter had included a link to Dr Teo’s blog. On that link, Mr Yaw added the postscript of Dr Teo: “Good MP. I voted for him in GE06.” The person, who started the thread on 8 May, said: “A leading opposition candidate from the Workers’ Party, who stood in the election against none other then PM Lee Hsien Loong, actually voted the PAP rather than… the opposition!” The netizen also called Mr Yaw’s act “hypocritical” of an opposition member. A couple of people also speculated that Mr Yaw was trying to “spite” SDP by “bragging” about his vote on his blog. Mr Yaw told The New Paper: “It doesn’t mean that you’re at the forefront of the opposition means you have to vote for the opposition. “It also doesn’t mean that just because you are in opposition politics, you must also oppose everything. I believe in voting for the deserving candidate regardless of the party.” He pointed out that Dr Teo knows the ground well and works really hard for the people and that was why he voted for him. When asked why he even revealed his vote on his blog, Mr Yaw said: “I was just stating my views. We should strive towards this level of transparency in political discourse.” Of the attention he has been receiving in cyberspace, Mr Yaw said: “I’m pleasantly stunned. I read some really good comments, both opposing and supporting my view.” WHAT POSSESSED HIM? When approached for comments, WP’s chairman Sylvia Lim, a Non-Constituency MP, said: “We respect that our members have the right to decide how to exercise their vote. “However, we would expect that if they live in a constituency which WP is contesting in, they would vote for the WP candidate(s).” Political observer Gillian Koh’s first reaction to Mr Yaw’s revelation that he had voted for Dr Teo was: “What possessed him to reveal that? “It was quite unnecessary and not in the least politically advantageous for him to do so. It would have been naive of him if he thought it was.” On Mr Yaw’s view that he did not believe in opposing for the sake of it, Dr Koh, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, commented: “One thing that is a bit more subtle or too subtle, is that WP sees itself as an alternative political party and not an opposition party. “So they always maintain that they do not oppose for the sake of opposing. “They may also be persuaded to take the PAP line based on the merit of the case. That is the WP line.” In view of the brickbats he has been getting, does Mr Yaw regret publicising his vote in the first place? “No regrets,” was his emphatic reply. Straits Times: I voted for PAP in 2006 election: WP candidate Opposition party leader Yaw Shin Leong draws online flak for revelation in his blog BY SUE-ANN CHIA HOW should an opposition leader vote in a general election (GE), especially one who is contesting the polls? Workers’ Party leader Yaw Shin Leong voted for the ruling People’s Action Party candidate in the 2006 GE - and has now found himself in the eye of an online storm. Mr Yaw, a Bukit Panjang resident, had revealed in his blog that he voted for the PAP’s Teo Ho Pin who was contesting the single-member constituency (SMC) against Singapore Democratic Party chairman and former opposition MP Ling How Doong. The disclosure was just a one-liner: Teo Ho Pin (MP) - Good MP. I voted for him in GE06. And it was hyperlinked to Dr Teo’s blog. However, it soon appeared on a popular online forum and sparked a furore among netizens who registered more than 100 postings. Many attacked him for voting for the other side and making public his vote. One posting called him a “political opportunist and hypocrite” for doing so. They also criticised him for sending conflicting signals. Mr Yaw, the WP’s organising secretary, had led a team in 2006 to contest against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his team of five in Ang Mo Kio GRC. Said a netizen: “He was a candidate contesting against PAP and rallying for voters to vote against PAP in one constituency, but himself voting for PAP in another.” But Mr Yaw, 33, in defending his actions, said he voted for the better candidate. His latest blog entry, posted on Monday, said: “I do not believe in opposition for opposition’s sake. “There is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community (Bukit Panjang SMC).” He also said, in reply to comments made on his blog, that “in view of Mr Ling’s past performance and antics, I just could not bring myself to vote for him”. When contacted yesterday, Dr Teo said he appreciated Mr Yaw’s support. “It is his personal choice,” he added. Political observer and law lecturer Eugene Tan believed Mr Yaw did what was right. “It is a responsible and principled approach to voting that entrenches democracy and ensures that Singapore will continue to have good leaders,” he said. sueann@sph.com.sg THE RIGHT TO DECIDE “We respect that our members have the right to decide how to exercise their vote. However, we would expect that if they live in a constituency which WP is contesting, they would vote for the WP candidate.” WP CHAIRMAN SYLVIA LIM, on Mr Yaw (above) voting for PAP’s Dr Teo rather than SDP’s Mr Ling Straits Times: I voted for PAP in 2006 election: WP candidate Opposition party leader Yaw Shin Leong draws online flak for revelation in his blog BY SUE-ANN CHIA HOW should an opposition leader vote in a general election (GE), especially one who is contesting the polls? Workers’ Party leader Yaw Shin Leong voted for the ruling People’s Action Party candidate in the 2006 GE - and has now found himself in the eye of an online storm. Mr Yaw, a Bukit Panjang resident, had revealed in his blog that he voted for the PAP’s Teo Ho Pin who was contesting the single-member constituency (SMC) against Singapore Democratic Party chairman and former opposition MP Ling How Doong. The disclosure was just a one-liner: Teo Ho Pin (MP) - Good MP. I voted for him in GE06. And it was hyperlinked to Dr Teo’s blog. However, it soon appeared on a popular online forum and sparked a furore among netizens who registered more than 100 postings. Many attacked him for voting for the other side and making public his vote. One posting called him a “political opportunist and hypocrite” for doing so. They also criticised him for sending conflicting signals. Mr Yaw, the WP’s organising secretary, had led a team in 2006 to contest against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his team of five in Ang Mo Kio GRC. Said a netizen: “He was a candidate contesting against PAP and rallying for voters to vote against PAP in one constituency, but himself voting for PAP in another.” But Mr Yaw, 33, in defending his actions, said he voted for the better candidate. His latest blog entry, posted on Monday, said: “I do not believe in opposition for opposition’s sake. “There is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community (Bukit Panjang SMC).” He also said, in reply to comments made on his blog, that “in view of Mr Ling’s past performance and antics, I just could not bring myself to vote for him”. When contacted yesterday, Dr Teo said he appreciated Mr Yaw’s support. “It is his personal choice,” he added. Political observer and law lecturer Eugene Tan believed Mr Yaw did what was right. “It is a responsible and principled approach to voting that entrenches democracy and ensures that Singapore will continue to have good leaders,” he said. sueann@sph.com.sg THE RIGHT TO DECIDE “We respect that our members have the right to decide how to exercise their vote. However, we would expect that if they live in a constituency which WP is contesting, they would vote for the WP candidate.” WP CHAIRMAN SYLVIA LIM, on Mr Yaw (above) voting for PAP’s Dr Teo rather than SDP’s Mr Ling Weekend TODAY: WP: Only S’poreans work at Hougang Town Council NEO CHAI CHIN chaichin@mediacorp.com.sg THE Workers’ Party has responded to Member of Parliament Seng Han Thong’s May Day challenge and has put on record that all its staff at the Hougang Town Council are Singaporeans. At the same time, WP said it is not against the employment of foreigners; its concern is that the dignity and societal position of Singaporean workers be upheld. The town council does not object to its contractors deploying foreign workers in the estate, for example, said the WP’s organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong (picture) in a press release. The People’s Action Party’s Mr Seng, who is also assistant secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress, had asked WP to set a national example by hiring only Singaporeans at its town council. The spirited exchange was triggered by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Lim Boon Heng’s remark that “a sweet, young beer girl from China” drew more patrons to her coffee shop, thus helping an older Singaporean to keep her job. WP pounced on the implication that Singaporeans are dependent on foreigners to keep their jobs. In its release on Friday, WP said, “Mr Seng has conveniently forgotten to address WP’s questions about his ex-boss Minister Lim’s insensitive comments. Instead, he side-steps them by querying whether all employees of the Hougang Town Council are Singaporeans.” Referring to its May Day message, the party said it had said: “The Government’s attitude should be to put Singaporeans first; secondly, we should resist any erosion of Singaporeans’ societal standing; and thirdly, it’s the Government’s responsibility to show compassion for the plight of the workers facing the pressure of high inflation.” In reply to WP’s latest comments, Mr Seng said the opposition “has shifted its position on the issue on foreigners”. “The WP has implied earlier that foreigners are breaking the rice bowl of Singaporean workers. If WP truly believes in helping Singaporeans, then it should offer all of its work to Singaporeans, and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners,” he said. Mr Seng said an “inclusive approach” was preferred when it came to labour supply. “The societal position of Singaporeans has never been in question. Nonetheless, we believe that all workers should be treated with dignity,” he said. Weekend TODAY: WP: Only S’poreans work at Hougang Town Council NEO CHAI CHIN chaichin@mediacorp.com.sg THE Workers’ Party has responded to Member of Parliament Seng Han Thong’s May Day challenge and has put on record that all its staff at the Hougang Town Council are Singaporeans. At the same time, WP said it is not against the employment of foreigners; its concern is that the dignity and societal position of Singaporean workers be upheld. The town council does not object to its contractors deploying foreign workers in the estate, for example, said the WP’s organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong (picture) in a press release. The People’s Action Party’s Mr Seng, who is also assistant secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress, had asked WP to set a national example by hiring only Singaporeans at its town council. The spirited exchange was triggered by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Lim Boon Heng’s remark that “a sweet, young beer girl from China” drew more patrons to her coffee shop, thus helping an older Singaporean to keep her job. WP pounced on the implication that Singaporeans are dependent on foreigners to keep their jobs. In its release on Friday, WP said, “Mr Seng has conveniently forgotten to address WP’s questions about his ex-boss Minister Lim’s insensitive comments. Instead, he side-steps them by querying whether all employees of the Hougang Town Council are Singaporeans.” Referring to its May Day message, the party said it had said: “The Government’s attitude should be to put Singaporeans first; secondly, we should resist any erosion of Singaporeans’ societal standing; and thirdly, it’s the Government’s responsibility to show compassion for the plight of the workers facing the pressure of high inflation.” In reply to WP’s latest comments, Mr Seng said the opposition “has shifted its position on the issue on foreigners”. “The WP has implied earlier that foreigners are breaking the rice bowl of Singaporean workers. If WP truly believes in helping Singaporeans, then it should offer all of its work to Singaporeans, and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners,” he said. Mr Seng said an “inclusive approach” was preferred when it came to labour supply. “The societal position of Singaporeans has never been in question. Nonetheless, we believe that all workers should be treated with dignity,” he said. Weekend TODAY: What I meant by my silence: Low LOH CHEE KONG cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg SWITCHING effortlessly between Teochew and Mandarin, Opposition leader Low Thia Khiang laughed heartily, listened intently and spoke animatedly at his Hougang Meet-The-People session on Wednesday evening. For close to three hours, Mr Low attended to his residents. However, he switched instantly to battle mode when this reporter, who turned up uninvited, asked him about the debate with the Prime Minister in Parliament last month on Mas Selamat’s escape. “The question by the Prime Minister is an unnecessary question. I have not called for the resignation of the minister. Is that not an obvious answer to you?” he told Weekend Today. The Workers’ Party chief had said he could not reconcile the principle of pegging ministerial pay to that of the corporate sector when ministers are not held to the same accountability. But when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong asked him pointedly if his deputy, Mr Wong Kan Seng, who is also the Home Affairs Minister, should resign over the Mas Selamat fiasco, Mr Low - in contrast to his usual combative style - kept silent. Why didn’t he point out to Mr Lee then that he was not calling for Mr Wong to resign? “I’ve answered that. I thought it was an unnecessary question (by Mr Lee),” was his reply. In fact, it was Mr Lee who had failed to answer his question on “minister responsibility vis-a-vis ministerial pay”, he pointed out. Mr Lee had said that even in the private sector, lapses have to be seen in perspective. He had also said Mr Low was attempting to cloud the issue since the Prime Minister was given “full opportunity” to establish whether Mr Wong was culpable for the mistake. Insisting that his question “had nothing to do with” whether Mr Wong should resign, Mr Low was puzzled why Mr Lee linked his question to the calls for Mr Wong’s head to roll. Said Mr Low: “The Government uses the same principle (as the private sector) but different standards. Is that a case of double standards? That was what I wanted him to clarify.” Still, the exchange - or non-exchange - made it to the front page of The Straits Times. It was further dissected and scrutinised not just in coffeeshop discussions, but on blogs and Internet forums. While some netizens felt the episode had been blown out of proportion, others criticised Mr Low - and the effectiveness of Opposition MPs - for failing to take the Government to task. Postgraduate law student Dharmendra Yadav wrote in Weekend Today last week that Mr Low, as an Opposition leader, “owes Singaporeans an explanation as to why he chose to remain silent in the face of an opportunity to be decisive and to show what a leader can and should do”. “Why, Mr Low? Why?” Mr Yadav had asked. But an academic, who did not want to be named, said: “Why what? It seems as if suddenly, Mr Low has a duty in Parliament to endorse the desire of those Singaporeans who want to see heads roll.” Throwing his arms up and shrugging his shoulders, Mr Low said: “A lot of people are jumping up and down but I really don’t understand why.” So, does he think Mr Wong should quit? Mr Low said: “Well, the fact is that I have not called for the resignation of Wong Kan Seng … That is enough for me to answer you.” Weekend TODAY: What I meant by my silence: Low LOH CHEE KONG cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg SWITCHING effortlessly between Teochew and Mandarin, Opposition leader Low Thia Khiang laughed heartily, listened intently and spoke animatedly at his Hougang Meet-The-People session on Wednesday evening. For close to three hours, Mr Low attended to his residents. However, he switched instantly to battle mode when this reporter, who turned up uninvited, asked him about the debate with the Prime Minister in Parliament last month on Mas Selamat’s escape. “The question by the Prime Minister is an unnecessary question. I have not called for the resignation of the minister. Is that not an obvious answer to you?” he told Weekend Today. The Workers’ Party chief had said he could not reconcile the principle of pegging ministerial pay to that of the corporate sector when ministers are not held to the same accountability. But when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong asked him pointedly if his deputy, Mr Wong Kan Seng, who is also the Home Affairs Minister, should resign over the Mas Selamat fiasco, Mr Low - in contrast to his usual combative style - kept silent. Why didn’t he point out to Mr Lee then that he was not calling for Mr Wong to resign? “I’ve answered that. I thought it was an unnecessary question (by Mr Lee),” was his reply. In fact, it was Mr Lee who had failed to answer his question on “minister responsibility vis-a-vis ministerial pay”, he pointed out. Mr Lee had said that even in the private sector, lapses have to be seen in perspective. He had also said Mr Low was attempting to cloud the issue since the Prime Minister was given “full opportunity” to establish whether Mr Wong was culpable for the mistake. Insisting that his question “had nothing to do with” whether Mr Wong should resign, Mr Low was puzzled why Mr Lee linked his question to the calls for Mr Wong’s head to roll. Said Mr Low: “The Government uses the same principle (as the private sector) but different standards. Is that a case of double standards? That was what I wanted him to clarify.” Still, the exchange - or non-exchange - made it to the front page of The Straits Times. It was further dissected and scrutinised not just in coffeeshop discussions, but on blogs and Internet forums. While some netizens felt the episode had been blown out of proportion, others criticised Mr Low - and the effectiveness of Opposition MPs - for failing to take the Government to task. Postgraduate law student Dharmendra Yadav wrote in Weekend Today last week that Mr Low, as an Opposition leader, “owes Singaporeans an explanation as to why he chose to remain silent in the face of an opportunity to be decisive and to show what a leader can and should do”. “Why, Mr Low? Why?” Mr Yadav had asked. But an academic, who did not want to be named, said: “Why what? It seems as if suddenly, Mr Low has a duty in Parliament to endorse the desire of those Singaporeans who want to see heads roll.” Throwing his arms up and shrugging his shoulders, Mr Low said: “A lot of people are jumping up and down but I really don’t understand why.” So, does he think Mr Wong should quit? Mr Low said: “Well, the fact is that I have not called for the resignation of Wong Kan Seng … That is enough for me to answer you.” Straits Times: Workers’ Party and NTUC spar over foreign workers BY SUE-ANN CHIA THE Workers’ Party (WP) and the labour movement engaged in a battle of words over the issue of foreign workers yesterday. The exchange had been sparked by labour MP Seng Han Thong’s criticism on Thursday of the opposition party’s May Day message. It had questioned if Singaporeans “truly benefited” from the job boom, as six in 10 new jobs had gone to foreigners. Mr Seng, assistant secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), said Singapore has to take a pragmatic approach to the issue. He also challenged the WP to match its words with deeds, by ensuring the town council it runs in Hougang does not hire any foreigners. Yesterday, the WP responded and said all the staff members in the town council are Singaporean. However, it was quick to add that it recognises the contribution of foreign workers and is not against their employment. For instance, Hougang Town Council does not object to its contractors deploying foreign workers in the estate, the WP said in a statement signed by its organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong. It also reiterated its views on foreigners. “The issue here is not of foreign workers’ employment per se but rather how the Singapore Government and the labour movement will ensure that the dignity and societal position of Singaporean workers are not compromised,” it said. The Government’s attitude, it added, should be to put Singaporeans first and “resist any erosion of Singaporeans’ societal standing”. “It is the Government’s responsibility to show compassion for the plight of workers facing the pressure of high inflation,” the WP said. Later, Mr Seng retorted: “The Workers’ Party has shifted its position on the issue on foreigners. The WP had implied earlier that foreigners are breaking the rice bowls of Singaporean workers. “If WP truly believes in helping Singaporeans, then it should offer all of its work to Singaporeans and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners.” He also said that, as far as NTUC is concerned, “the societal position of Singaporeans has never been in question”. “Nonetheless, we believe all workers should be treated with dignity. Hence, we believe in taking an inclusive approach that would make Singapore an inclusive society.” Straits Times: Workers’ Party and NTUC spar over foreign workers BY SUE-ANN CHIA THE Workers’ Party (WP) and the labour movement engaged in a battle of words over the issue of foreign workers yesterday. The exchange had been sparked by labour MP Seng Han Thong’s criticism on Thursday of the opposition party’s May Day message. It had questioned if Singaporeans “truly benefited” from the job boom, as six in 10 new jobs had gone to foreigners. Mr Seng, assistant secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), said Singapore has to take a pragmatic approach to the issue. He also challenged the WP to match its words with deeds, by ensuring the town council it runs in Hougang does not hire any foreigners. Yesterday, the WP responded and said all the staff members in the town council are Singaporean. However, it was quick to add that it recognises the contribution of foreign workers and is not against their employment. For instance, Hougang Town Council does not object to its contractors deploying foreign workers in the estate, the WP said in a statement signed by its organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong. It also reiterated its views on foreigners. “The issue here is not of foreign workers’ employment per se but rather how the Singapore Government and the labour movement will ensure that the dignity and societal position of Singaporean workers are not compromised,” it said. The Government’s attitude, it added, should be to put Singaporeans first and “resist any erosion of Singaporeans’ societal standing”. “It is the Government’s responsibility to show compassion for the plight of workers facing the pressure of high inflation,” the WP said. Later, Mr Seng retorted: “The Workers’ Party has shifted its position on the issue on foreigners. The WP had implied earlier that foreigners are breaking the rice bowls of Singaporean workers. “If WP truly believes in helping Singaporeans, then it should offer all of its work to Singaporeans and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners.” He also said that, as far as NTUC is concerned, “the societal position of Singaporeans has never been in question”. “Nonetheless, we believe all workers should be treated with dignity. Hence, we believe in taking an inclusive approach that would make Singapore an inclusive society.” TODAY: Singapore workers disadvantaged: WP THE Singapore economic model, one in which Singaporeans are dependent on foreigners for their jobs, has eroded the societal standing of the Singapore worker, suggested the Workers’ Party (WP) in its May Day message yesterday. The WP cited an anecdote from Mr Lim Boon Heng, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, at the recent Singapore Tripartism Forum, of a woman concerned about a “sweet, young beer girl from China” undercutting her wages at the coffee shop. According to The Straits Times, Mr Lim had said the young girl drew more customers, in turn helping the Singaporean to keep her job. “According to Mr Lim’s logic, is he conceding the People’s Action Party has created an economic model whereby Singaporeans must now be dependent on the foreign workers to retain our jobs?” asked the WP statement, which cited how 60 per cent of the 234,900 jobs created last year went to foreigners. The party also questioned if the “rosy picture” of the record job growth had masked some disadvantages. “Could it be that more Singaporeans are holding contractual part-time work positions, whereas foreigners might be benefiting from the full-time positions created?” asked the WP. The job figures required “more detailed analysis to understand the actual employment status” of Singaporeans and their employment terms, such as medical benefits and annual leave. The WP ended its message with a call for more help measures from the Government, in the context of rising food prices, “on top of the initiatives (such as the U Stretch food voucher programme) by the National Trades Union Congress”. While the party did not suggest food subsidies “across the board”, it repeated its call to reduce the Goods and Services Tax to 5 per cent and to keep it at that rate for “at least a year”. It also suggested the Government reduce fuel taxes. TODAY: Singapore workers disadvantaged: WP THE Singapore economic model, one in which Singaporeans are dependent on foreigners for their jobs, has eroded the societal standing of the Singapore worker, suggested the Workers’ Party (WP) in its May Day message yesterday. The WP cited an anecdote from Mr Lim Boon Heng, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, at the recent Singapore Tripartism Forum, of a woman concerned about a “sweet, young beer girl from China” undercutting her wages at the coffee shop. According to The Straits Times, Mr Lim had said the young girl drew more customers, in turn helping the Singaporean to keep her job. “According to Mr Lim’s logic, is he conceding the People’s Action Party has created an economic model whereby Singaporeans must now be dependent on the foreign workers to retain our jobs?” asked the WP statement, which cited how 60 per cent of the 234,900 jobs created last year went to foreigners. The party also questioned if the “rosy picture” of the record job growth had masked some disadvantages. “Could it be that more Singaporeans are holding contractual part-time work positions, whereas foreigners might be benefiting from the full-time positions created?” asked the WP. The job figures required “more detailed analysis to understand the actual employment status” of Singaporeans and their employment terms, such as medical benefits and annual leave. The WP ended its message with a call for more help measures from the Government, in the context of rising food prices, “on top of the initiatives (such as the U Stretch food voucher programme) by the National Trades Union Congress”. While the party did not suggest food subsidies “across the board”, it repeated its call to reduce the Goods and Services Tax to 5 per cent and to keep it at that rate for “at least a year”. It also suggested the Government reduce fuel taxes. Straits Times: Should 18-year-olds get to vote? WP youth forum to debate issue BY JEREMY AU YONG LET 18-year-olds vote - this notion will be the focus of a public forum organised by the Workers’ Party (WP) youth wing on Saturday. The question may not traditionally have been a major political point, but WP youth wing organising secretary Bernard Chen, 22, said that the topic was chosen because it is one that is “close to his heart”. “If youth had a chance to vote at a younger age, I think the likelihood is greater that they will get involved and interested in government and politics,” he said. He disagreed with the notion that the young may not be serious enough for such a responsibility. Currently, the official voting age is 21. The forum will be the first in a series that the opposition party has named YouthQuake, meant as a platform for raising youth-centric issues. “We feel that youth in Singapore seldom have a voice, so this is a place where they can speak up,” said Mr Chen. Three young speakers have been lined up for the inaugural forum. They are: Mr Choo Zheng Xi, 21, who runs online political blog The Online Citizen; full-time national serviceman Khairulanwar Zaini, 19; and student Anne Tan, 17. None of the three is a WP member although Anne is the daughter of WP member Eric Tan, who was part of the party’s team that stood in East Coast GRC in the previous election. Mr Choo said he agreed to speak at the forum because he feels the issue of voting age is an important one. “More important than the endpoint, whether the law is changed or not, is the process of getting young people to reflect on politics and public discourse,” he said. Organisers are expecting around 60 people to attend the two-hour forum on Saturday at the WP headquarters in Syed Alwi Road, near Lavender MRT station. According to Mr Chen, the group has been spreading word about the forum through e-mail, blogs and via social networking website Facebook.