Just after I praised you

Dear ST,

When writing about the loss of Aljunied to the WP, why is it necessary to imply that the voters who voted for WP are emotional, bear grudges and cannot see the big picture?

See below, emphasis mine.

It is around 1am and three young men are puffing away on their Viceroy Menthols. All are from Aljunied GRC and their nicotine intake had shot up in the last week.

Customer service officer W.K. Ho, 29, is one of dozens, possibly hundreds, of people at the Bedok Stadium tonight who are here for Mr George Yeo first, and the People’s Action Party second.

All three men sport neat, short hair in natural, undyed black. They wear the Aljunied PAP T-shirt, but sport ‘In George We Trust’ stickers as well. The frustration of Mr Ho and his friends is clear, and it is seen not just in the thick cloud of smoke above their heads.

They have been trying to reach out to their friends who are PAP detractors, and they sense that they have failed.

Mr Ho brings up numbers and data to show how things have improved, but their friends bring up anecdotes of people treated badly by the Government.

Data versus personal stories, head versus heart: These are the sides being drawn up in the battle, says Mr Ho. And it is driving him to cigarettes.

‘I had to buy a whole carton to see me through the week,’ he says, sounding a little disappointed in himself.

He and his friends have brought champagne. It is sitting in a car outside the stadium, the cork ready to be popped after a PAP victory in Aljunied GRC.

Almost close enough to smell the smoke is a woman who wants to be known only as Ms Koh. The 30-year-old prefers to stay anonymous because she is selling food from a cart without a licence.

The thin woman, clad in a T-shirt and shorts, is handling the sticky mua chee (rice dough dipped in crushed fried peanuts) with bare hands.

Her customers, most wearing all white and sporting PAP badges, do not seem to mind.

She has been fined many times by the authorities who want her to use gloves, among other things.

‘How can I use gloves to handle this? It’s so sticky. How come they don’t ask the prata man to use gloves?’ she argues.

She is the classic resentful, personal-grudge voter, impervious to the big picture, the long view.

She is, in other words, the kind of person who haunts Mr Ho in his nightmares. She has set up a cart at nearly every opposition rally and thinks the Workers’ Party will win big tonight.

The other opposition parties will lose. Her statistical tool? Mua chee sales. She will turn out to be more accurate than many a think-tank pundit.

Up in the stands is an interested bystander in a T-shirt and slippers who cannot even vote.

Mr H.L. Chua, 40, a freelance designer, is a permanent resident who came here from Malaysia as a child, blazed through his studies and went on to an Ivy League school in the United States.

He has been fascinated by the way tiny things become significant during the campaigning. A resident of Bedok, he has walked here to capture the thrill.

In his home country, electioneering is a contact sport, with the media a breathless observer, and often an enthusiastic participant.

‘Here, one Facebook comment can become a scandal,’ he says, grinning.

By 2.30am, it is all nearly over. Ms Koh will close up her tiny stall. Business has been so-so.

A large number of PAP supporters have been supplied with packaged food (piles of Old Chang Kee boxes and cartons of Pepsi are spied in one section).

Not many need snacks. She wakes up her sleepy nephews, lying on mats.

Mr Ho, the chain-smoking George Yeo supporter, has not heard good news tonight. The champagne will still be drunk, though.

‘It will console us,’ he says.


In the aftermath

  • I’m glad we have more opposition MPs this time round. I was a little disappointed that we couldn’t get more in but I think it’s a good start.
  • I felt a little sad for George Yeo but this is the nature of politics.
  • Mah Bow Tan is still deluded clearly when he thanked people for a “strong mandate”. He’s probably one of those who thinks the PAP can do no wrong.
  • Mr Chiam, I applaud your service to Singapore and I hope that you can take a well-deserved rest now.
  • The TV coverage was awful – pointless infographics (did we really need to see a mock-up of parliament, especially when in the beginning, only 1 opposition seat was won and it is obvious the PAP would sweep most seats?), delayed information (even the ST had more updated news than you), constant recycling of analysis (how many times did I need to hear about the tight race in Aljunied?).
  • What would I have done without twitter?
  • Poor Mr Yam Ah Mee – I don’t think he enjoyed his job at all. Still, he did get a FB fan page out of it.
  • I am curious to see how things pan out over the next few years. Am I optimistic things will change? Not really. But we’ll see.

Why only now?

I was reading about the subsequent remarks, notably by Vivian Balakrishnan and George Yeo, about how they’ve learnt a lot over these 9 days of campaigning by listening to the people.

My question is, why only now? We’ve been here complaining for a long time. Why does it take a possible loss of power to finally make you listen? How do you expect people to believe you when you only listen once every 5 years?

That said, I have a lot of respect for George Yeo and I do think that he is probably the one PAP candidate I can say I genuinely like. So it is unfortunate he is running in Aljunied – unfortunate for us and for him.

My predictions for tomorrow? The PAP will sweep it all. At most, Hougang and Potong Pasir might still remain in the hands of the opposition. Online, there is a lot of support for the opposition but my experience is that IRL, things are quite different. A lot of my colleagues for one have expressed genuine fear that the PAP may not win and have been persuading people to vote for them.


Saying Sorry

The more I read about PM Lee’s apology, the angrier I get. I’m glad that he apologise and I really hope he does feel some semblance of guilt and regret over how things have turned out in Singapore.

What irks me is how, for the longest time, the PAP government has been trying to pin the blame us for the problems and insisting they have done a wonderful job. Either they have known for a long time that their policies and directions have been flawed to say the least but have refused to admit it or they have no clue what is happening on the ground in Singapore. How many times has it been said that we complain too much, that we are fussy or that our expectations need to be moderated? The other thing that irks me is how he only apologises for these things when there is so much more wrong today – what about the systematic discrimination against single parents, or the lack of help and support for those with special needs, or the stubborn refusal to believe that the poor in Singapore are fighting a losing war against the cycle of poverty? Why do you not apologise for not caring for those who do not fit your narrow vision of a successful Singaporean?


Today’s ST Forum Count (and some thoughts)

Total number of letters: 22, 8 print, 14 online

Pro-PAP: [print] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,

Neutral: [print] 1 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4

Pro-opposition: [print] 0 [online] 1

Non-political: [print] 1*, 2 [online] 1, 2*

Oh boy, I have to quote this from one of today’s letters:

Some (of those who vote the opposition) vote out of self-interest because they believe that by depleting the reserves, chasing foreigners out, killing manufacturing and shrinking our army, the opposition can deliver them HDB flats cheaper and faster, give them better job opportunities and cheaper health care.

blah blah blah

There will always be unwise voters motivated by short-term goodies.

Such a poor summary of the opposition’s stand. And who are the ones offering short-term goodies at the moment?

Here’s another one:

The opposition parties, for so many years, have been selling their policies and ideas as better than those of the People’s Action Party, but I have seen no follow through.

So, instead of always asking the People’s Action Party Government for handouts to help their constituents and lamenting the unfair treatment, why not set up their own opposition investment company (OIC), the equivalent of the Government of Singapore Investment Corp (GIC), though not necessarily in size.

How is this even workable? Whose money do they put into OIC? Are the poor residents in the opposition wards going to have to contribute to this as well on top of paying taxes to the government? And then what? How do you expect the opposition to follow through with anything when they have no place in the current government? Maybe they should go form their own opposition government, the equivalent of the Singapore government, though not necessarily in size. Then they can pass policies and bills and we can see if they are good ones … oh wait …

Not bad ST Forum. I think you’ve outdone yourself today! 12/22 pro-PAP letters. Although I wish you had better quality control.

Standard disclaimer: As stated before, not scientific and contains my own biases. Also, I realise I’ve taken letters that are anti-opposition to mean they are pro-PAP, which to me is quite likely but I also realise that one can be both anti-opposition and anti-PAP.

* Not terribly sure about these two letters. And can we please stop with the “should I vote PAP or should I vote opposition? Only time will tell” sort of letters. I am not sure what benefit they bring.


LOL ST Forum Pt 2

Being ‘elitist’ is more of a behaviour than a state. You could have the world’s riches and not be elitist or you could be poor and yet be elitist. I fear poor Mr Jason Soon does not understand this distinction. Here’s his (not very well-thought out words)

IN PREVIOUS general elections, it was always the People’s Action Party (PAP) fielding well-qualified candidates, who were usually top professionals in their respective fields. The opposition, on the other hand, used to face a problem of attracting qualified candidates.

The opposition used this to whip up sentiments on the ground by labelling the PAP as a party of the elite, who were unable to sufficiently understand the needs of average citizens.

For this general election, the PAP has fielded a slate of candidates coming from diverse backgrounds. Isn’t PAP doing what it thought the people wanted – which is to see some representation from people having similar heartland roots?

However, it appears that whatever the PAP does, a minority group of the electorate remains dissatisfied, and some PAP candidates were criticised by netizens.

I wonder why the opposition is offering a slate of impressive candidates now, especially after it has persistently labelled the PAP as elitist.

Firstly, Mr Soon, find out why people call the PAP candidates elitist. Perhaps they are people who think that the homeless are “homeless-by-choice“. Maybe they are also the people, when confronted with the need for more comprehensive public assistance, immediately respond by asking “How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?“. I suppose it might be that they seem to think that all the needy Singaporeans are lazy and will take advantage of public assistance should we give any, so the best is to not give.

Secondly, Mr Soon should do a little research into what the opposition candidates stand for – are their policies benefiting the rich more than the poor? For example, they may argue that GST should be reduced because they (secretly) want to help the rich. Then, perhaps you’ll be right in calling them elitist.

Thirdly, Mr Soon should learn that just because it looks like a duck, it may not actually be a duck. It would have to talk like a duck too. A little more thought, a little more analysis – always a good thing.

*********

Why does it seem like the ST Forum gets more annoying as the elections draw closer? How many people have to write in to tell us to think carefully before we vote?

Let’s do a count:

30 April 2011

17 letters in total; 9 in the forum; 8 in the forum online

Pro-PAP letters: [print] 1, 2, 3, 4 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4

Neutral: [print] 1, 2, 3, 4 [online] 1, 2

Pro-opposition: [print] 0 [online] 1, 2

Notes: I did not count the one which was just a small quote and neutral includes those which didn’t seem related to the elections at all. Lastly, this is completely unscientific and probably contain my biases.


Fear and being a public servant

It’s quite obvious I am a public servant. I work for the Singapore government and in a lot of ways, I spread their agenda and their messages.

At dinner yesterday, a friend pointed confidently at me and said that I would definitely vote PAP because I am a civil servant. Today, I read this post.  I also overheard a few ladies discussing how public servants will definitely vote for PAP because they will be served notice if they do not (although the strange thing was, the example she used was SIA which really isn’t part of the civil service and makes me wonder how confused she is).

Here’s what I think.

As a public servant, I work for the Singapore government, no matter what party is in power. Whether or not I agree with the politics of PAP or the opposition has little bearing on my ability to carry out my job. I took an oath to serve my country, not PAP. But more importantly, I don’t want to be ruled by fear. And to vote for the PAP simply because they might sack me from my job is exactly that – allowing fear to influence my life and in all honesty, that really isn’t the best way to serve your country. So if you are a public servant and you really want to serve your country, then vote the party who you believe will do the best job in looking after her and not because you are afraid. Vote for the PAP because you think they are the ones who will best serve Singapore.

(And really, I highly doubt that our votes are not secret at least for now. Since my vote is secret, this post isn’t any indication of my voting decision.)