Skip to main content

George Yeo as PM leading a Work Together Singapore?




It looks like a remote possibility. But politics is a book of change; especially when a person is so committed to serve the people for his own good cause, why not.

When George Yeo called for Singaporeans to work together, and urged different political parties to work together to prevent a divided Singapore; what actually is in his mind? Is he looking for a unity government that Singapore is facing social threat and social divide?

We can’t read the mind of GY but he seems to work on something. If he feels so strong about the “Work Together” concept, will he steps forward to offer himself to lead the unity government? And if it is a ‘yes’, it will give the oppositions a hope of running the government.

Many voters can accept more opposition MPs in the parliament. But when it comes to forming a government, many have reservations.  We are neither Americans nor the English.  Barack Obama can be elected as President even though he lacked political and governing experience as described by LKY. And also, it is true for the inexperienced and younger David Cameron to be PM of the United Kingdom.

However, in Singapore, the situation is quite different. Not only the voters are not ready, the public administration sector is also not ready for such a change.  Furthermore, the international community and financial market are also not ready for an inexperienced Singapore PM.

But GY will offer a different perspective. His experience, image and reputation will fix into the political picture very well. Furthermore, he is also a respectable PM material internationally. 

If there is an offer of GY as PM and Chen Show Mao as DPM against LHL as PM and Teo Chee Hean as DPM, will you give your vote to the first team?  There is a high chance that voters will consider the ‘Work Together’ team seriously as the second term can only provide a status quo. Our new political normal will demand new expectation but not a stay put situation.   

Beyond Anwar, better than Anwar

It may be similar to Anwar Ibrahim in Malaysian politics. But GY will cast a better alternative than Anwar. He has no issues with the authority; he even has the support of Team B in the PAP. 

After PE2011, the strength of Team B, as shown in the votes to Tan Cheng Bock, can be as strong as Team A in the PAP.  Even there is no split in the PAP; the Team B will most likely support GY as PM if there is a coalition government between the PAP and the oppositions.

The question is should GY work inside or outside the PAP?  What will be his best option inside or outside the PAP if he is aiming for the PM post? 

Another helicopter another colour

Interestingly, the Chinese newspaper ‘Lianhe Zaobao’ has a different angle when covering news of GY’s working together. It seems GY is not leaving politics and his next move is a guessing game. Perhaps, his mention of Dr Ang Yong Guan has another meaning.   

In the Zaobao report, GY said he was not retiring, still doing something and trying to make contributions in other ways.  This makes you guessing (耐人寻味).   He further said the dinner was not a farewell but just a milestone. And just like when he left the army, he boarded a helicopter and he now felt like boarding another helicopter, leaving once again.  

[“我没有退隐。我还在做一些其他的事情,还在尝试以其他方式作出贡献。
  前外交部长杨荣文昨天在基层领袖为答谢及送别他而设的千人宴上,留下这句耐人寻味的话。  他说:这不是道别,这只不过是个里程碑。
他回忆道,当年他弃戎从政时,军队为他在卡迪兵营举行送别仪式,之后他乘坐直升机离开。他略带感伤地说:有时,我觉得我上了另一架直升机,再次离开。
(Zaobao, 25 Mar2012)]


Will he be boarding a unity helicopter with a different colour this time?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...