Skip to main content

Singapore’s Future: Status Quo, Transition or Transformation


Prof. Su Guaning provided an interesting observation when he moderated the Mandarin Symposium “China’s Future: Transition or Transformation?” on October 5. He said Singapore faced the same problem of transition or transformation like the Chinese. However, besides the two, I would like to add one more possibility: status quo – this is the PAP!

Prof. Su thought the PAP was moving towards either transition or transformation. Therefore, he suggested leaning from the Chinese Communist Party about their “Inner-party Democracy”.  However, changes within a political party are certainly different from changes outside the party and changes within a country.

If the men in white represent the status quo in future Singapore, then what colors are for transition and transformation. Blue is most likely to be the transition and red is for transformation.  And other colors like orange, pink or mixed-colors are either between white and blue or blue and red.

The white party wants to project themselves as a transition party. National Conversation is one of their strategies.  Unfortunately, this is just another “Inner-party Democracy”. They cannot go beyond specified topics or themes and most importantly, they will keep their old policies without even any adjustments, like:  ISA, immigration policy, control of mainstream media, public housing, health care and foreign reserve.

The blue party is closer to the position of transition.  “
You have to give credit where credit is due.” They acknowledge the past contribution of the white party and seek to improve, modify or even ‘out do” the white party in some ways.  Waiting for white and red to make mistakes is also their strategy.  Who dare to say doing nothing is not a strategy!

Transformation will go to the party in red. They are looking for change in many aspects: health care, education, CPF, population policy, foreign reserve, human rights etc.  They have also come out with their alternative proposals and suggestions.  No other alternative parties have produced alternative budget or other policy changes like the red party before.
  
Transition is the middle ground?

The white party does not like the image of status quo even though many things that they are doing are as conservative as before, for example, the PM thinks he wants to keep his job till 70, replacement PM need time to train, high economic growth, no major policy changes, etc.

But election results and ground feedback indicate people want some transitional changes or reforms. Hence, they have to ‘wayang’ a bit.  But is the ‘wayang’ like National Conversation effective enough to project a new or changed image of white party? More ‘wayangs’ are expected when 2016 comes nearer.

The true color of the white party is still status quo even the blue party wanted to give them a ‘due’ credit of transition:    

Budget 2012 reflects shift in govt's mindset: Low Thia Khiang
MP for Aljunied GRC Low Thia Khiang called this year's Budget a special one.
He put it in contrast to previous Budgets, which he said focused on the economy.
Speaking in Mandarin, Mr Low said reducing dependency on foreign workers and restructuring the economy may even slow down growth.
Mr Low said: "This is the first Budget after the 2011 election. It points to the direction of future governing and the focus of government policy from focusing on economy to social policy, from the economy's role to raising the wages of lower-income Singaporeans. This is a major shift in the government's thinking and mindset. The government is therefore making a formal statement after much reflection after the 2011 election."
Mr Low's comments prompted a rebuttal from MP for Chua Chu Kang GRC Low Yen Ling.
Ms Low said: "He had described this year's Budget as a change in the government's thinking and mindset. In the past, the government prioritised the economy, now it's prioritising at the foundation of society. I think this view is little narrow. As a little red dot without natural resources, Singapore has to be concerned about the economy at all times. Having worked at EDB for 10 years, I can feel this importance. Only with an effective economic policy can a country create wealth for society and have excess to enable people to live well."http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1186081/1/.html 
So, it there a change of thinking and mindset for the white party? Perhaps, many PAP members (like MP Low) still prefer the old way and old thinking of public policy. But transition seems to be the middle ground and the white and blue parties are battling in this ground.

PE2011 shows that transformation may be an ideal state and intellectuals may prefer this option. But majority of the people would like to see a ‘smooth’ transition. This is either through the ‘false’ picture of National Conversation and other transitional changes from the white or the inaction of ‘silent’ transition from the blue.

Whichever way it goes, people would like to see a transition rather than status quo or transformation.  Transformation may come later when people think (and sick of) transition is no more an effective tool to solve their problems.

As far as PM wants to keep his post till age 70, the white party will remain status quo in policy, strategy and even leadership.  Some people may be misled by all the ‘wayangs” and believed they have moved from status quo to transition and give them a due credit.

As for the red party, as a strategy shift, will they soften the transformation elements and move towards transition? As for other colors, for survival, they will have to observe the movements of these three colors and find a suitable position for themselves. Failure to do so will see more disappearance of small political parties in Singapore.

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...