Skip to main content

Mandarin Announcement and the PAP’s Dilemma


The trial run of Mandarin announcement at SMRT trains has stopped. Is this a controversy or a dilemma of the PAP?

SMRT is a listed company, a public company responsible to shareholders for profit making and dividends.  It wants to please certain groups of customers, to make them happy, so that their sales and profits can go up. Why not? Unfortunately, the public and the commuters at large do not see in this way. In a ‘Singlish’ and English speaking society, people are more comfortable with just one lingua for more efficiency, better communication and understanding.

Then, why does the PAP want to take the risk to anger Singaporeans in the first place?  Who has the power to impose political agenda on a public listed company? Is this just a trial run only, so simple?

Receiving end

Cheong Yip Seng in his book OB Markers: The Straits Times Story acknowledges that he is at the receiving end. 
"I have seen newspapers closed when they fell foul of the government, and friends lose their jobs. Journalists have been detained. I did not suffer their fate, but many were the times when I was at the receiving end of Lee Kuan Yew's fury," he writes.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1232391/1/.html

So, SPH is at the receiving end. SMRT, ComfortDelgro (SBSTransit), DBS, Keppel, Sembcorp, CapitaLand, and many more listed companies are all at the receiving end. Not to mention those not listed organizations like PA, NTUC, election department etc., all are directly at the receiving end.    

One will wonder how many big companies and big organizations in Singapore are excluded from the list of receiving end companies.
  
Is Mandarin announcement just to please the Chinese?

SMRT at the receiving end has no power to change the policy of Mandarin announcement.  They just take the instruction from the government.  To have a test run and then cancel the trial run, SMRT is using the listed company’s money to please the mainland Chinese?

Many Singaporeans have criticized SMRT for failing to understand the reality of Singapore and there is no need to have Mandarin announcement. Even the Straits Times in its editorial of 16 December loudly declared that “Just English will do”.  Is this another receiving end instruction from the government?

Let go back and try to examine the reasons why the government wants to have Mandarin announcement at the first place.  SMRT has already enough problems and there is no reason they want to create one more trouble for themselves.  But being at the receiving end, they have no choice.

Let look at it from the view point of a Chinese speaking Singaporean.  We all know that the PAP came to power because of the strong support of Chinese educated and Chinese (dialect) speaking people in 1950s and 1960s.  This continued in the 1970s. 

But with the closing of Nantah in 1980 and the complete phasing out of Chinese schools in the 1980s, the support from them has declined.  However, they also became minority as English and ‘Singlish’ speaking voters become the majority in Singapore. This, in the PAP’s planning, can offset the balance.

Losing ground since 1980s

In fact, the PAP has been losing ground as early as in the 1980s. The loss of Anson by-election in 1981 is due to the lack of grassroots support.  In 1984 there was another loss in Potong Pasir due to weak heartlands support.

One of the biggest miscalculations of the PAP is they fail to anticipate that one day, they will lose their support from English and ‘Singlish’ speakers.  The system of ‘English First’ does not convince the English speaking Singaporeans that they can benefit from the economic growth.

Margin player

To remain in power and control the parliament, the PAP has to act like a margin player in the stock market. With regulatory and parliament changes (GRC, NCMP, NMP, EP and Marxist Conspiracy), the PAP started to add ‘margin’ power to themselves in the 1980s.

From the 1990s onwards, they also used lawsuits, avoid by elections, continued fear tactics and media control etc. to control the parliament.    

However, the loss of support from Chinese, English and Singlish speaking Singaporeans continued. This means the PAP cannot play margin like before or the people of Singapore refuse to extend ‘margin’ facility to them.

The ‘middle ground’, that PM Lee keeps stressing, is referring to the support from Chinese speaking (1960s-1970s), English and Singlish speaking (1980s-2000s) Singaporeans. These supports have all declined since 1980s.

So, they have to depend on the support of foreign born Singaporeans, especially the mainland Chinese? And so we see the introduction of Mandarin MRT announcement and National Conversation?

Efficiency

In economic efficiency, one language for all Singaporeans is the best solution. But the outcome is a surprise to the PAP. They thought the losing support from Chinese speaking Singaporeans could be replaced by the majority English and Singlish speaking Singaporeans. They thought the building of one-language nationhood would give them the advantage and more ‘margin’ limit.    

And now with the losing support of Chinese, English and Singlish speaking Singaporeans, they hope to gain the support of foreign born Singaporeans.  Can the PAP continue to play the ‘margin’ as they wish? 

This may give the right explanation for the trial run of Mandarin announcement (to please the mainland Chinese).  However, without the support of local born Singaporeans, can the PAP still play their ‘margin’ effectively?

So, they have to turn back to the Chinese speaking, perhaps Singlish speaking Singaporeans.  They have no option to the Mandarin announcement. 
To many Chinese educated Singaporeans, the bilingualism is a failure.  In fact, it is true too otherwise we will not see “Just English will do” in the Straits Times.  This is a failed psychology in not recognizing that there are non-English speaking Singaporeans in Singapore. Mainland Chinese is an easy target but it also hurts the hearts of Chinese speaking Singaporeans.
This is the dilemma of Singapore and the dilemma of the PAP.  The PAP knows they urgently need Mandarin speaking (even better with Chinese culture) Singaporeans for business and exchange with China. But there is no better environment for Chinese learning in today’s Singapore.  Mandarin announcement is just a simple step to encourage the learning but it failed again.

In the past, the PAP played their cards well, played the ‘margin’ well. The English first or “Just English will do” policy is so successful that it has transformed Singapore into a monolingual new Singapore. And the uniquely Singaporeans seem to refuse to accept our past, our multi-language multi-culture past.

Who is now at the receiving end? The PAP, Chinese speaking, English speaking or Singlish speaking Singaporeans?

20 years later, by 2030, we are all at the receiving end except those foreigners.
 EDITORIALJust English will doTransport operator SMRT said that its trial run of having Mandarin announcements of station names on some trains, which was supposed to end next month, had been stopped on Dec 5. It was not a moment too soon. The wisdom of such a trial is doubtful, given the social unease it has aroused in some quarters. English has been used to announce the names of train stations all along. So, many wondered, why the sudden need to add Mandarin? SMRT explained that it had started the trial after receiving "considerable public feedback" that Mandarin be used as well to assist passengers, especially older citizens, who rely on announcements during their journeys.But, rightly or wrongly, many came to see the scheme as directed at the growing number of Chinese immigrants who cannot understand English. Society needs to give immigrants a helping hand, of course, but immigrants must make an effort to integrate into Singapore society by learning some basic English.Singapore has come a long way in fostering racial harmony because its founding fathers had decided from the outset that although there would be four official languages, English would be the neutral language to be used by all. No one race should be privileged over the others. It will only stir resentment. As a blogger said, his non-Chinese friends found the Mandarin announcements "deeply alienating".SMRT said it did consider announcements in all four languages, but found that Malay and Tamil pronunciations were similar to English. However, some station names in Mandarin sound very different, said its spokesman. Yet, what language to use in public services has much wider ramifications, not to be trifled with. So apart from ensuring that the trains run, providers of such essential services will have to bear in mind community sensitivities. (ST, 16 Dec 2012)http://www.stasiareport.com/premium/think/story/just-english-will-do-20121216

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...