Following the outcry over the introduction of another ruse by the ruling party to tilt the playing field in its favor in the next elections, the Straits Times predictably runs a column to allay concerns and anxieties on the ground that the proposed “cooling-off” day will handicap the opposition.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced last week that a “cooling-off” day will be introduced on the eve of polling day in the next election due by 2011 to allow voters to make a “calm” and “rational” decision.
All mass rallies, door-to-door visits and public campaigning will be banned on the day including podcasts on political party websites and the new media.
However, the traditional broadcasts of election messages by various political parties on television and news reports of the election will still be allowed.
Straits Times journalist Kor Kian Beng wrote an lengthy article today to defend the “cooling-off” day on the grounds that it exists in various forms in other countries as well:
“This idea is not novel. It is already found in various forms in many countries, including Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Italy.”
It is disgenuous of Kor Kian Beng to omit a crucial fact in his article to hoodwink and mislead unsuspecting readers, that Australia’s version of “cooling-off” day or “black-out” period applies to all broadcasters equally
In Singapore, the broadcast time given to the ruling party is disproportionately longer than other parties because that it fields more candidates than them which gives it an unfair advantage to influence voters.
There is only one broadcaster in Singapore – Mediacorp, which is owned by Temasek Holdings, a government sovereign wealth fund whose CEO is the wife of the Prime Minister.
However in Australia, all broadcasters are required under the law to give equal access to all political parties and they are not owned by the government:
Furthermore, the Australia media is relatively free and independent compared to Singapore’s. The Australia media is ranked 16th on the World Press Freedom index this year by respected International NGO Reporters Without Borders as compared to the Singapore media’s pathetic 133th ranking.
All the printed newspapers in Singapore in the four national languages of English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil, are owned by one single press company - the Singapore Press Holdings whose Chairman is none other than a former deputy prime minister Dr Tony Tan.
As NCMP Sylvia Lim puts in succinctly, the boundaries between the party and the state are blurred in Singapore and the ruling party can make use of the civil service to clarify certain policies brought up by the opposition or introduced last-minute changes to appease the voters on the “cooling-off” day thereby swaying the fence-sitters to its side.
Instead of highlighting Australia’s “black-out” day to justify Singapore’s own “cooling-off” day, why not educate Singaporeans on other aspects of Australian elections which provide a fair and level playing field to all contestants unlike Singapore’s lop-sided one?
For example, the campaign period for Australia is much longer than Singapore’s nine days which enables important national issues to be aired and discussed and adequate time for the parties to reach out to the voters:
Australia’s electoral commission is an independent statutory board headed by Chairperson (a Judge or a retired Judge of the Federal Court), the Electoral Commissioner, and a non-judicial member.
Singapore’s electoral commission as well as the electoral boundary review committee in charge of drawing electoral boundaries are under the purview of the Prime Minister’s Office headed none other by the Prime Minister himself when both should be independent entities in the first place.
The election deposit for Singapore is a hefty $12,500 which is a relatively large sum for ordinary Singaporeans to cough out thereby enabling only the rich and power who are more often than not PAP candidates to take part in the elections. The minimum winning margin is also set at a high 12.5 per cent unlike in Australia:
Senate candidates pay a $1000AUD deposit upon their nomination, and House of Representatives candidates pay $500AUD. These deposits are returned if a candidate gains more than 4% of the total first preference votes, or if the candidate is in a group of Senate candidates which polls at least 4% of the total first preference votes.
Until the ruling party relinquish its control of the print media and electoral agencies, it is both inappropriate and unreasonable to compare Singapore’s “cooling-off” day with Australia’s “black-out” period.
Australia conducts free and fair elections where no political parties will have an edge over the others unlike Singapore’s which are engineered to ensure an overwhelming victory for the ruling party.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced last week that a “cooling-off” day will be introduced on the eve of polling day in the next election due by 2011 to allow voters to make a “calm” and “rational” decision.
All mass rallies, door-to-door visits and public campaigning will be banned on the day including podcasts on political party websites and the new media.
However, the traditional broadcasts of election messages by various political parties on television and news reports of the election will still be allowed.
Straits Times journalist Kor Kian Beng wrote an lengthy article today to defend the “cooling-off” day on the grounds that it exists in various forms in other countries as well:
“This idea is not novel. It is already found in various forms in many countries, including Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Italy.”
It is disgenuous of Kor Kian Beng to omit a crucial fact in his article to hoodwink and mislead unsuspecting readers, that Australia’s version of “cooling-off” day or “black-out” period applies to all broadcasters equally
In Singapore, the broadcast time given to the ruling party is disproportionately longer than other parties because that it fields more candidates than them which gives it an unfair advantage to influence voters.
There is only one broadcaster in Singapore – Mediacorp, which is owned by Temasek Holdings, a government sovereign wealth fund whose CEO is the wife of the Prime Minister.
However in Australia, all broadcasters are required under the law to give equal access to all political parties and they are not owned by the government:
Furthermore, the Australia media is relatively free and independent compared to Singapore’s. The Australia media is ranked 16th on the World Press Freedom index this year by respected International NGO Reporters Without Borders as compared to the Singapore media’s pathetic 133th ranking.
All the printed newspapers in Singapore in the four national languages of English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil, are owned by one single press company - the Singapore Press Holdings whose Chairman is none other than a former deputy prime minister Dr Tony Tan.
As NCMP Sylvia Lim puts in succinctly, the boundaries between the party and the state are blurred in Singapore and the ruling party can make use of the civil service to clarify certain policies brought up by the opposition or introduced last-minute changes to appease the voters on the “cooling-off” day thereby swaying the fence-sitters to its side.
Instead of highlighting Australia’s “black-out” day to justify Singapore’s own “cooling-off” day, why not educate Singaporeans on other aspects of Australian elections which provide a fair and level playing field to all contestants unlike Singapore’s lop-sided one?
For example, the campaign period for Australia is much longer than Singapore’s nine days which enables important national issues to be aired and discussed and adequate time for the parties to reach out to the voters:
Australia’s electoral commission is an independent statutory board headed by Chairperson (a Judge or a retired Judge of the Federal Court), the Electoral Commissioner, and a non-judicial member.
Singapore’s electoral commission as well as the electoral boundary review committee in charge of drawing electoral boundaries are under the purview of the Prime Minister’s Office headed none other by the Prime Minister himself when both should be independent entities in the first place.
The election deposit for Singapore is a hefty $12,500 which is a relatively large sum for ordinary Singaporeans to cough out thereby enabling only the rich and power who are more often than not PAP candidates to take part in the elections. The minimum winning margin is also set at a high 12.5 per cent unlike in Australia:
Senate candidates pay a $1000AUD deposit upon their nomination, and House of Representatives candidates pay $500AUD. These deposits are returned if a candidate gains more than 4% of the total first preference votes, or if the candidate is in a group of Senate candidates which polls at least 4% of the total first preference votes.
Until the ruling party relinquish its control of the print media and electoral agencies, it is both inappropriate and unreasonable to compare Singapore’s “cooling-off” day with Australia’s “black-out” period.
Australia conducts free and fair elections where no political parties will have an edge over the others unlike Singapore’s which are engineered to ensure an overwhelming victory for the ruling party.
:(
