Business Times - 17 May 2011
PERSPECTIVE
The real watershed election: GE 2016
Head-based 'smarts' alone are simply not enough for this changed electorate. By Dinesh Senan
IT WAS a big mistake on the part of many within the PAP, just a few months ago, to have so confidently assumed that the old 'head vs heart divide' issue was largely a thing of the past.
Many within the party had believed this and had shared it with me. That's one reason why the party was so evidently caught flat-footed when faced with the exceptionally strong display of sentiment by the people, by Singaporean standards, in taking the PAP to task, whilst demonstrating unparalleled support for the opposition, which characterised and set apart the recent general election (GE) from all previous ones.
However, what will be a bigger mistake is for political parties here to believe that this was the watershed election or a turning point.
Judging from the slippage in the popular vote garnered by the PAP, (75.3 per cent in the GE of 2001, 66.6 per cent in 2006 and 60.1 per cent in 2011), I feel that it will be the next election that will be the real 'watershed election' for Singapore.
Accordingly, in order to influence that future GE's more critical outcome, it will be necessary for parties, (both the incumbent and challengers), to accurately identify, and then sincerely acknowledge the biggest challenges that lie ahead of them, before rolling up their sleeves and getting down to work.
All this will need to be done within the context of the new political environment that the Internet age has ushered in. In cyberspace, there is effectively no 'statute of limitations' for anything said or done in the past, however distant in time. No party can avoid anything said or done in the past simply by ignoring it. The only way to lessen the impact of the past will be by directly confronting it and addressing the issues squarely with the people.
Key challenges facing the PAP
In this landscape and in the main, it is very much the head vs heart challenge that still besets the PAP: the party still holds on to controlling power in Parliament largely because it currently still has a sound and large enough set of intelligent, capable people within its ranks.
The prevailing 'head-related' issues are doubtlessly complex. They include addressing the need for policy changes impacting matters such as facilitating more affordable homes for young couples, striking a finer balance on immigration policy that also poses a competitive threat in certain areas for jobs and for seats at education institutions against Singaporeans, and in ensuring that the benefits of growth are seen and felt to trickle further downwards to benefit even more Singaporeans.
These aren't easy issues to tackle. However, the reality is that most Singaporeans have very little doubt that the PAP, with its arsenal of competent brains and experience behind it, will not fail to deliver quality solutions in all of these realms, once they set their minds to it. That, however, is not where the PAP's biggest challenge lies.
The party's biggest challenge lies in turning the tide to regain the hearts of the people, which are fast slipping into precariously low levels of support - a classic case of a depleting 'emotional bank account' - almost to the point of tipping the balance of votes away from the party altogether.
This despite the party's undisputed head-based strengths in policy development and governance. Head-based 'smarts' alone are simply not enough for this changed electorate.
The PAP will have to truly and humbly engage in serious-minded introspection, to identify just where the real heart-based challenges lie, before genuinely and candidly acknowledging them in discussion with the public, and then be seen to sincerely address them.
Picking up on sentiments from an unusually, and pleasantly, robust level of political discussions across Singaporeans of all age groups over these past few months, here are a few of the heart-based challenges of the PAP which are most often brought up for discussion:
Firstly, why does the party pay its officers so much more than the average politician worldwide for public service work - whether in salaries, bonuses and/or pensions?
This is no doubt a prickly issue, but one which the party simply cannot avoid addressing. Especially when the rising cost of living is hurting more and more Singaporeans, the extraordinarily high levels of pay of the party leaders make it less possible for the people to truly connect with the members of the party, or to believe their leaders can actually 'feel' their pain.
Any attempt at providing a purely economic rationale for this misses the point. Saying that the best leaders will only serve the country when their own pockets aren't too badly affected just doesn't square with the higher notion of privilege and honour in wielding the mandate of trust placed in their hands by the people of Singapore today. Moreover, post-retirement, many opportunities still abound for proven, senior politicians to earn good money - for instance, by serving on corporate boards, writing books and joining the international public speaking circuit.
Second, the PAP doesn't yet sound like it fully embraces the notion of 'Servant Leadership'. For sustainable leadership in today's world, voters demand that the tone and the language of the PAP must demonstrate transcendence from mere 'Leadership' and into the higher realm of 'Servant Leadership'.
The tone of voice needs to be watched. Humility needs to be truly embraced at all levels within the party. The more educated and financially better off Singaporean populace of today, (which is starkly different from the population some 50 years ago, which was probably 'grateful' that there were educated people in the party to do some of the complex thinking for them), will no longer tolerate being talked down to. People expect to be addressed with respect, regardless of how intelligent the politician may be. The people will, in the end, always reclaim their status as master of the house, with elected politicians performing as privileged servants. Any politician who starts to behave as if the people are lucky or privileged to have him or her serve them will be summarily disabused of such a notion in this much-changed landscape.
Third, there is the haunting legacy of the previous harsh treatment of opposing voices. The inculcation of fear, whether intended or otherwise, (through the incarceration of political dissidents without trial, lawsuits leading to the bankrupting of opposition members, etc, however justified), was arguably a useful pragmatic, tactical weapon in speeding up the process of national development in Singapore in the past (yes, too many cooks can pragmatically slow things down).
But in today's changed and improved living climate, where there is no longer the presence of communist insurgent threats and gangland triads, which might have lent some legitimacy to the party's strong tactics of the past, such fear-inducing tactics will simply never work. Threats, however veiled, will not wash with this electorate. Even if today's PAP says that it is, or wishes to be, different from the PAP of the past, the party cannot distance itself from the past simply by ignoring it. The party will have to find the inner strength to discuss past issues candidly with the people of Singapore, if it wants to put these issues behind it and move on.
Finally, there is a need for better face-to-face connection, at all levels of society. The PAP is full of extraordinarily capable, diligent and well-meaning leaders of integrity, whose genuine concern for Singapore's growth and development isn't in question. But they will need to find more meaningful ways to communicate with society. Without this, any heart-based changes cannot be effectively felt by the people.
The PAP has a strong, well-deserved and loyal following at the grassroots level, cultivated over the past five decades, primarily through its 'Meet-the-People' sessions. However, the growing upper strata of society tends to miss out on these opportunities for direct, face-to-face engagement. This is a gap the party needs to plug, especially in order to reach the increasing numbers of better-educated Singaporeans.
Key challenges facing the Opposition
It is not only the PAP which faces challenges, but also the Opposition. The people will be closely watching the Opposition between now and the next GE, mainly from the perspective of how well they fare in substantive terms when it comes to influencing policies.
Opposition members have been granted a few precious seats in Parliament by the people, at tremendous opportunity costs to Singapore, given the calibre of some of the outgoing MPs, not least of whom is Singapore's highly capable foreign minister, George Yeo.
It will not be enough for Opposition MPs to merely identify issues and highlight them. They will also need to participate actively in developing tangible solutions as well. In other words, Opposition MPs cannot behave simply like armchair critics. They must also be constructive problem solvers.Nor can the Opposition use the excuse that the incumbent party has better access to data and so is better placed to come up with solutions. This will not wash. Seats in Parliament are not meant for people who merely criticise from the sidelines. They are meant for hardworking solution developers. And that's what the people will be looking for from Opposition MPs.
As responsible citizens, Singaporeans also face challenges over the next five years. We have a duty to work harder ourselves. We need to develop and organise our largely under-developed social sector, and take on more responsibilities for shaping the future we desire for ourselves and our families. We need to be clearer and more vocal in expressing our expectations. We need to pay closer attention to the performance of our chosen Parliamentary representatives, consistently, and not just at election time.
And if we are vague about what we expect, or passive in our vigilance, then we will end up with the Parliament we justly deserve.The author is chairman & CEO of Fuelcor Global, a high-technology clean energy manufacturing corporation
Copyright © 2010 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved.
PERSPECTIVE
The real watershed election: GE 2016
Head-based 'smarts' alone are simply not enough for this changed electorate. By Dinesh Senan
IT WAS a big mistake on the part of many within the PAP, just a few months ago, to have so confidently assumed that the old 'head vs heart divide' issue was largely a thing of the past.
Many within the party had believed this and had shared it with me. That's one reason why the party was so evidently caught flat-footed when faced with the exceptionally strong display of sentiment by the people, by Singaporean standards, in taking the PAP to task, whilst demonstrating unparalleled support for the opposition, which characterised and set apart the recent general election (GE) from all previous ones.
However, what will be a bigger mistake is for political parties here to believe that this was the watershed election or a turning point.
Judging from the slippage in the popular vote garnered by the PAP, (75.3 per cent in the GE of 2001, 66.6 per cent in 2006 and 60.1 per cent in 2011), I feel that it will be the next election that will be the real 'watershed election' for Singapore.
Accordingly, in order to influence that future GE's more critical outcome, it will be necessary for parties, (both the incumbent and challengers), to accurately identify, and then sincerely acknowledge the biggest challenges that lie ahead of them, before rolling up their sleeves and getting down to work.
All this will need to be done within the context of the new political environment that the Internet age has ushered in. In cyberspace, there is effectively no 'statute of limitations' for anything said or done in the past, however distant in time. No party can avoid anything said or done in the past simply by ignoring it. The only way to lessen the impact of the past will be by directly confronting it and addressing the issues squarely with the people.
Key challenges facing the PAP
In this landscape and in the main, it is very much the head vs heart challenge that still besets the PAP: the party still holds on to controlling power in Parliament largely because it currently still has a sound and large enough set of intelligent, capable people within its ranks.
The prevailing 'head-related' issues are doubtlessly complex. They include addressing the need for policy changes impacting matters such as facilitating more affordable homes for young couples, striking a finer balance on immigration policy that also poses a competitive threat in certain areas for jobs and for seats at education institutions against Singaporeans, and in ensuring that the benefits of growth are seen and felt to trickle further downwards to benefit even more Singaporeans.
These aren't easy issues to tackle. However, the reality is that most Singaporeans have very little doubt that the PAP, with its arsenal of competent brains and experience behind it, will not fail to deliver quality solutions in all of these realms, once they set their minds to it. That, however, is not where the PAP's biggest challenge lies.
The party's biggest challenge lies in turning the tide to regain the hearts of the people, which are fast slipping into precariously low levels of support - a classic case of a depleting 'emotional bank account' - almost to the point of tipping the balance of votes away from the party altogether.
This despite the party's undisputed head-based strengths in policy development and governance. Head-based 'smarts' alone are simply not enough for this changed electorate.
The PAP will have to truly and humbly engage in serious-minded introspection, to identify just where the real heart-based challenges lie, before genuinely and candidly acknowledging them in discussion with the public, and then be seen to sincerely address them.
Picking up on sentiments from an unusually, and pleasantly, robust level of political discussions across Singaporeans of all age groups over these past few months, here are a few of the heart-based challenges of the PAP which are most often brought up for discussion:
Firstly, why does the party pay its officers so much more than the average politician worldwide for public service work - whether in salaries, bonuses and/or pensions?
This is no doubt a prickly issue, but one which the party simply cannot avoid addressing. Especially when the rising cost of living is hurting more and more Singaporeans, the extraordinarily high levels of pay of the party leaders make it less possible for the people to truly connect with the members of the party, or to believe their leaders can actually 'feel' their pain.
Any attempt at providing a purely economic rationale for this misses the point. Saying that the best leaders will only serve the country when their own pockets aren't too badly affected just doesn't square with the higher notion of privilege and honour in wielding the mandate of trust placed in their hands by the people of Singapore today. Moreover, post-retirement, many opportunities still abound for proven, senior politicians to earn good money - for instance, by serving on corporate boards, writing books and joining the international public speaking circuit.
Second, the PAP doesn't yet sound like it fully embraces the notion of 'Servant Leadership'. For sustainable leadership in today's world, voters demand that the tone and the language of the PAP must demonstrate transcendence from mere 'Leadership' and into the higher realm of 'Servant Leadership'.
The tone of voice needs to be watched. Humility needs to be truly embraced at all levels within the party. The more educated and financially better off Singaporean populace of today, (which is starkly different from the population some 50 years ago, which was probably 'grateful' that there were educated people in the party to do some of the complex thinking for them), will no longer tolerate being talked down to. People expect to be addressed with respect, regardless of how intelligent the politician may be. The people will, in the end, always reclaim their status as master of the house, with elected politicians performing as privileged servants. Any politician who starts to behave as if the people are lucky or privileged to have him or her serve them will be summarily disabused of such a notion in this much-changed landscape.
Third, there is the haunting legacy of the previous harsh treatment of opposing voices. The inculcation of fear, whether intended or otherwise, (through the incarceration of political dissidents without trial, lawsuits leading to the bankrupting of opposition members, etc, however justified), was arguably a useful pragmatic, tactical weapon in speeding up the process of national development in Singapore in the past (yes, too many cooks can pragmatically slow things down).
But in today's changed and improved living climate, where there is no longer the presence of communist insurgent threats and gangland triads, which might have lent some legitimacy to the party's strong tactics of the past, such fear-inducing tactics will simply never work. Threats, however veiled, will not wash with this electorate. Even if today's PAP says that it is, or wishes to be, different from the PAP of the past, the party cannot distance itself from the past simply by ignoring it. The party will have to find the inner strength to discuss past issues candidly with the people of Singapore, if it wants to put these issues behind it and move on.
Finally, there is a need for better face-to-face connection, at all levels of society. The PAP is full of extraordinarily capable, diligent and well-meaning leaders of integrity, whose genuine concern for Singapore's growth and development isn't in question. But they will need to find more meaningful ways to communicate with society. Without this, any heart-based changes cannot be effectively felt by the people.
The PAP has a strong, well-deserved and loyal following at the grassroots level, cultivated over the past five decades, primarily through its 'Meet-the-People' sessions. However, the growing upper strata of society tends to miss out on these opportunities for direct, face-to-face engagement. This is a gap the party needs to plug, especially in order to reach the increasing numbers of better-educated Singaporeans.
Key challenges facing the Opposition
It is not only the PAP which faces challenges, but also the Opposition. The people will be closely watching the Opposition between now and the next GE, mainly from the perspective of how well they fare in substantive terms when it comes to influencing policies.
Opposition members have been granted a few precious seats in Parliament by the people, at tremendous opportunity costs to Singapore, given the calibre of some of the outgoing MPs, not least of whom is Singapore's highly capable foreign minister, George Yeo.
It will not be enough for Opposition MPs to merely identify issues and highlight them. They will also need to participate actively in developing tangible solutions as well. In other words, Opposition MPs cannot behave simply like armchair critics. They must also be constructive problem solvers.Nor can the Opposition use the excuse that the incumbent party has better access to data and so is better placed to come up with solutions. This will not wash. Seats in Parliament are not meant for people who merely criticise from the sidelines. They are meant for hardworking solution developers. And that's what the people will be looking for from Opposition MPs.
As responsible citizens, Singaporeans also face challenges over the next five years. We have a duty to work harder ourselves. We need to develop and organise our largely under-developed social sector, and take on more responsibilities for shaping the future we desire for ourselves and our families. We need to be clearer and more vocal in expressing our expectations. We need to pay closer attention to the performance of our chosen Parliamentary representatives, consistently, and not just at election time.
And if we are vague about what we expect, or passive in our vigilance, then we will end up with the Parliament we justly deserve.The author is chairman & CEO of Fuelcor Global, a high-technology clean energy manufacturing corporation
Copyright © 2010 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved.
