- Joined
- Jul 14, 2008
- Messages
- 8,533
- Points
- 0
Nothing much will change
Dec 9, 2009
No need to sweat over 'cooling-off' period
Parties should work now to win over voters, not wait till eve of polls
By Kor Kian Beng
PUNCHLINES
THE political scene, particularly among the opposition parties, got a little heated in the cool month of December.
The spark: An announcement by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of a proposed change to the campaigning process at the next general election.
Voters will get a one-day 'cooling-off' period, the day before Polling Day, so as to think and reflect on how they would cast their ballots.
There will be no mass rallies that day, no block visits or the display of party symbols - the normal electioneering activities that take place between Nomination Day and the eve of Polling Day, which usually lasts nine days.
Political party websites or new media tools put out in the name of political parties will also be banned from campaigning that day. Only party political broadcasts and 'news reports' on the events the previous day will be allowed.
This idea is not novel. It is already found in various forms in many countries, including Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Italy.
PM Lee cited two reasons for the proposed change: to give voters time to think carefully and calmly over their electoral choices, and to reduce the risk of public disorder in the lead-up to Polling Day.
To me, the proposed change also aims to reduce the impact of a regular phenomenon observed in past elections - which is that opposition rallies have traditionally drawn bigger crowds than ruling party rallies and been more boisterous events.
What the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) wants is to lower the number of 'irrational' voters - swayed by the rhetoric at opposition rallies the night before Polling Day - casting votes in a less than considered fashion.
I find the idea beneficial to voters on the whole. As a voter, I like the fact that I will have some time that day - devoid of intense campaigning - to consider who I should vote for the following day.
But the opposition has unanimously objected to the idea, saying it would give an unfair edge to the PAP. The ruling party, it argues, will use the mainstream media to campaign under the guise of disseminating 'news' from the Government.
They also say there is no need for a 'cooling-off' day to minimise risks of public disorder because elections here are tame affairs. Furthermore, there are already laws in the books to help prevent unrest during election campaigns.
They also say the proposed change exposes the PAP's distrust of voters' ability to cast their votes rationally.
Veteran opposition leader and Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong told The Straits Times: 'It is one step backwards for democracy when Singapore is striving to be a first-world democratic country.'
I am worried by the reactions from the opposition camp, which seem to stem from a fear that the 'cooling-off' day will not let them end their campaigns with a bang, with the customary final-night rallies. For opposition parties, election rallies are rare opportunities to reach voters directly and on a large scale.
But does this not reflect their over-reliance on final-night rallies? They usually pull out all the stops to make rousing speeches on the eve of Polling Day.
Doesn't this suggest that there are indeed 'irrational' voters around, whose votes the opposition hopes to capture?
I know every vote counts, but is this the kind of political maturity we want to entrench among Singaporeans?
Second, the 'cooling-off' period cuts both ways. The PAP will not be able to exploit final-night rallies too, nor make use of the mainstream media.
It knows full well that it has to play by the rules to be seen as fair. Failure to do so could cost it precious votes among discerning voters.
This was a point made by Aljunied GRC MP Zainul Abidin Rasheed. He suggested that PAP ministers and MPs should not make any speeches - even non-political ones, perhaps - during the 'cooling-off' period for they would be seen as forms of indirect 'campaigning'.
The only speeches that should be made should be at events planned long before the election, for example, events involving international partners.
The onus lies on all parties to play by the letter as well as the spirit of the rules and to let voters judge if any party has breached the 'cooling-off' period.
Third, the announcement of a 'cooling-off' period now should give the opposition more than enough time to rethink their strategies in the next general election, which must be held by early 2012 at the latest.
Instead of griping over how the playing field has been tilted further towards the PAP - incumbents tend to have the advantage; deal with it - opposition parties should intensify their efforts. They can step up their walkabouts or the sale of newsletters - try to win over voters now, and not wait till the final-night rallies. At any rate, votes should be won in the four to five years between general elections, not on the eve of Polling Day.
For the past two elections, I had decided my vote way before the final night or Polling Day. The campaign period was simply an opportunity for me to assess the parties' ability to attract talent by checking out the new candidates.
It was also for parties to sum up their past work and achievements, if any, and their upcoming plans for the wards, should they win.
Thus, the opposition should not sweat too much over the 'cooling-off' period, especially if the campaign is well-fought in the preceding nine days. Instead, they should study ways to work around the 'cooling-off' period because the ruling PAP will be doing the same.
The only grouse I have about the cooling-off idea is that it comes with a proposed ban on campaigning on party websites and new media tools.
The Internet's reach, though it has grown since the last polls, remains limited. Why try to control something that you can't really control - and doesn't pose a real threat in the first place?
In the meantime, voters also have a part to play. With elections possibly nearing, they should start tracking the work of the candidates and political parties, and not wait till election fever kicks in.
Dec 9, 2009
No need to sweat over 'cooling-off' period
Parties should work now to win over voters, not wait till eve of polls
By Kor Kian Beng
PUNCHLINES
THE political scene, particularly among the opposition parties, got a little heated in the cool month of December.
The spark: An announcement by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of a proposed change to the campaigning process at the next general election.
Voters will get a one-day 'cooling-off' period, the day before Polling Day, so as to think and reflect on how they would cast their ballots.
There will be no mass rallies that day, no block visits or the display of party symbols - the normal electioneering activities that take place between Nomination Day and the eve of Polling Day, which usually lasts nine days.
Political party websites or new media tools put out in the name of political parties will also be banned from campaigning that day. Only party political broadcasts and 'news reports' on the events the previous day will be allowed.
This idea is not novel. It is already found in various forms in many countries, including Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Italy.
PM Lee cited two reasons for the proposed change: to give voters time to think carefully and calmly over their electoral choices, and to reduce the risk of public disorder in the lead-up to Polling Day.
To me, the proposed change also aims to reduce the impact of a regular phenomenon observed in past elections - which is that opposition rallies have traditionally drawn bigger crowds than ruling party rallies and been more boisterous events.
What the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) wants is to lower the number of 'irrational' voters - swayed by the rhetoric at opposition rallies the night before Polling Day - casting votes in a less than considered fashion.
I find the idea beneficial to voters on the whole. As a voter, I like the fact that I will have some time that day - devoid of intense campaigning - to consider who I should vote for the following day.
But the opposition has unanimously objected to the idea, saying it would give an unfair edge to the PAP. The ruling party, it argues, will use the mainstream media to campaign under the guise of disseminating 'news' from the Government.
They also say there is no need for a 'cooling-off' day to minimise risks of public disorder because elections here are tame affairs. Furthermore, there are already laws in the books to help prevent unrest during election campaigns.
They also say the proposed change exposes the PAP's distrust of voters' ability to cast their votes rationally.
Veteran opposition leader and Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong told The Straits Times: 'It is one step backwards for democracy when Singapore is striving to be a first-world democratic country.'
I am worried by the reactions from the opposition camp, which seem to stem from a fear that the 'cooling-off' day will not let them end their campaigns with a bang, with the customary final-night rallies. For opposition parties, election rallies are rare opportunities to reach voters directly and on a large scale.
But does this not reflect their over-reliance on final-night rallies? They usually pull out all the stops to make rousing speeches on the eve of Polling Day.
Doesn't this suggest that there are indeed 'irrational' voters around, whose votes the opposition hopes to capture?
I know every vote counts, but is this the kind of political maturity we want to entrench among Singaporeans?
Second, the 'cooling-off' period cuts both ways. The PAP will not be able to exploit final-night rallies too, nor make use of the mainstream media.
It knows full well that it has to play by the rules to be seen as fair. Failure to do so could cost it precious votes among discerning voters.
This was a point made by Aljunied GRC MP Zainul Abidin Rasheed. He suggested that PAP ministers and MPs should not make any speeches - even non-political ones, perhaps - during the 'cooling-off' period for they would be seen as forms of indirect 'campaigning'.
The only speeches that should be made should be at events planned long before the election, for example, events involving international partners.
The onus lies on all parties to play by the letter as well as the spirit of the rules and to let voters judge if any party has breached the 'cooling-off' period.
Third, the announcement of a 'cooling-off' period now should give the opposition more than enough time to rethink their strategies in the next general election, which must be held by early 2012 at the latest.
Instead of griping over how the playing field has been tilted further towards the PAP - incumbents tend to have the advantage; deal with it - opposition parties should intensify their efforts. They can step up their walkabouts or the sale of newsletters - try to win over voters now, and not wait till the final-night rallies. At any rate, votes should be won in the four to five years between general elections, not on the eve of Polling Day.
For the past two elections, I had decided my vote way before the final night or Polling Day. The campaign period was simply an opportunity for me to assess the parties' ability to attract talent by checking out the new candidates.
It was also for parties to sum up their past work and achievements, if any, and their upcoming plans for the wards, should they win.
Thus, the opposition should not sweat too much over the 'cooling-off' period, especially if the campaign is well-fought in the preceding nine days. Instead, they should study ways to work around the 'cooling-off' period because the ruling PAP will be doing the same.
The only grouse I have about the cooling-off idea is that it comes with a proposed ban on campaigning on party websites and new media tools.
The Internet's reach, though it has grown since the last polls, remains limited. Why try to control something that you can't really control - and doesn't pose a real threat in the first place?
In the meantime, voters also have a part to play. With elections possibly nearing, they should start tracking the work of the candidates and political parties, and not wait till election fever kicks in.
