Singapore Democrats

Is Vincent Wijey SDP's new marquee signing ?

I'm very impressed with his speech. He speaks better than most of the PAP candidates.

Let’s be realistic and practical. By getting elected to “parliament” in Singapore is not the “be-all and end-all”. Parliament, just like any other state apparatus, is completely under the control of the authoritarian PAP. It’s just a façade to hoodwink the people that Singapore’s electoral process is based on the Westminster model and that the opposition should concentrate in winning seats in parliament if they want to speak for the people.


Don’t forget that soon after Singapore became independent in Aug 1965, the PAP refused to convene parliament for more than one year, despite the opposition at that time having had 13 MPs. After the 1968 GE when the entire House was dominated by the PAP, suddenly parliament was floated by the PAP and its “media” as the important platform for the opposition to be in. Embarrassed by the total domination of parliament, the PAP deliberately embarked on a series of by-elections, but winning every by-election until the shock defeat of the PAP in Anson in 1981. Suddenly, the focus shifted. Almost no more by-elections became the norm since then, though there were unexpected deaths of incumbents.


After the 1988 GE, parliament was not convened for close to six months for fear of Mr Francis Seow taking up his place in the House as NCMP. It was only after Mr Seow was found guilty, convicted and an arrest warrant issued on charges of tax evasion, the PAP felt it was safe to call for the first sitting of parliament.


Events of the past decades have shown that the PAP was intolerant of real opposition getting elected to parliament. As a safeguard to keep the parliament an exclusive domain of the PAP, the judiciary is roped in either to get rid of “rogue” MPs or bankrupt and disqualify potential opposition leaders considered threats to PAP authoritarianism.


Let’s also keep in mind what the prime minister said during campaigning in the last GE in 2006. Mr Lee said he could easily manage the existing couple of opposition MPs, but if the number is more than 10, he had to “worry” about “fixing” the opposition.


Of course, I’m not advocating that the opposition should boycott elections. Contesting elections, under the present circumstances, is one of the options, but it’s not the only way to move forward in the struggle to change the system.


If you are happy with the system and think that PAP has respect for rule of law , then pin your entire hopes on elections. But if you feel otherwise, then combine your strategy of electoral participation with other forms of struggle.


To go for only challenging the PAP in elections to enter parliament and then hoping to bring about change is not only naïve but also political infantilism. History has shown that every avenue has to be explored and embarked upon in challenging an authoritarian regime. And election strategy is one of the ways.

I wholeheartedly agree with you.

The areas of emphasis by almost all the speakers were distinctively bread-and-butter ground issues. Except for Vincent Cheng’s tirade against the ISA, the topics were:

- Population growth and influx of foreign workers
- Minimum wages
- GST, the cost of living and public assistance for the poor in Singapore.
- Education system that encouraged critical thinking
- Ministerial salaries (Note: this is still considered bread-and-butter, at least for the ministers).

One might suspect the SDP has had a rethink of its political direction. It could be attempting to soften its image and employ a more measured tone because it realises that its previous outlook was turning people off.

Perhaps SDP has come to realise few voters are bought over by its call for higher degree of democracy and more freedoms. The simple fact is that their main concerns are just not these.

On the other hand, it could just be a case of SDP having turning election-smart just for this period. It also can't afford to carry out illegal civil-disobedience activities since it does not desire to be bogged down by court hearings or prison sentences or get any of its potential candidates disqualified. It needs all hands on-deck for the coming GE and all key members to be available to run for seats.

Once the GE is over, it would revert to its confrontational and law-breaking ways, and start peppering its messages with the D- and F-words, all over again.

We shall see.



We shall see.