|
Why did Dr Chee kick Mr Chiam See Tong out of the SDP?
He didn't. It was Mr Chiam who resigned as secretary-general of the SDP.
Following the election in 1993, Dr Chee was sacked by the National University of Singapore where he was a Lecturer. Dr Chee went on a hunger strike as a mark of protest. Mr Chiam first supported Dr Chee's action but later changed his mind and called for the Party to censure his the assistant secretary-general (Dr Chee was elected to the post in February 1993).
None of the Central Executive Committee (CEC) members supported Mr Chiam's motion whereupon the Party leader tended his resignation, citing that he had lost the confidence of his colleagues.
A few of the CEC members, including Dr Chee, tried to persuade Mr Chiam to remain as secretary-general. However, Mr Chiam stated that he would do so only if he could be granted the power to appoint and dismiss the Party's cadre members. He also wanted the removal of Mr Wong Hong Toy as vice-chairman.
Under the Party's constitution a simple majority of the CEC was needed to appoint cadre members, not any one individual leader. The CEC did not have the constitutional power to accede to Mr Chiam's demands.
A few weeks later, Mr Chiam gave a speech at the Singapore Press Club attacking the Party's leadership in a vicious manner. Ironically, it was he who forbade leaders from criticising the party after they left it by making them sign oaths.
It was only after his speech at the Singapore Press Clubs, which is always looking for an opportunity to run down the opposition, that the CEC voted to expel Mr Chiam.
(The Press Club had extended a similar invitation to Dr Chee to counter Mr Chiam. Knowing that the PAP-controlled media had every intention to fan the flames Dr Chee declined the invitation. But when he subsequently informed the organizers that he would speak but on the Party's alternative policy ideas instead of the altercation with Mr Chiam, the Press Club withdrew the invitation.)
Despite all this Dr Chee approached Mr Chiam a few months later to invite him to join an SDP delegation that was going to visit the Australian Parliament in Canberra. Mr Chiam declined.
The PAP has seized on this matter and deliberately portrayed the falsehood that Dr Chee ousted Mr Chiam from the SDP.
Why does the Singapore Democrats focus on human rights issues and not bread-and-butter issues?
This is not true. The SDP has repeatedly brought up pocket-book issues such as cost of living, withholding of our CPF funds, jobs for Singaporeans, minimum wage, ministers' pay and so on.
Our newspaper, The New Democrat, regularly focuses on these issues as we are aware that these are matters that Singaporeans are concerned about. Our flyers and speeches during the elections discuss nothing but such issues.
Our Campaign Against Repression and Exploitation of Singaporeans 2008 (CARES '08) as well as the People Against Poverty (PAP) campaign in 2002 testify to our intense interest in such issues.
The SDP has even published an Economic Report in 1995 specifically on matters related to bread-and-butter issues. SDP also fought the Government on healthcare costs in Parliament in a Select Committee hearing.
Dr Chee's books such as Dare to Change; Your Future, My faith, Our Freedom; and A Nation Cheated regularly focus on economic issues
In fact, Dr Chee has been repeatedly prosecuted and jailed because he insists on talking to Singaporeans about cost-of-living issues.
So it is patently untrue to say that SDP does not bring up kitchen-table issues. The reason why Singaporeans don't think that the SDP is talking enough about these topics is because the mainstream press refuses to report on such matters whenever the SDP raises them.
Having said this, issues about the people's civil and political rights are just as important. Without these rights Singaporeans cannot pressure the PAP Government to listen to them. this allows the PAP to continue to raise the GST, introduce price hikes, increasing the salaries of the ministers even as the poor continue to see their wages shrink.
elections are controlled by the PAP to the extent that there is little or no chance for the opposition candidates to be elected in enough numbers to make any difference in parliament. One way to resolve this problem is to pressure the PAP to reform the election system to make it free and fair.
Ironically to do this, we need to first claim back our political rights of freedom of speech and assembly.
So it is crucially important for the opposition to talk about bread-and-butter issues while at the same time emphasize on the need for the people's civil and political rights.
Why does the SDP insist on breaking the law when it comes to protests and making public speeches? First, the Singapore Constitution guarantees citizens freedoms of speech, association and assembly. The Constitution is a collection of fundamental principles which sets the spirit upon which the country is to be governed, and that is the spirit of democracy. The PAP Government has introduced laws to override the Constitution by ensuring that these rights are denied to Singaporeans. This is so that it can deprive the people of their power, thereby strengthening its grip on Singapore. As I have made clear, laws that are just and serve society must be obeyed. Laws that are unjust and serve the avarice of the few must be abolished. What we in Singapore must resist is the dogma that all laws passed by the PAP Government are good and therefore must be obeyed without question. This is a sign of a society with an arrested maturation process, a sign of an amoral, if not immoral, society.
Morally it is necessary, desirable even, for society to take action against unjust laws. In fact, the alternative—doing nothing—is unacceptable.
Why does the SDP only criticise the Government but not propose any alternative ideas?
Again, this is the lie that the PAP and its media keeps trying to propagate. A look at the section Manifesto will show that the Singapore Democrats have articulated clearly and concisely alternative policies in the various areas such as the economy, wealth distribution, social security and so on.
The media refuses to give coverage to these issues leading the people to think that the SDP has not put forth such ideas.
Dr Chee Soon Juan has also written extensively on such alternatives in his books mentioned earlier.
|
Singapore Democrats
