TR EMERITUS

By Fang Zhi Yuan, Chief Editor Mr Tan Kin Lian's unexpected announcement of his intention to run for public office has taken many Singaporeans by surprise, including his ex-employees and supporters. After all, it was only 2 weeks ago that he played down his political ambitions citing "age and family" as concerns. While his previous blog posts were focused primarily on financial matters, he had been more forthcoming lately of his political views including writing a manifesto of what he want to do if he gets elected into public office. Though Mr Tan had been coy about his intention to run for public office by insisting that he will only do so if he is able to collect 100,000 signatures from Singaporeans, it appears he is pretty serious and clear of his next course of action. Is this the right timing for Mr Tan to launch his bid for public office ? It may not be the appropriate time now for the following reasons: 1. There are no signs an election will be called soon, either for the presidency or a general election. The current president S R Nathan is in the pink of health and there are no signs he will be stepping down by the next election in 2 years time. Is it too early to fire the shot ?    2. The minibond fiasco is still not resolved satisfactorily and this will be an unwelcomed distraction. Preparing a presidential bid is not a small matter and it will be a heavy toll on him given his committment to the investors.   3. Just this week, Mr Chua Sheng Yang wrote a highly charged letter to The Straits Times Forum questioning Mr Tan's political agenda for helping the investors by staging protests at Hong Lim Park. With Mr Tan now abandoning his previously neutral political stance, it will only give free ammunition to his detractors to shoot at him.   4. Mr Tan just told the media in a recent interview that he did not 'harbor any political ambition'. What spin will the mainstream media come up next to discredit him for this apparent abrupt 'flip-flop' ? 5. There is insufficient public interest in the matter at the present moment. People will ask why time and resources are being spent on an election which is not imminent in the near future. With the current economic downturn, Singaporeans are more concerned about their rice-bowls than their candidate for the next presidential election.   6. Did Mr Tan sound out the establishment yet about their views ? Though anybody with the qualifications can contest the presidency, it is an unspoken rule that nobody can sit on that seat without prior tacit approval from Singapore's 'godfather'. Let us not forget the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong and the last wistful challenger to the coveted 'throne', Mr Andrew Kwan, who is a PAP cadre himself. Nevertheless, one may argue that there will never be a perfect time and it is better to 'strike when the iron is hot' rather than to miss the boat later. Mr Tan's smart move to test the ground first by following ex-Filipino president Corazon Aquino's example of starting a petition to garner support for his bid is a testimony to this newcomer's political guile and maturity. If he manage to gather the 100,000 signatures he has set for himself to run for president, then nobody else, even from the establishment can afford to challenge him directly. On the other hand, he can easily extricate himself from the tricky situation should he fail to obtain the necessary support he has set for himself by citing that Singaporeans are not ready for 'change' yet. Now that the arrow has been released, there is no turning back. Mr Tan has to thread carefully from now onwards for there is plenty of time ahead for "unforeseen circumstances" to arise out of nowhere to derail his bid. [polldaddy poll=1132285]  Read More →

By Fang Zhi Yuan, Chief Editor So Mr Tan Kin Lian has finally made his political ambitions known and it is The Sunday Times which break the news to Singaporeans in its glaring headlines today "Tan Kin Lian eyes elected presidency"  If one glances through the article quickly, one may get the impression that The Sunday Times is helping Mr Tan to announce his bid. Or is that so ? The mainstream media has the knack of inserting subtle innuendoes in its articles to generate misperception amongst unwary readers who do not read carefully between the lines. Take for example these 2 paragraphs coming after a brief mention of Mr Tan's role as a consumer advocate for the troubled minibond investors : "In May this year, just 14 months after his resignation from NTUC Income, he mounted an online protest over a move by his former employer to cut annual bonus payouts for life policies sold after 1993. The move would affect two NTUC Income policies that he owns. Three weeks later, he called a truce with the insurer." In the first place, there is no need to include this episode from Mr Tan's past which seems to insinuate that Mr Tan has a "history" of "betraying" his employer (if taken in the context of Mr Tan's involvement with the PAP later on) and his motives are not entirely altruistic. (he only bothers to protest against his ex-employer because he owns 2 policies which were affected by the new changes implemented). Most shockingly, the journalist did not bother to publish Mr Tan's reasons for launching an online protest against NTUC INCOME then and for calling a "truce" 3 weeks later if that is the correct word to use as it implies that it was Mr Tan who backed out from "confronting" his ex-employer. The article next spent 8 paragraphs on Mr Tan's past as a PAP member, with emphasis on his intimate links with senior PAP leaders by selective use of words to describe him as a "party stalwart", "hand-picked by Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong" and "a regular attendee at the annual PAP conference." If Mr Tan is indeed going to run for the President or MP as an independent, or member of another party, he needs to secure the support of the opposition camp which constitutes at least 20% of the electorate. This group of voters are ferociously anti-PAP and will reject any candidate seen proposed or supported by the establishment. By highlighting the fact that Mr Tan is very much a "PAP man" in spite of him voicing his objections to some PAP policies now, it will invariably cast doubts in the minds of these opposition voters whose support for Mr Tan may waver. They will naturally think: "If Mr Tan really wants to change the PAP system, why does he wait for 30 years till now to do so. Why didn't he join forces with J.B. Jeyaretnam or Lee Siew Choh earlier when the chances of challenging the PAP is greater ?" This brings us to the last unanswered question: What 'change' does Mr Tan mean exactly when he said this: "I need to know that people want the change. If not, then there is no point." Does 'change' refers to changing the entire government, changing the PAP system or simply having an alternative voice in parliament to speak up for the people ? The journalist did not elaborate on this crucial point and leave it hanging in the air for readers to second guess Mr Tan's intention. Though there is a rising proportion of Singaporeans who want to have an effective opposition to check on the PAP in parliament, I doubt that they are ready for a real "change" of government. Many Singaporeans still trust the PAP to run the country in spite of the numerous mistakes they have made in the past because they have never lived a life under a different government. To them, PAP is the government. Mr Tan has to fine-tune his message of "change" to cater to the middle ground or he will risk ailenating this influential bloc of voters. Change the near complete hegemony enjoyed by the PAP currently in parliament by having more independent alternative (not opposition) voices to speak up for the people with the PAP still in power is fine, but not changing the entire government or PAP 'system' which is unacceptable to Singaporeans so used to the "paternalistic care" of the PAP. In his now infamous 'condolence letter' to the deceased Jeyaretnam's sons, PM Lee wrote that Jeyaretnam seeks to 'destroy the PAP's system'. What he didn't mention is that because Jeyaretnam's life was 'destroyed' by the PAP because he is a threat to their 'system'. Just 10 days ago, PM Lee urged Singaporeans to "work with the government" instead of joining or setting up another political party to challenge the PAP due to the "limited talent pool" here. Unless Mr Tan has secured the tacit approval from the establishment to run for public office, his latest announcement may not be too welcomed by certain quarters in the government going by the slant the state media has been adopting so far against him. EDITORS' NOTE: We will bring you more critical analyzes of Mr Tan Kin Lian's bid for political office tomorrow.  Read More →

By Lim Siow Kuan, Deputy Chief Editor and Malaysian Correspondent Last year at this time, Democratic Party Presidential nominee Hilliary Clinton was leading Barack Obama by nearly 20 points in some polls. She was the anointed heir of the Democratic Party, a scion of the Clinton dynasty backed by powerful connections in the party and oligarchs from the corporate world. Yet she lost the primary to a first term senator from Illinois who raised more than 60% of his campaign funds from small donors. The Malaysian government which has been at odds with the the country's growing cyber-dissidents, bloggers and netizens was forced to admit its mistake of ignoring the new media, leading to a poor showing in the last election which saw the rejuvenated opposition won an unprecedented 5 states and 82 seats in Parliament, thereby denying the Barisan Nasional its customary two-third majority. Will Singapore's PAP and its media be scratching their heads too if they lose the next general election ? The young has always been at the forefront of change throughout the world. Fired up by a pristine idealism and passion for civil liberty, social justice and human rights, they will go to great lengths and sometimes sacrifices to fulfil their aspirations. We see them in action during the 1988 Burmese uprising against General Ne Win's ruthless military junta leading to the incarceration of over 2000 college and university students, many of them the creame la crop of the improverished Southeast Asian country. A year later, students from Qinghua and Beijing Universities staged a massive protest against China's Communist Party in front of Tiananmen square. The photo of a young student standing in front of a tank in stark defiance remained deeply etched in our collective consciousness even nearly after two decades and today, Hong Kong still conducts a yearly candle-night vigil to commemorate those who lost their lives during the Tiananmen incident. The mainstream media will never understand why, in spite of their vast resources, superior technology and supposedly well trained journalists, they are struggling for readership with a new media which only came into existence a decade ago. A journalist friend of mine from the New Straits Times (Malaysia's major English daily) once lamented to me that she simply cannot fathom why Malaysian youth prefer to read the 'half-baked junk' on Raja Petra's Malaysia Today and the poorly homemade videos on the Malaysiakini TV portal instead of the mainstream media. "We are fighting a losing battle and we don't know why", she remarked in exasperation. "Are we becoming a nation of gossip-mongers ? Any rubbish which is published by the new media is worshipped as the gospel truth while the real stuff we wrote based on hard facts are dismissed as government propaganda !" The Malaysian media has a real credibility issue and you only need to look at its ranking on the World Press Freedom Index conducted yearly by the international media watchdog, Reporters Sans Frontieres to know why. The new media is perceived by the younger generation to have more credibility than the mainstream media because it is not owned by anybody and does not have to account to any third parties.  The beauty of it lies in the fact that it has no vested interests, motives or agendas. A video clip posted by an annonymous netizen on Youtube can be put up on any blog whose link can in turn be disseminated throughout cyberspace via emails, forums and facebook. In a short instance, the entire nation will have known the news long before the mainstream media. During the March elections, few Malaysians below the age of 30 bothered to read the newspapers or watch TV3 for election news. They take in wholesale whatever is reported on the internet and regurgitated in full back to their parents back in the kampungs: "Mama, please don't believe in the crap reported by the mainstream media. This is the truth. Now listen to me and vote for the opposition". Even if you are a fervent hardcore UMNO member, will you listen to your son or the Prime Minister ? That's why Barisan lost the Permatang-Pauh by-election to Anwar by an increased margin because while they are trying to fix him with the sodomy case, the medical report of his accuser Saiful was circulating throughout cyberspace for all to see. With a rapid changing electoral demographics, Singapore's PAP may have a tough run in the next general election. From my observations during my five years in Singapore, the PAP draws its core support from the middle class working adults, white-collar professionals and the silver-haired retirees. The younger generation born after 1965 has little affinity or love for the PAP. Malaysia will see 2 million new voters in the next general election in which the nail on Barisan Nasional's coffin will finally be hit. Even if it is not booted out from government, more states are expected to fall into the hands of Anwar's Pakatan Rakyat coalition. Najib Razak will soon find himself replacing Abdullah Badawi as Malaysia's shortest-lived Prime Minister. In a recent poll the Wayangparty Club conducted on our blog here, over 90% of 200 readers indicate they will give their vote to the opposition if an election is held now. Does this reflect the real sentiment on the ground ? Malaysia Today posted a similar poll a week before the March elections and 98% voted in support for the opposition. Of course Barisan politicians laughed the poll result off. As the electoral results showed, the truth is somewhere in between. The opposition did not garner a whooping 98%, but it did manage to win the popular vote on the Peninsula, a first in the history of Malaysia. If the anti-establishment sentiment continue to be prevalent amongst Singapore's young voters, we will expect the popular vote of the PAP to see a steady decline in the next few elections. Unless the PAP revamp itself and start to harness the energy of the young and the new media, the possibility of a wind of change sweeping them out of power remains very real.  Read More →