后港补选的小风波
谨贵报三月二十四日言论版游润恬之作《“工人党·美女·艺人三角战”？》，本人有以下的回应：
游小姐谈到在博客上提出三角战的“仁兄”正是本人。游小姐在文章中回避指名道姓，确实用心良苦。
老实说，写这篇博客的时候，真的没想到会“引眼球”以至“成功地重新把聚光灯转向自己”，孰料在政界和媒体上引起了热烈的讨论，我倒是无任欢迎。但是，游小姐在早报的文章中，字里行间对我人格作出莫须有的影射和批判，本人深表遗憾，也必须澄清我的立场。
首先，我在博客发表自己的看法是行使言论自由的绝对权利，从来不会以“哗众取宠”或博取见报为目的，但是我无法防止记者朋友在报导中引述我的看法，甚至断章取义，以至歪曲了我文章的原意。
我一向对自己在博客上发表的文章都非常严谨小心，尤其对政策的评论必定有所根据，推断也要符合逻辑。我在《后港补选分析》一文中，综合了已公开的资讯，并整理出以下范畴的分析：“刘程强巧妙的空城计”、“行动党的失策”、“工人党蜀中无大将”、“个人品牌战”、“三角战的危机”、“工人党不容乐观”。
我衷心希望游小姐在形容本人论点为“天马行空的假设”，以及“逻辑漏洞百出”之前，能更具体和负责任的解释她的凭据，否则对那些不了解事件来龙去脉、没有读过我博客文章的广大读者，以及笔者我皆有欠公平！我欢迎早报把我的博客文章整篇刊登，或列出博客的连结，让贵报读者亲自判断本人的评论，避免堕入以讹传讹，以偏概全的舆论陷阱。
在这里我想分享一下本人立论的基础，希望有助澄清游小姐对文章的误解。
在单选区的竞选里，尤其是补选，各个政党打的都是个人品牌战。若候选人早已在基层建立了扎实的根基，自然事半功倍。后港能成为工人党战线的桥头堡，靠的是工人党秘书长刘程强在选区中长达二十年时间的耕耘，以及他本身的政治魅力，但是这次上阵的却可能是该党去年大选东海岸集选区团队成员方荣发。
方先生在后港的知名度尚待提升，该区选民对他的认识相对有限，这是工人党必须面对的实际问题；再加上饶欣龙事件所带来的负面冲击，谁也说不准到底工人党在这次补选中的胜算有多少，而三角战又会对该党造成多大的威胁。
如果国民团结党决定参选的话，它会考虑到在后港缺乏基层基础下，就必须以高知名度的候选人来填补“先天＂的不足。派出知名度高，具亲和力的佘雪玲自然是合理的策略，美女与否应不在考量之列。以此推论，行动党派出新传媒艺人郑斌辉也是无可厚非。演员固然是他的专业，但他参与政治的热诚，以及对时事课题的关注和见解也是不能被抹杀的。
根据媒体的报导，团结党从来没有排除参加后港补选的可能性。我只是从团结党的角度推论，他们必须先为下届大选可能面对工人党在淡滨尼和马林百列选区的挑战而作出准备，而这次后港补选可被视为测试实力的前哨战。
媒体也曾报导，团结党与工人党在上届大选对谁该出战摩绵加冷区一度争持不下，最后团结党以大局为重而退出。事实上，团结党在该区耕耘已久，到了开花结果，即将收成的时候，才因反对党之间协调布局的考量，而把多年的心血拱手相让。这是个政治现实的问题，不管谁带领团结党，也必须在下届大选再次面对和解决。
至于淡滨尼和马林百列区，团结党在去年均取得超过百分之四十二选票的佳绩，只要继续耕耘，在下次大选中击败行动党绝对不是天方夜谭。如果再度面对三角战的困境，团结党该如何自处呢？
我已经在今年一月一日退出团结党，并在事前主动通知党中央。如今我是以独立政治评论员的身份，对时事课题发表我见，当中不涉及任何利益冲突。我认为，从新加坡整体民主发展的过程来看，我们必须确保国会多元化。在我国反对党萌芽茁壮的阶段，无论是执政党或任何一个反对党执意“垄断”政治平台的话，对我国民主发展是百害而无一利的。
随着新加坡政治气候的改变，积极论政已经是一种不可逆转的趋势。我将秉持从大学时代就开始以不偏不倚的原则，继续对政治、经济和民生议题发表意见，希望“不在其位，不谋其事”的说法，不会成为我论政的绊脚石。
我期望国人能继续捍卫并享有言论自由的权利，各方以开放和包容的态度，迎接百花齐放的意见平台，迈向一个理智的公民社会。我们应该鼓励社会上的知识分子挺身而出，为社会的良知发声，当面对无理责难时，更要以道德勇气逆流而上。
对于资深新闻从业员游小姐就本人文章作出有欠公道的批评，我十分失望和惋惜。
虽然我目前没有参与任何政党政治，很多时候也身在国外，但是对于生于斯，长于斯的新加坡，仍然关切无比。希望游小姐和广大的早报读者们，不要因为我过往参政的背景，而对我文章的用意作出不必要的揣测，请以开放和客观的态度去解读我的分析。
吴明盛
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
Mypaper: 吴明盛退出团结党 评论政治无包袱
《我报》专访国民团结当前秘书吴明盛，谈论他的政治生涯和看法。
《我报》：据说，您在去年底会员资格到期后，就已经退出国民团结党（NSP），现在是无党派的政治观察家，您为何会做出这个决定？
吴明盛：自从去年5月7日大选过后，我觉得，新加坡的政治气候变了，科技的开放让很多人顿时以为，他们现在什么都可以说，什么都可以做，这对国家未必是好的，社会的矛盾会越来越深。
现在，我们需要的是“政治教育”和建设一个理智的公民社会，可是，当你有党派背景时，很多话你就没有办法说。
现在这种政治环境，很多人都会认为自己敢怒敢言，但是，并不是敢说话就叫敢怒敢言，还要看你说话时有没有预设的立场。
退了党之后，没有党籍，没有包袱，我就是一个中间派，用这个立场看待事情和评论事情比较好，不怕连累政党。
抨击工人党 被指“反骨仔”
《我报》：日前，您在网上批评工人党的诚信问题，结果引来许多网民的抨击，您有什么感受？
吴明盛：他们说我原本是反对党人，退党后就开始抨击反对党，说我是“反骨仔”。但是，从饶欣龙事件，到毕丹星和陈硕茂的文抄公事件，以及工人党对这些事件的回应及处理方式等，我觉得，工人党应该认真看待诚信的问题。
我因为提起这个问题，被一位学者在面簿（Facebook)上除名，这件事让我觉得有点感触。我觉得，学者和知识分子要懂得分辨是非黑白，不应该护短。
我们把一个反对党扶持起来之后，不应该溺爱它，应该更严格地督促它。虽然我现在无党派，但是，我对反对党阵营还是有期望和情结，所以，对它有更高的要求是难免的。
陈硕茂对新加坡不熟悉
《我报》：去年大选，反对党出现了两位闪烁的“政治新秀”，一个是工人党的陈硕茂，一个是国民团结党的佘雪玲，您如何评价他们两位？
吴明盛：我觉得，陈硕茂有政治魅力，但是，他的问题在于他对新加坡不熟，或许他旅居国外太久，对各种政策更加不熟，所以，他在国会辩论一些政策时，很难讲出一些实质的东西来。
至于佘雪玲，她才出道，还很嫩，需要一些时间的琢磨，不过，她需要更好地约束自己，要懂得自律，不可以太轻佻的对待一些事情，尤其是在大是大非面前，要呈现出负责任的一面。
而且，要注意，不要把话说得太尽，例如：最近我在面簿上写后港补选的事，分析如果后港出现三角战，她、方荣发、郑斌辉3人出来选，会形成一个怎样的形式？
佘雪玲就马上回应说，她不会出来，因为这对刘程强是不敬的。她的话这么一说，她的党日后如果要派人，不是很尴尬吗？所以，要搞政治，有时候就不能只顾及自己的立场。
国家议题上 反对党应有主张
《我报》：您怎么看待大选后的工人党？
吴明盛：首先，在辩论部长薪金问题时，严燕松犯了逻辑上的错误，这就如同菜还没有炒熟就端上桌，这是相当出丑的一件事。
接着，又发生了饶欣龙事件，以及文抄公事件，显示工人党在政治上不够敏锐，政治智慧还不够。
工人党不能只是搞地方性基层话动
当工人党只有一个后港区的议席时，他们大可说“我们只有一个议席，能做什么呢”，那时，他们可以专注去搞基层，只需照顾自己如何争取每一张选票就可以了。
但是，现在的情况不同，他们拿下一个集选区，有6个议席，他们就不能只是搞地方性的基层活动而已。
在国家议题上，他们也必须有见解，至少要针对三两个他们所关注的议题，有深入的了解，并能提出具体的解决方案。
《我报》：据说，您在去年底会员资格到期后，就已经退出国民团结党（NSP），现在是无党派的政治观察家，您为何会做出这个决定？
吴明盛：自从去年5月7日大选过后，我觉得，新加坡的政治气候变了，科技的开放让很多人顿时以为，他们现在什么都可以说，什么都可以做，这对国家未必是好的，社会的矛盾会越来越深。
现在，我们需要的是“政治教育”和建设一个理智的公民社会，可是，当你有党派背景时，很多话你就没有办法说。
现在这种政治环境，很多人都会认为自己敢怒敢言，但是，并不是敢说话就叫敢怒敢言，还要看你说话时有没有预设的立场。
退了党之后，没有党籍，没有包袱，我就是一个中间派，用这个立场看待事情和评论事情比较好，不怕连累政党。
抨击工人党 被指“反骨仔”
《我报》：日前，您在网上批评工人党的诚信问题，结果引来许多网民的抨击，您有什么感受？
吴明盛：他们说我原本是反对党人，退党后就开始抨击反对党，说我是“反骨仔”。但是，从饶欣龙事件，到毕丹星和陈硕茂的文抄公事件，以及工人党对这些事件的回应及处理方式等，我觉得，工人党应该认真看待诚信的问题。
我因为提起这个问题，被一位学者在面簿（Facebook)上除名，这件事让我觉得有点感触。我觉得，学者和知识分子要懂得分辨是非黑白，不应该护短。
我们把一个反对党扶持起来之后，不应该溺爱它，应该更严格地督促它。虽然我现在无党派，但是，我对反对党阵营还是有期望和情结，所以，对它有更高的要求是难免的。
陈硕茂对新加坡不熟悉
《我报》：去年大选，反对党出现了两位闪烁的“政治新秀”，一个是工人党的陈硕茂，一个是国民团结党的佘雪玲，您如何评价他们两位？
吴明盛：我觉得，陈硕茂有政治魅力，但是，他的问题在于他对新加坡不熟，或许他旅居国外太久，对各种政策更加不熟，所以，他在国会辩论一些政策时，很难讲出一些实质的东西来。
至于佘雪玲，她才出道，还很嫩，需要一些时间的琢磨，不过，她需要更好地约束自己，要懂得自律，不可以太轻佻的对待一些事情，尤其是在大是大非面前，要呈现出负责任的一面。
而且，要注意，不要把话说得太尽，例如：最近我在面簿上写后港补选的事，分析如果后港出现三角战，她、方荣发、郑斌辉3人出来选，会形成一个怎样的形式？
佘雪玲就马上回应说，她不会出来，因为这对刘程强是不敬的。她的话这么一说，她的党日后如果要派人，不是很尴尬吗？所以，要搞政治，有时候就不能只顾及自己的立场。
国家议题上 反对党应有主张
《我报》：您怎么看待大选后的工人党？
吴明盛：首先，在辩论部长薪金问题时，严燕松犯了逻辑上的错误，这就如同菜还没有炒熟就端上桌，这是相当出丑的一件事。
接着，又发生了饶欣龙事件，以及文抄公事件，显示工人党在政治上不够敏锐，政治智慧还不够。
工人党不能只是搞地方性基层话动
当工人党只有一个后港区的议席时，他们大可说“我们只有一个议席，能做什么呢”，那时，他们可以专注去搞基层，只需照顾自己如何争取每一张选票就可以了。
但是，现在的情况不同，他们拿下一个集选区，有6个议席，他们就不能只是搞地方性的基层活动而已。
在国家议题上，他们也必须有见解，至少要针对三两个他们所关注的议题，有深入的了解，并能提出具体的解决方案。
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Over Reactions on Hougang by-election Analysis
Irresponsible Main Stream Media Ethics will enhance social contradictions
I would have to criticise the Main Stream Media here before I continue. I believe the MSM is doing a great disservice to the Nation as a whole by being inaccurate in their reporting. Misquote or quoting totally out of context of a written article which resulted in misrepresentation is totally unacceptable. Especially so when such newspaper report could evoke strong emotional reactions from Singaporeans.
PAP has always lamented that the internet is full of aggressive, "irrational" anti-PAP views but unknowingly, it is PAP's controlled (or perceived "controlled") MSM which aggravated such sentiments. I would understand that for newspapers, they have limitation on space and thus, they normally will report on the gist of things. But most of the time, they chose things which are either favourable to PAP or those which will "damage" or attempt to "damage" opposition as a whole. This unhealthy practice will further polarize the population and enhance contradictions within the society.
For a start, the title chosen by the MSM is totally out of context. It is pure sensational choice. I have spent some time to translate my whole article to show the serious misrepresentation made by Sin Ming. I am just a non-partisan political commentator and I will refrain of "TELLING" any opposition parties what to do. My job is to gather all the relevant information and come up with a logical perspective, explaining and examining all the possibilities and outcomes.
In no way have I even "SUGGESTED" what NSP will do or not do. I definitely do not speak on behalf of NSP, least for anybody else. The fact that NSP has refrained from confirming whether they will contest in Hougang by-election or not, is a clear indication that they are giving serious considerations to that option at that moment. These are public available information.
The possibility of sending Nicole Seah to contest IF NSP so decided to contest is based on the PREVIOUS paragraph stating that any contest in a SMC, especially so in a by-election, is a battle of personal branding. Since NSP does not have much ground presence in Hougang, the only option left is to field someone with high public profile. Thus Nicole Seah would be the natural choice.
Reactions from NSP and Nicole Seah
Up to this instance, Nicole Seah has declared that she will not contest. That is a good decision for self preservation. However, she seems to over react by making further comment on anyone who has the intention to contest in Hougang would mean that he would not be "taking into consideration the work of Worker's Party MP Low Thia Kiang in retaining one of Singapore's longest-serving opposition wards." (Quoted from her response on FB).
I was puzzled about this statement. Since she is a member of NSP CEC, she must be stating the stand of NSP. However NSP Secretary General Hazel Pao in the same newspaper report, said that NSP has not decided on the issue yet. This seems to be conflicting signals from the same Party's CEC.
I believe it is Nicole Seah's over reaction which resulted in such situation. She has jumped the gun and practically closed the door hastily for her party in the rush to deny any intention of contest. Especially so when there is already public outcry against 3 corner fight. In doing so, she might have unwittingly compromised her party's strategic position.
Over reactions from Opposition members and supporters
Opposition members and supporters have over reacted even before they actually read the whole analysis. Their over reactions are unwarranted.
Even if Nicole Seah contested in Hougang, chances for WP to lose would be slim. WP has 15% points advantage. The odds for Nicole Seah to lose her deposit is still very high. Even if the vote swing is 15% and WP gets below 50%, it may not lose because it will still get the highest votes. The only exception is for PAP to field a strong candidate with high public profile. Tay Ping Hui may be one.
Most of the emotional knee jerk reactions from netizens are irrational at best. Most of the time, they did not rebut any of the points made in my article. Do they oppose the possibility of NSP contesting in Hougang by-election because they just don't like it or what? Or that they believe opposition should unite? Is opposition unity really the CORE belief of these people? If so, do they think WP is at fault when it bulldozed itself into Moulmein Kallang with a 3rd rate team, destroying the chance of the NSP's scholars of breaking through in this fertile ground? What is their stand?
Most importantly, what do they think about the possibility of WP contesting in Tampines and Marine Parade in next GE? Would they raise their voice to oppose such moves? Or are they just "PRO-WP" at all cost?
Myth and Broken Dream of Opposition Unity
Some of those who reacted strongly raised the notion of "Opposition Unity". I would like them to ask WP whether they really believe in "Opposition Unity" and would they contest in Tampines and Marine Parade for the next GE.
I feel that people are just abusing the notion of "Opposition Unity". After a decade of participation in opposition politics, I would dare to say that Opposition Unity is just a myth and a broken dream. It is just that most people don't dare to admit it. Worse of all, some would just use it like a tissue paper: when it is to their own advantage eg. like keeping people out of 3 corner in Hougang by-election, they will use it. But they will just throw it away like used tissue paper when they want to step into other people's turfs.
Mistake me not. I used to be a strong believer of Opposition Unity until last GE. Last GE changed my perspective. The earlier supporters of opposition realize that we are now emerging into "Warring States" the better it is for them. So that they won't be utterly disappointed when they realize that for next GE, there will be lots of 3 corner fights happening around them.
What are the real issues of 3 Corner Fight in Hougang by-election
When I am writing this, I read again Wanbao said that I have changed my mind about the 3 corner fight. It is yet another bad reporting without much clarifications with the writer about the context. There are a few scenarios in having a 3 Corner fight in Hougang by-election.
First case, NSP or some other party send somebody without a strong public profile while PAP sends someone without strong public profile as well. WP will still suffer a drop of percentage votes due to Yaw-gate. How big is the impact, nobody knows exactly. My feel is it may suffer about 5% to 8% vote swing in this case. These votes would most likely go to the other opposition party. PAP may not benefit from the vote swing in this case.
Neither would PAP benefit from the widen vote swing if NSP Nicole Seah contested. The expected vote swing will be something between 5% to 20% but this is not enough to make WP lose because most of these votes would go to Nicole Seah, not PAP. WP will still win, regardless of whether it gets more than 50% of votes or not.
However, if it is Tay Ping Hui vs Png Eng Huat alone (without three corner fight), there is a danger of WP losing if the vote swing is greater than 15%. All these vote swing will go to Tay PH. Thus, if there is a third party contesting (not somebody like Nicole Seah), it may just help WP to win by diverting the vote swing away from PAP's Tay PH.
This is why I say a 3 corner fight may not be a bad thing at all for WP unless the vote swing is as great as 30%, then there is a clear and present danger of losing. This scenario may only happen (please note, NOT DEFINITELY) if there is a 3 corner fight with both PAP and NSP sending candidates with very strong public profile: i.e. Nicole Seah vs Tay Ping Hui vs Png Eng Huat.
A 3 corner fight will increase WP's stress tolerance from 15% to 25%. i.e. If the impact of Yaw-gate alone is as great as 20%, WP could still win with the third party diverting the vote swing away from PAP.
This is why Wanbao should not jump into conclusion that I have changed my mind or backtrack from my earlier view. They are on different contexts.
(I have deliberately left out one very unlikely scenario where WP will lose the support of the hardcore opposition supporters in Hougang.)
The Building of Civil Society
I have a talk with friends from the media recently. The first thing that was discussed is the present state of internet situation. The consensus is that internet is dominated by lively discussions and commentaries. However, it seems that irrational rantings, flamings and trolling have become a clear trend.
Before I engaged in opposition politics back in the early 2000s, I faced a dilemma on whether to contribute my time and effort in building a civil society or to try and effect change in the political climate first. Singapore is a unique place where the political climate has curbed the development of civil activism. Civil society will involve efforts of the academia, intelligentsia and such but political activities in universities and colleges are a taboo, unlike Hong Kong, Taiwan and Korea.
Thus I finally come to the conclusion that engagement in changing the political climate via active participation in elections must come first for Singapore. True enough, with the past two General Elections, the awakening process has deepen. Active citizenry has been enhanced throughout the years. However, such development created certain problems like what we see in the internet right now. It has almost become a mob rule in the internet sphere.
Take for example, Mr. Baey has talked about the perception and pressure his son faced in school. Netizens started to attack him on that. Imagine if the same problem is raised by Mr. Chen Shao Mao. I guess we will only hear praises. That's the reality in Singapore. But this is not a healthy development for Singapore as it will deepen contradictions and increase the tensions between supporters of different camps.
This is why I have chosen to take a step back from political participation and to engage in political commentary instead. I hope to put up fair political comments. Even so, I am attacked with all sorts of name calling and speculations. My views are seen with much contempt.
I would like to reiterate this, I do not have any bad feelings about any opposition parties, not even PAP. Political parties are just platforms and different people will play different roles within. There isn't much strong emotional attachment, so to speak, be it love or hatred.
But once you take stand, you will read everything, anything with a tainted glass. The Main Stream Media has unwittingly enhanced such contradictions and divides by its reporting methods.
I only hope that the silent majority, the middle ground voters, would start to engage actively in providing views and moulding public opinions. Else, we will end up with a situation where extreme views will start to split out Nation apart causing deeper social contradictions.
Goh Meng Seng
I would have to criticise the Main Stream Media here before I continue. I believe the MSM is doing a great disservice to the Nation as a whole by being inaccurate in their reporting. Misquote or quoting totally out of context of a written article which resulted in misrepresentation is totally unacceptable. Especially so when such newspaper report could evoke strong emotional reactions from Singaporeans.
PAP has always lamented that the internet is full of aggressive, "irrational" anti-PAP views but unknowingly, it is PAP's controlled (or perceived "controlled") MSM which aggravated such sentiments. I would understand that for newspapers, they have limitation on space and thus, they normally will report on the gist of things. But most of the time, they chose things which are either favourable to PAP or those which will "damage" or attempt to "damage" opposition as a whole. This unhealthy practice will further polarize the population and enhance contradictions within the society.
For a start, the title chosen by the MSM is totally out of context. It is pure sensational choice. I have spent some time to translate my whole article to show the serious misrepresentation made by Sin Ming. I am just a non-partisan political commentator and I will refrain of "TELLING" any opposition parties what to do. My job is to gather all the relevant information and come up with a logical perspective, explaining and examining all the possibilities and outcomes.
In no way have I even "SUGGESTED" what NSP will do or not do. I definitely do not speak on behalf of NSP, least for anybody else. The fact that NSP has refrained from confirming whether they will contest in Hougang by-election or not, is a clear indication that they are giving serious considerations to that option at that moment. These are public available information.
The possibility of sending Nicole Seah to contest IF NSP so decided to contest is based on the PREVIOUS paragraph stating that any contest in a SMC, especially so in a by-election, is a battle of personal branding. Since NSP does not have much ground presence in Hougang, the only option left is to field someone with high public profile. Thus Nicole Seah would be the natural choice.
If you read my analysis in proper perspective, I have repeatedly shown concerns on the possibility of 3 corner fights, not only in Hougang by-election but also in Tampines and Marine Parade GRC as well in next GE. I have said that it is better for NSP and WP to sit down and negotiate an amicable solution. I have even cautioned that NSP and Nicole Seah should think thrice and make serious consideration about contesting in Hougang by-election because there would be potential political cost if this is perceived as unjustifiable by the public. However, the MSM deliberately left out these critical parts of my analysis. The MSM has left out the more "damaging" parts on PAP's misstep. This may be explained by the limitation of space but the further omission of these critical parts is totally irresponsible and an attempt to misrepresent view, creating unnecessary emotional response from Singaporeans.
Reactions from NSP and Nicole Seah
Up to this instance, Nicole Seah has declared that she will not contest. That is a good decision for self preservation. However, she seems to over react by making further comment on anyone who has the intention to contest in Hougang would mean that he would not be "taking into consideration the work of Worker's Party MP Low Thia Kiang in retaining one of Singapore's longest-serving opposition wards." (Quoted from her response on FB).
I was puzzled about this statement. Since she is a member of NSP CEC, she must be stating the stand of NSP. However NSP Secretary General Hazel Pao in the same newspaper report, said that NSP has not decided on the issue yet. This seems to be conflicting signals from the same Party's CEC.
I believe it is Nicole Seah's over reaction which resulted in such situation. She has jumped the gun and practically closed the door hastily for her party in the rush to deny any intention of contest. Especially so when there is already public outcry against 3 corner fight. In doing so, she might have unwittingly compromised her party's strategic position.
Over reactions from Opposition members and supporters
Opposition members and supporters have over reacted even before they actually read the whole analysis. Their over reactions are unwarranted.
Even if Nicole Seah contested in Hougang, chances for WP to lose would be slim. WP has 15% points advantage. The odds for Nicole Seah to lose her deposit is still very high. Even if the vote swing is 15% and WP gets below 50%, it may not lose because it will still get the highest votes. The only exception is for PAP to field a strong candidate with high public profile. Tay Ping Hui may be one.
Most of the emotional knee jerk reactions from netizens are irrational at best. Most of the time, they did not rebut any of the points made in my article. Do they oppose the possibility of NSP contesting in Hougang by-election because they just don't like it or what? Or that they believe opposition should unite? Is opposition unity really the CORE belief of these people? If so, do they think WP is at fault when it bulldozed itself into Moulmein Kallang with a 3rd rate team, destroying the chance of the NSP's scholars of breaking through in this fertile ground? What is their stand?
Most importantly, what do they think about the possibility of WP contesting in Tampines and Marine Parade in next GE? Would they raise their voice to oppose such moves? Or are they just "PRO-WP" at all cost?
Myth and Broken Dream of Opposition Unity
Some of those who reacted strongly raised the notion of "Opposition Unity". I would like them to ask WP whether they really believe in "Opposition Unity" and would they contest in Tampines and Marine Parade for the next GE.
I feel that people are just abusing the notion of "Opposition Unity". After a decade of participation in opposition politics, I would dare to say that Opposition Unity is just a myth and a broken dream. It is just that most people don't dare to admit it. Worse of all, some would just use it like a tissue paper: when it is to their own advantage eg. like keeping people out of 3 corner in Hougang by-election, they will use it. But they will just throw it away like used tissue paper when they want to step into other people's turfs.
Mistake me not. I used to be a strong believer of Opposition Unity until last GE. Last GE changed my perspective. The earlier supporters of opposition realize that we are now emerging into "Warring States" the better it is for them. So that they won't be utterly disappointed when they realize that for next GE, there will be lots of 3 corner fights happening around them.
What are the real issues of 3 Corner Fight in Hougang by-election
When I am writing this, I read again Wanbao said that I have changed my mind about the 3 corner fight. It is yet another bad reporting without much clarifications with the writer about the context. There are a few scenarios in having a 3 Corner fight in Hougang by-election.
First case, NSP or some other party send somebody without a strong public profile while PAP sends someone without strong public profile as well. WP will still suffer a drop of percentage votes due to Yaw-gate. How big is the impact, nobody knows exactly. My feel is it may suffer about 5% to 8% vote swing in this case. These votes would most likely go to the other opposition party. PAP may not benefit from the vote swing in this case.
Neither would PAP benefit from the widen vote swing if NSP Nicole Seah contested. The expected vote swing will be something between 5% to 20% but this is not enough to make WP lose because most of these votes would go to Nicole Seah, not PAP. WP will still win, regardless of whether it gets more than 50% of votes or not.
However, if it is Tay Ping Hui vs Png Eng Huat alone (without three corner fight), there is a danger of WP losing if the vote swing is greater than 15%. All these vote swing will go to Tay PH. Thus, if there is a third party contesting (not somebody like Nicole Seah), it may just help WP to win by diverting the vote swing away from PAP's Tay PH.
This is why I say a 3 corner fight may not be a bad thing at all for WP unless the vote swing is as great as 30%, then there is a clear and present danger of losing. This scenario may only happen (please note, NOT DEFINITELY) if there is a 3 corner fight with both PAP and NSP sending candidates with very strong public profile: i.e. Nicole Seah vs Tay Ping Hui vs Png Eng Huat.
A 3 corner fight will increase WP's stress tolerance from 15% to 25%. i.e. If the impact of Yaw-gate alone is as great as 20%, WP could still win with the third party diverting the vote swing away from PAP.
This is why Wanbao should not jump into conclusion that I have changed my mind or backtrack from my earlier view. They are on different contexts.
(I have deliberately left out one very unlikely scenario where WP will lose the support of the hardcore opposition supporters in Hougang.)
The Building of Civil Society
I have a talk with friends from the media recently. The first thing that was discussed is the present state of internet situation. The consensus is that internet is dominated by lively discussions and commentaries. However, it seems that irrational rantings, flamings and trolling have become a clear trend.
Before I engaged in opposition politics back in the early 2000s, I faced a dilemma on whether to contribute my time and effort in building a civil society or to try and effect change in the political climate first. Singapore is a unique place where the political climate has curbed the development of civil activism. Civil society will involve efforts of the academia, intelligentsia and such but political activities in universities and colleges are a taboo, unlike Hong Kong, Taiwan and Korea.
Thus I finally come to the conclusion that engagement in changing the political climate via active participation in elections must come first for Singapore. True enough, with the past two General Elections, the awakening process has deepen. Active citizenry has been enhanced throughout the years. However, such development created certain problems like what we see in the internet right now. It has almost become a mob rule in the internet sphere.
Take for example, Mr. Baey has talked about the perception and pressure his son faced in school. Netizens started to attack him on that. Imagine if the same problem is raised by Mr. Chen Shao Mao. I guess we will only hear praises. That's the reality in Singapore. But this is not a healthy development for Singapore as it will deepen contradictions and increase the tensions between supporters of different camps.
This is why I have chosen to take a step back from political participation and to engage in political commentary instead. I hope to put up fair political comments. Even so, I am attacked with all sorts of name calling and speculations. My views are seen with much contempt.
I would like to reiterate this, I do not have any bad feelings about any opposition parties, not even PAP. Political parties are just platforms and different people will play different roles within. There isn't much strong emotional attachment, so to speak, be it love or hatred.
But once you take stand, you will read everything, anything with a tainted glass. The Main Stream Media has unwittingly enhanced such contradictions and divides by its reporting methods.
I only hope that the silent majority, the middle ground voters, would start to engage actively in providing views and moulding public opinions. Else, we will end up with a situation where extreme views will start to split out Nation apart causing deeper social contradictions.
Goh Meng Seng
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Hougang By-election Analysis (Translated)
Looking at recent news reports and political commentary, it seems that everyone feels that Workers Party “sure win” in Hougang and PAP is just “kiasu” (afraid to lose) to not announce by-election. (This analysis was written before PM Lee announced he will call for Hougang by-election.) This is actually quite hilarious.
Low Thia Khiang’s ingenious strategic bluff
Immediately after Workers Party Secretary General Low Thia Khiang announced the expulsion of Yaw Shin Leong, he went straight away to Hougang. From the look of the news video clip, Mr Low indeed enjoys great support from the ground. However at the very end of the interview, he has revealed his own worries. He said in front of the camera, “Perhaps the Prime Minister should look at the sentiment and should not drag too long for the by-election if you get National agenda and he wants to move on… that is my advice to him.”
I have gone through these words repeatedly but felt that it is a bit unreasonable. If the Prime Minister saw that passionate support, why would he want to have by-election early? I finally realize that Low Thia Khiang was just putting up a political posturing, “challenging” the Prime Minister, look at the support WP enjoys here, if you dare, call for by-election immediately! But why would Mr Low put up such political posture to challenge the Prime Minister?
This is a strategic bluff! At that critical period, WP’s greatest fear was PAP capitalizing on the adverse situation of Yaw-gate and called for immediate by-election to launch a “sneak attack” on the totally unprepared WP. Thus Mr. Low put up a “bravado” posture to effect a strategic bluff to prevent PAP from a rapid attack. If PAP had seized the opportunity and held by-election as soon as possible, it would have seized the advantage of the situation. WP’s greatest fear was PAP attacking while it was still in disarray, especially so if PAP fixed the date of by-election among the dates of budget debate. If that happened, WP would have to face the most severe test. Low Thia Khiang might not be able to exert his personal charismatic influence fully during the by-election. (This is also why I choose to publish this article after Budget Debate.)
However, fortunately Low Thia Khiang’s strategic bluff has successfully worked on PAP!
PAP’s misstep
After all, PAP has a ready candidate in Hougang and with its grassroot foundation, there should not be any problem in turning on the electioneering machine immediately. However, it was too indecisive. On top of that, it actually shows its fear of losing by letting its MPs to argue speciously on the Constitutional rules on by-elections. It is totally irrational for a ruling party which has ruled Singapore for 50 years to be afraid of losing in a small by-election in a single seat. Even a layman could understand that this by-election will not threaten PAP’s ruling party status. Even if it loses, PAP do not suffer any additional loss in seats! This is because this seat is originally an opposition seat. PAP do not suffer any real loss if it failed to win, but it wins it would be a surprise bonus! Even if it is just reducing WP’s support by a few percentage points, it is considered as a gain! This is a win-win situation for PAP!
On the contrary, if the by-election is being dragged for a few months, won’t it allow WP to have breathing space to re-deploy itself? PAP has quite a number of military generals within its rank and I am puzzled why they couldn’t come to such simple conclusions at all, resulting in its indecisiveness and missing the prime opportunity! If PAP is to lose with a big margin in Hougang this time round, even worse than the GE2011, they really deserve it!
Lack of Talents within WP’s rank
The next question is, why WP is worried about early by-elections? The reason is simple. All along WP adopted a closed management style. It will not groom any particular potential candidate during normal time. Even during the GE, the focus will still be on the few key candidates on the main battleground. Such management style is very effective during GE whereby the centralized control will prevent big mistakes being made. This is why even after GE, voters will only have impression on a few candidates among the lot and very few of them will have made deep impression on voters. How many candidates has WP groomed with high public profile from 2006 till the eve of 2011 GE? Even for Mr. Chen Shao Mao who has joined WP for years, he only came to fame with the help of the media providing him an early exposure which eventually made him a political idol.
Such conservative management may have its merits but it creates great obstacles in grooming young potentials among the ranks for political renewal. The selection of the less known candidate Png Eng Huat to hold the helm at Hougang exposed the awkward situation of the lack of talents among its rank.
The battle of personal branding
By-elections, especially when it is a SMC by-election, is normally fought on individual’s personal branding. Although Low Thia Khiang has absolute advantage in terms of personal branding in Hougang, but after Yaw-gate, I guess Hougang voters (especially those middle ground voters) will not just vote anyone put up by WP due to WP or Low Thia Khiang’s branding assurance without much scrutiny like GE2011. Hougang voters will definitely be more demanding on all candidates. If WP thinks that it could win voters’ confidence easily just like the past, then it will end up with a rude shock on a less than expected result.
This is also the reason why WP would rather select Png Eng Huat over other younger and more prominent individuals like Koh Choong Yong to take over the helm at Hougang. Low Thia Khiang knows very well that he can’t afford to make another mistake in the selection of candidate for Hougang, else his as well as WP’s branding will be destroyed overnight! Choosing a matured candidate will be safer in this case.
Interestingly, ex-WP leader of East Coast GRC team Eric Tan, who has resigned after GE2011, is a superior choice than Png Eng Huat in terms of popularity, resume as well as seniority. But WP has chosen Gerald Giam as the NCMP instead of Eric Tan using the excuse of party renewal while breaking the unwritten rule of granting the leader of the GRC team priority of being the NCMP. This resulted in Eric Tan’s resignation. In retrospect, this is a chain of ironies. After all, WP didn’t expect to be forced into a by-election in Hougang!
The Crisis of 3 Corner Fight
After WP expelled Yaw Shin Leong, there was a couple of opposition members showing interests in Hougang by-election. I have said then that it is best for them not to take advantage of WP to go into a 3 corner fight. If these people really contest in 3 corner fight, it would not be justifiable and most probably they will suffer humiliating defeats.
However, there is one exception and that is NSP. It could affect the result of this by-election. NSP participation in the contest will add to the uncertainty of this by-election.
As the former SG of NSP, I can understand why NSP will want to contest in Hougang 3 corner fight. Of course I still hope that this could be avoided through negotiation but it seems that chances are slim for it to be resolved. It is not just about “revenge” for NSP to contest. It has its own strategic considerations. During last GE2011, WP has basically bulldozed into Moulmein-Kallang with its second or even third tier team, even if it means to have a 3 corner fight with NSP main Team B. Although NSP has bitten the bullet and avoided the 3 corner fight by withdrawing out of Moulmein Kallang, but it is believed that WP will be even bolder and bulldoze its way into Tampines and Marine Parade GRCs to go head on with NSP. This will force NSP out of the more “fertile” ground in the East. NSP may use this by-election as an advanced battle to test each other’s relative strength. Especially so when the price of this battle even if deposit was loss, is much lesser relatively.
IF NSP really decides to fight it out in Hougang’s 3 corner fight, it is possible for it to send Nicole Seah. Nicole Seah’s high public profile will maximize the impact on WP Png Eng Huat. If WP really lost Hougang due to Nicole Seah’s contest, that would be the ultimate karmic retribution. Of course personally I don’t wish to see PAP benefiting from this by capturing Hougang.
Although Nicole Seah has high public profile but she must make her contest as a justified cause else she may pay a heavy price politically. NSP has to consider carefully the pros and cons of contesting in Hougang by-election. If it so decides to send Nicole Seah to contest, I could only wish her good luck.
It isn’t Optimistic for Workers Party
Politics is unpredictable. Who would expect WP to have such big happenings within a short period of 9 months? Nobody can predict accurately what kinds of turbulence this by-election will bring. Of course many WP members and supporters are full of confidence so much so that they expect the result of this by-election will be even better than the 64% it has achieved in GE2011. However in my opinion, there are only conditions and possibility for WP’s result to fall. Whether it will lose Hougang due to a 3 corner fight will depend on whether it would lower its pride and negotiate for an amicable settlement.
Of course, the longer the by-election drags, the better it is for WP. This is because WP would need more time to allow Hougang voters to know its candidate who has a deficit on public profile. . Of course, it would be best if WP could invite Eric Tan back and contest this by-election. This will increase WP’s ability to withstand the impact of a 3 corner fight. However, this may just be my own wishful thinking.
Goh Meng Seng
P.S. I just realize I have left out a very important factor. Since this is the battle of personal branding, if PAP is smart enough, it may send TV celebrity to contest. Don’t underestimate the impact of this celebrity effect, it could well become PAP’s the most effective weapon! TV celebrity Tay Ping Hui is a well known PAP member and he has all along shown vast interests in contesting in elections. Recently he has even evoke Nationalistic sentiments to rebel against foreign students. Although these are extreme acts but nevertheless such populist acts have won him substantial support. If PAP send him to contest, this by-election would be very interesting to watch. Imagine, Nicole Seah, Tay Ping Hui and Png Eng Huat…. I believe in the end, Png Eng Huat will be totally marginalized while the by-election turns into the show down between the TV celebrity and the political rising star!
Low Thia Khiang’s ingenious strategic bluff
Immediately after Workers Party Secretary General Low Thia Khiang announced the expulsion of Yaw Shin Leong, he went straight away to Hougang. From the look of the news video clip, Mr Low indeed enjoys great support from the ground. However at the very end of the interview, he has revealed his own worries. He said in front of the camera, “Perhaps the Prime Minister should look at the sentiment and should not drag too long for the by-election if you get National agenda and he wants to move on… that is my advice to him.”
I have gone through these words repeatedly but felt that it is a bit unreasonable. If the Prime Minister saw that passionate support, why would he want to have by-election early? I finally realize that Low Thia Khiang was just putting up a political posturing, “challenging” the Prime Minister, look at the support WP enjoys here, if you dare, call for by-election immediately! But why would Mr Low put up such political posture to challenge the Prime Minister?
This is a strategic bluff! At that critical period, WP’s greatest fear was PAP capitalizing on the adverse situation of Yaw-gate and called for immediate by-election to launch a “sneak attack” on the totally unprepared WP. Thus Mr. Low put up a “bravado” posture to effect a strategic bluff to prevent PAP from a rapid attack. If PAP had seized the opportunity and held by-election as soon as possible, it would have seized the advantage of the situation. WP’s greatest fear was PAP attacking while it was still in disarray, especially so if PAP fixed the date of by-election among the dates of budget debate. If that happened, WP would have to face the most severe test. Low Thia Khiang might not be able to exert his personal charismatic influence fully during the by-election. (This is also why I choose to publish this article after Budget Debate.)
However, fortunately Low Thia Khiang’s strategic bluff has successfully worked on PAP!
PAP’s misstep
After all, PAP has a ready candidate in Hougang and with its grassroot foundation, there should not be any problem in turning on the electioneering machine immediately. However, it was too indecisive. On top of that, it actually shows its fear of losing by letting its MPs to argue speciously on the Constitutional rules on by-elections. It is totally irrational for a ruling party which has ruled Singapore for 50 years to be afraid of losing in a small by-election in a single seat. Even a layman could understand that this by-election will not threaten PAP’s ruling party status. Even if it loses, PAP do not suffer any additional loss in seats! This is because this seat is originally an opposition seat. PAP do not suffer any real loss if it failed to win, but it wins it would be a surprise bonus! Even if it is just reducing WP’s support by a few percentage points, it is considered as a gain! This is a win-win situation for PAP!
On the contrary, if the by-election is being dragged for a few months, won’t it allow WP to have breathing space to re-deploy itself? PAP has quite a number of military generals within its rank and I am puzzled why they couldn’t come to such simple conclusions at all, resulting in its indecisiveness and missing the prime opportunity! If PAP is to lose with a big margin in Hougang this time round, even worse than the GE2011, they really deserve it!
Lack of Talents within WP’s rank
The next question is, why WP is worried about early by-elections? The reason is simple. All along WP adopted a closed management style. It will not groom any particular potential candidate during normal time. Even during the GE, the focus will still be on the few key candidates on the main battleground. Such management style is very effective during GE whereby the centralized control will prevent big mistakes being made. This is why even after GE, voters will only have impression on a few candidates among the lot and very few of them will have made deep impression on voters. How many candidates has WP groomed with high public profile from 2006 till the eve of 2011 GE? Even for Mr. Chen Shao Mao who has joined WP for years, he only came to fame with the help of the media providing him an early exposure which eventually made him a political idol.
Such conservative management may have its merits but it creates great obstacles in grooming young potentials among the ranks for political renewal. The selection of the less known candidate Png Eng Huat to hold the helm at Hougang exposed the awkward situation of the lack of talents among its rank.
The battle of personal branding
By-elections, especially when it is a SMC by-election, is normally fought on individual’s personal branding. Although Low Thia Khiang has absolute advantage in terms of personal branding in Hougang, but after Yaw-gate, I guess Hougang voters (especially those middle ground voters) will not just vote anyone put up by WP due to WP or Low Thia Khiang’s branding assurance without much scrutiny like GE2011. Hougang voters will definitely be more demanding on all candidates. If WP thinks that it could win voters’ confidence easily just like the past, then it will end up with a rude shock on a less than expected result.
This is also the reason why WP would rather select Png Eng Huat over other younger and more prominent individuals like Koh Choong Yong to take over the helm at Hougang. Low Thia Khiang knows very well that he can’t afford to make another mistake in the selection of candidate for Hougang, else his as well as WP’s branding will be destroyed overnight! Choosing a matured candidate will be safer in this case.
Interestingly, ex-WP leader of East Coast GRC team Eric Tan, who has resigned after GE2011, is a superior choice than Png Eng Huat in terms of popularity, resume as well as seniority. But WP has chosen Gerald Giam as the NCMP instead of Eric Tan using the excuse of party renewal while breaking the unwritten rule of granting the leader of the GRC team priority of being the NCMP. This resulted in Eric Tan’s resignation. In retrospect, this is a chain of ironies. After all, WP didn’t expect to be forced into a by-election in Hougang!
The Crisis of 3 Corner Fight
After WP expelled Yaw Shin Leong, there was a couple of opposition members showing interests in Hougang by-election. I have said then that it is best for them not to take advantage of WP to go into a 3 corner fight. If these people really contest in 3 corner fight, it would not be justifiable and most probably they will suffer humiliating defeats.
However, there is one exception and that is NSP. It could affect the result of this by-election. NSP participation in the contest will add to the uncertainty of this by-election.
As the former SG of NSP, I can understand why NSP will want to contest in Hougang 3 corner fight. Of course I still hope that this could be avoided through negotiation but it seems that chances are slim for it to be resolved. It is not just about “revenge” for NSP to contest. It has its own strategic considerations. During last GE2011, WP has basically bulldozed into Moulmein-Kallang with its second or even third tier team, even if it means to have a 3 corner fight with NSP main Team B. Although NSP has bitten the bullet and avoided the 3 corner fight by withdrawing out of Moulmein Kallang, but it is believed that WP will be even bolder and bulldoze its way into Tampines and Marine Parade GRCs to go head on with NSP. This will force NSP out of the more “fertile” ground in the East. NSP may use this by-election as an advanced battle to test each other’s relative strength. Especially so when the price of this battle even if deposit was loss, is much lesser relatively.
IF NSP really decides to fight it out in Hougang’s 3 corner fight, it is possible for it to send Nicole Seah. Nicole Seah’s high public profile will maximize the impact on WP Png Eng Huat. If WP really lost Hougang due to Nicole Seah’s contest, that would be the ultimate karmic retribution. Of course personally I don’t wish to see PAP benefiting from this by capturing Hougang.
Although Nicole Seah has high public profile but she must make her contest as a justified cause else she may pay a heavy price politically. NSP has to consider carefully the pros and cons of contesting in Hougang by-election. If it so decides to send Nicole Seah to contest, I could only wish her good luck.
It isn’t Optimistic for Workers Party
Politics is unpredictable. Who would expect WP to have such big happenings within a short period of 9 months? Nobody can predict accurately what kinds of turbulence this by-election will bring. Of course many WP members and supporters are full of confidence so much so that they expect the result of this by-election will be even better than the 64% it has achieved in GE2011. However in my opinion, there are only conditions and possibility for WP’s result to fall. Whether it will lose Hougang due to a 3 corner fight will depend on whether it would lower its pride and negotiate for an amicable settlement.
Of course, the longer the by-election drags, the better it is for WP. This is because WP would need more time to allow Hougang voters to know its candidate who has a deficit on public profile. . Of course, it would be best if WP could invite Eric Tan back and contest this by-election. This will increase WP’s ability to withstand the impact of a 3 corner fight. However, this may just be my own wishful thinking.
Goh Meng Seng
P.S. I just realize I have left out a very important factor. Since this is the battle of personal branding, if PAP is smart enough, it may send TV celebrity to contest. Don’t underestimate the impact of this celebrity effect, it could well become PAP’s the most effective weapon! TV celebrity Tay Ping Hui is a well known PAP member and he has all along shown vast interests in contesting in elections. Recently he has even evoke Nationalistic sentiments to rebel against foreign students. Although these are extreme acts but nevertheless such populist acts have won him substantial support. If PAP send him to contest, this by-election would be very interesting to watch. Imagine, Nicole Seah, Tay Ping Hui and Png Eng Huat…. I believe in the end, Png Eng Huat will be totally marginalized while the by-election turns into the show down between the TV celebrity and the political rising star!
Friday, March 16, 2012
后港补选分析
综合最近的新闻报道和政治评论，后港补选似乎是工人党“包吃”，行动党“怕输”不敢宣布补选。（这篇文章是在李显龙总理宣布会在后港举行补选前写的。）其实这是啼笑皆非的现象。
刘程强巧妙的空城计
工人党秘书长刘程强先生在宣布开除饶欣龙后，便直驱后港造势。从新闻画面看来，刘先生在后港的支持度也真的很强。但是刘先生在访问最后一段，竟不慎透露了他本身的忧虑。他对着摄影机说：“如果总理有重要的国家议程的话，他应该看看这些支持者的情绪，而别等太久才补选。。。这是我的忠告。。。“
我反复咀嚼了这段说话，总觉得有点不合理。如果总理看了那么激情的场面，他为什么还要尽快补选呢？最后我才了解，原来刘程强只是在摆出政治架势，“挑战”总理，你看后港对工人党的支持度，如果敢的话，就马上补选吧！但是为何刘先生要摆出这政治架势挑战总理呢？
这就是“空城计”！工人党当时最怕的是行动党“趁势追击”，马上宣布补选而“偷袭”完全没有准备的工人党。所以刘先生就使出“虚张声势”，摆出了一个“空城计”来，防止行动党速战速决。其实，如果行动党把握时机，在最短时间里宣布补选的话，那么它就掌握了时局的优势。工人党那时候最怕的是行动党给它杀个措手不及，尤其是如果行动党把补选订在国会在辩论财政预算案期间，那么工人党将会面对严峻的考验。刘程强也许就无法在补选中发挥他个人的号召力了。(这也就是为什么我选择在国会预算案辩论完后才刊登此文.)
但是刘程强微妙的空城计终究把行动党给唬住了！
行动党的失策
行动党毕竟在后港已经有现成的候选人了，以它的基层实力，马上启动竞选机器并非难事。可惜的是，它太优柔寡断，竟然怕输到让党内议员狡辩无需补选云云，这是策略上的一大败笔！这些议员在狡辩宪法对补选的定义的同时，便凸现了堂堂一个执政了几乎50年的政党竟然对一个选区的补选如此畏惧、怕输的窘境！其实以普通人的智慧来计算，这补选又不是会威胁到行动党的执政地位的。就算是输了，行动党也没有任何而外的损失！因为这选区本来就是反对党区，输了没损失，如果赢了就是意外的收获！就算只是把工人党的支持率降低几个百分点，也算是有所获呀！这是没赔有赢的事啊！
反过来说，如今拖了几个月才决定补选，这不就让工人党有喘气的机会去重新部署吗？我其实不明白，行动党里有这么多军事将领，连这么简单的盘算都不会算，令它举棋不定错失良机！我看行动党如果这一次在后港大败，比原先在2011年大选的成绩还差的话，那也真是活该了！
工人党“蜀中无大将“
接下来的问题就是，为何工人党对尽早补选会如此担心呢？其实理由很简单。工人党的管理方式是封闭式的，平时不会刻意去栽培任何有潜能的候选人。就算是大选到来，也只集中于那么几位在主要战场的侯选人。这种管理方式能很有效的针对大选做出集权式的操纵，不大会出乱子。这也就是为什么很多时候大选过后，选民在众多候选人当中，也只对那么几位有印象，深刻印象的也就说不上了。纵观从2006年至2011年大选前夕，工人党内有多少有高知名度的候选人呢？就算是加入党多年的陈硕茂，也是在大选前由媒体为他提早曝光而造就了他那政治偶像的形象的。
这种保守的管理方式固然有它的可取之处，但也致使工人党在培养接班政治人才方面形成了重大阻碍。从工人党这次只能派知名度微弱的方荣发去坐镇后港便能得知它“蜀中无大将”的窘境了。
个人品牌战
补选，尤其是单选区的补选，往往打的是个人品牌。虽然刘程强的个人品牌在后港有绝对的优势，但是经过饶欣龙事件以后，我想后港选民（尤其是中间选民）在这次补选中不会像大选一样只靠工人党或刘程强的品牌保证而轻易投给工人党了。后港选民这次补选也一定对所有候选人有更严谨的审视，更严格的要求了。如果工人党以为能像以往一样轻易地取信于中间选民的话，那么它将可能面对意想不到的结果。
这也就是为什么工人党会选择方荣发而不是比他更有知名度又更年轻的许俊荣来坐镇后港。刘程强明白他在人选方面再也不能出差错了，要不然他和工人党的品牌将会毁于一旦！选个年级比较成熟的候选人会比较稳当一点。
有趣的是，之前被挤出局的东海岸领队陈忠恩无论知名度、履历或资历都比方荣发优异。可是工人党当时是以“自我更新”为由，改变了原有让领队成为非选区议员不成文的潜规则而推选更年轻的严燕松替之。这导致陈忠恩愤而离去。如今看来，这一连串的事故真是一种讽刺。毕竟工人党万万想不到它会被逼打一场补选吧！
三角战的危机
当饶欣荣被踢出工人党后，有几位反对党人就表明对后港补选有兴趣。我就曾经说过最好不要乘人之危去打三角战。这些人如果真的上阵打三角战的话，名不正言不顺，最后很可能会自取其辱的。
可是有一个是例外，那就是国民团结党了。它有可能左右这次补选的结果。国民团结党的参选，将会给这次补选增添变数。
身为国民团结党的前秘书长，我可以理解他们为何要到后港打三角战。当然我还是希望可以通过谈判来解决和避免三角战，但是看来这机会是渺茫的。国民团结党的参选不只是“报仇”这么简单。它有它策略上的考量。上一次大选工人党咄咄逼人，就算是派个二、三线的队伍到摩棉-加冷集选区与国民团结党的主队B打三角战，也再所不惜。虽然最后国民团结党忍辱负重退出摩棉-加冷集选区而避免了三角战，但相信在下次大选，工人党更会毫无顾忌地以强硬姿态到淡宾尼和马林百烈集选区去与国民团结党硬碰硬。这将逼使国民团结党退出东部比较“肥沃”的选区。国民团结党可能会以这次补选做为往后选战的前哨战，以试探彼此的实力。尤其是在这单选区的补选就算失去按金，代价也不会太大。
如果国民团结党真的打算到后港打三角战的话，它很有可能会派佘雪玲上阵。高知名度的佘雪玲将对工人党的方荣发造成最大的冲击。如果工人党真的是因为佘雪玲的挑战而失去后港的话，那将是因果报应的终极体现了。当然，我并不愿意看到行动党因此渔翁得利而夺回后港。
佘雪玲虽然有高知名度，但是她这一战必须出师有名，要不然她可能必须付上很大的政治代价。国民团结党必须要很小心和慎重的考虑出战后港的利与弊。一旦它决定派佘雪玲出战，我也只好祝她好运了。
工人党不容乐观
政治是难以预料的。谁会想到工人党在短短九个月里竟然会发生如此大的变化呢？到底这次后港补选会发生怎么样的动荡，没人说得准。当然，有许多工人党员和支持者都对补选信心满满，甚至认为补选成绩会比上次大选64%的成绩还要好。但是在我看来，工人党的成绩也只有往下跌的条件和可能性，至于会否因三角战导致它失去后港，那就要看它愿不愿意放下身段去谈判和解了。
当然，补选拖得越迟就对工人党更有利。因为工人党需要时间让后港选民认识它知名度不高的候选人，让他到基层去搏感情。但是时间并非在工人党掌握之中。当然，工人党如果能把陈忠恩请回来出战这次后港补选的话，那将是最好的安排了。这将增强工人党面对三角战的抵抗力。可是，这也只是我一厢情愿的想法罢了。
吴明盛
（后记：我刚想起我忽略了一个非常重要的因素。既然这补选会是个人品牌战，如果行动党够聪明的话，它也许会派出新广艺人上阵。别小看这明星效应，这很可能会变成行动党的杀手锏！艺人郑斌辉是行动党员，一向来都显得对竞选有兴趣。最近他还提起国民主义来“起义”，对抗外来学生。虽然这举动有些太偏激，但是毕竟会哗众取宠，得到不少支持的。要是行动党真的派他出战，那将会是非常有看头的补选了。试想想，佘雪玲、郑斌辉和方荣发。。。我相信到最后，方荣发将会被边缘化，补选就会变成电视明星与政治新星的对决了！）
刘程强巧妙的空城计
工人党秘书长刘程强先生在宣布开除饶欣龙后，便直驱后港造势。从新闻画面看来，刘先生在后港的支持度也真的很强。但是刘先生在访问最后一段，竟不慎透露了他本身的忧虑。他对着摄影机说：“如果总理有重要的国家议程的话，他应该看看这些支持者的情绪，而别等太久才补选。。。这是我的忠告。。。“
我反复咀嚼了这段说话，总觉得有点不合理。如果总理看了那么激情的场面，他为什么还要尽快补选呢？最后我才了解，原来刘程强只是在摆出政治架势，“挑战”总理，你看后港对工人党的支持度，如果敢的话，就马上补选吧！但是为何刘先生要摆出这政治架势挑战总理呢？
这就是“空城计”！工人党当时最怕的是行动党“趁势追击”，马上宣布补选而“偷袭”完全没有准备的工人党。所以刘先生就使出“虚张声势”，摆出了一个“空城计”来，防止行动党速战速决。其实，如果行动党把握时机，在最短时间里宣布补选的话，那么它就掌握了时局的优势。工人党那时候最怕的是行动党给它杀个措手不及，尤其是如果行动党把补选订在国会在辩论财政预算案期间，那么工人党将会面对严峻的考验。刘程强也许就无法在补选中发挥他个人的号召力了。(这也就是为什么我选择在国会预算案辩论完后才刊登此文.)
但是刘程强微妙的空城计终究把行动党给唬住了！
行动党的失策
行动党毕竟在后港已经有现成的候选人了，以它的基层实力，马上启动竞选机器并非难事。可惜的是，它太优柔寡断，竟然怕输到让党内议员狡辩无需补选云云，这是策略上的一大败笔！这些议员在狡辩宪法对补选的定义的同时，便凸现了堂堂一个执政了几乎50年的政党竟然对一个选区的补选如此畏惧、怕输的窘境！其实以普通人的智慧来计算，这补选又不是会威胁到行动党的执政地位的。就算是输了，行动党也没有任何而外的损失！因为这选区本来就是反对党区，输了没损失，如果赢了就是意外的收获！就算只是把工人党的支持率降低几个百分点，也算是有所获呀！这是没赔有赢的事啊！
反过来说，如今拖了几个月才决定补选，这不就让工人党有喘气的机会去重新部署吗？我其实不明白，行动党里有这么多军事将领，连这么简单的盘算都不会算，令它举棋不定错失良机！我看行动党如果这一次在后港大败，比原先在2011年大选的成绩还差的话，那也真是活该了！
工人党“蜀中无大将“
接下来的问题就是，为何工人党对尽早补选会如此担心呢？其实理由很简单。工人党的管理方式是封闭式的，平时不会刻意去栽培任何有潜能的候选人。就算是大选到来，也只集中于那么几位在主要战场的侯选人。这种管理方式能很有效的针对大选做出集权式的操纵，不大会出乱子。这也就是为什么很多时候大选过后，选民在众多候选人当中，也只对那么几位有印象，深刻印象的也就说不上了。纵观从2006年至2011年大选前夕，工人党内有多少有高知名度的候选人呢？就算是加入党多年的陈硕茂，也是在大选前由媒体为他提早曝光而造就了他那政治偶像的形象的。
这种保守的管理方式固然有它的可取之处，但也致使工人党在培养接班政治人才方面形成了重大阻碍。从工人党这次只能派知名度微弱的方荣发去坐镇后港便能得知它“蜀中无大将”的窘境了。
个人品牌战
补选，尤其是单选区的补选，往往打的是个人品牌。虽然刘程强的个人品牌在后港有绝对的优势，但是经过饶欣龙事件以后，我想后港选民（尤其是中间选民）在这次补选中不会像大选一样只靠工人党或刘程强的品牌保证而轻易投给工人党了。后港选民这次补选也一定对所有候选人有更严谨的审视，更严格的要求了。如果工人党以为能像以往一样轻易地取信于中间选民的话，那么它将可能面对意想不到的结果。
这也就是为什么工人党会选择方荣发而不是比他更有知名度又更年轻的许俊荣来坐镇后港。刘程强明白他在人选方面再也不能出差错了，要不然他和工人党的品牌将会毁于一旦！选个年级比较成熟的候选人会比较稳当一点。
有趣的是，之前被挤出局的东海岸领队陈忠恩无论知名度、履历或资历都比方荣发优异。可是工人党当时是以“自我更新”为由，改变了原有让领队成为非选区议员不成文的潜规则而推选更年轻的严燕松替之。这导致陈忠恩愤而离去。如今看来，这一连串的事故真是一种讽刺。毕竟工人党万万想不到它会被逼打一场补选吧！
三角战的危机
当饶欣荣被踢出工人党后，有几位反对党人就表明对后港补选有兴趣。我就曾经说过最好不要乘人之危去打三角战。这些人如果真的上阵打三角战的话，名不正言不顺，最后很可能会自取其辱的。
可是有一个是例外，那就是国民团结党了。它有可能左右这次补选的结果。国民团结党的参选，将会给这次补选增添变数。
身为国民团结党的前秘书长，我可以理解他们为何要到后港打三角战。当然我还是希望可以通过谈判来解决和避免三角战，但是看来这机会是渺茫的。国民团结党的参选不只是“报仇”这么简单。它有它策略上的考量。上一次大选工人党咄咄逼人，就算是派个二、三线的队伍到摩棉-加冷集选区与国民团结党的主队B打三角战，也再所不惜。虽然最后国民团结党忍辱负重退出摩棉-加冷集选区而避免了三角战，但相信在下次大选，工人党更会毫无顾忌地以强硬姿态到淡宾尼和马林百烈集选区去与国民团结党硬碰硬。这将逼使国民团结党退出东部比较“肥沃”的选区。国民团结党可能会以这次补选做为往后选战的前哨战，以试探彼此的实力。尤其是在这单选区的补选就算失去按金，代价也不会太大。
如果国民团结党真的打算到后港打三角战的话，它很有可能会派佘雪玲上阵。高知名度的佘雪玲将对工人党的方荣发造成最大的冲击。如果工人党真的是因为佘雪玲的挑战而失去后港的话，那将是因果报应的终极体现了。当然，我并不愿意看到行动党因此渔翁得利而夺回后港。
佘雪玲虽然有高知名度，但是她这一战必须出师有名，要不然她可能必须付上很大的政治代价。国民团结党必须要很小心和慎重的考虑出战后港的利与弊。一旦它决定派佘雪玲出战，我也只好祝她好运了。
工人党不容乐观
政治是难以预料的。谁会想到工人党在短短九个月里竟然会发生如此大的变化呢？到底这次后港补选会发生怎么样的动荡，没人说得准。当然，有许多工人党员和支持者都对补选信心满满，甚至认为补选成绩会比上次大选64%的成绩还要好。但是在我看来，工人党的成绩也只有往下跌的条件和可能性，至于会否因三角战导致它失去后港，那就要看它愿不愿意放下身段去谈判和解了。
当然，补选拖得越迟就对工人党更有利。因为工人党需要时间让后港选民认识它知名度不高的候选人，让他到基层去搏感情。但是时间并非在工人党掌握之中。当然，工人党如果能把陈忠恩请回来出战这次后港补选的话，那将是最好的安排了。这将增强工人党面对三角战的抵抗力。可是，这也只是我一厢情愿的想法罢了。
吴明盛
（后记：我刚想起我忽略了一个非常重要的因素。既然这补选会是个人品牌战，如果行动党够聪明的话，它也许会派出新广艺人上阵。别小看这明星效应，这很可能会变成行动党的杀手锏！艺人郑斌辉是行动党员，一向来都显得对竞选有兴趣。最近他还提起国民主义来“起义”，对抗外来学生。虽然这举动有些太偏激，但是毕竟会哗众取宠，得到不少支持的。要是行动党真的派他出战，那将会是非常有看头的补选了。试想想，佘雪玲、郑斌辉和方荣发。。。我相信到最后，方荣发将会被边缘化，补选就会变成电视明星与政治新星的对决了！）
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Integrity - Fundamental Basic of Leadership
(Update: Vikram has admitted that he shouldn't use the Nigerian Scam to insinuate Chen Shao Mao. At least he has the courage to admit his mistake and upheld his integrity. This is reported in Zaobao: 把工人党议员陈硕茂对改善财政预算案的提议，和“尼日利亚骗局”作比较，挖苦对方一番。三巴旺集选区议员维凯反省后承认：太过火了。 )
More than 20 years ago, I was just an Officer Cadet in OCS. Day in day out, right from dawn till dusk, our trainers would shout at us and punish us for the slightest fault we made. I remembered very clearly that the most often used phrase was "All of you have integrity problem is it?"
In fact, several fellow cadets were kicked out of course due to "integrity problems". Integrity problems could range from telling white lies, breaking rules knowingly to outright stealing. Looking back, all those little issues are really minor and OCS might have been too strict. However, it set the expectation of every officer-to-be: Integrity is the most important virtue valued.
I would expect any persons in the positions of public service to uphold the highest integrity level. This should apply to both ruling and opposition parties MPs. Even in Hong Kong, where they are having election of the Chief Executive by a mere 1200 electorates, they were fighting on the issue of integrity.
It is really disappointing to note that in the recent months, certain events had happened and it exposed the lack of due respect to integrity in the leadership of the highest authority of law making, parliament. Integrity encompasses a whole range of issues, from Yaw-gate (saving grace for WP, Low Thia Khiang finally decided to expel him), plagiarism, intellectual dishonesty, refusing to admit glaring mistakes and use lots of lame excuses like "it is just a joke" or "it is not against the rules and law" to explain away their spoken words cum actions, to the disrespect of our written Constitution on by-election (Well, the saving grace for PAP is that PM Lee has decided to call for Hougang by-elections) etc. People just couldn't think straight and talk straight but tried every ways to twist and turn, flaunting with words and "interpretations".
If this is the First World Parliament that we are supposed to build, I would rather not have it. Contrary to some people, including my friends who thought that I am "trumpeting" about "High Moral Standards" in my expectation of our representatives in parliament, I have only asked for the very basic quality of leadership in terms of Integrity, transparency, accountability and democracy to be part of the core values of them, to be upheld and safe guarded.
I understand it is unrealistic to ask for saints to fill all the parliamentary seats but at the very least, we should have people with basic integrity and honesty to lead the country.
As for opposition party supporters who have been criticising me for being too vocal on opposition MPs, particularly WP MPs and I should cut them some slack because they are, as IPS Gillian Koh said, "rookie politicians", I have only this to say to them: I have been the Secretary General of NSP and I understand it is really difficult to attract good and upright individuals to join the opposition cause.
However, if we do not keep our "role model" opposition MPs in check and keep reminding them what qualities are expected from them, especially in the aspect of Integrity, then those good and upright people would think thrice before they want to join any opposition parties. In the end, only those who do not put emphasis on integrity will join opposition parities. Do we want that to happen?
On the other hand, the middle ground voters who are mostly better educated would feel disappointed after giving opposition parties their votes in last GE. We should not take their support for granted and be mindful that the only way to continue to get their support or even convince others in the middle ground to support opposition cause, is to give them full confidence in our opposition MPs. Integrity is part of the confidence building process.
I thought with the break through in a GRC by WP is a major step forward a more balanced democracy but I was wrong. It seems that we just have a long way to go in achieving an upright democratic development for Singapore. I hope future political players will work harder to achieve that goal, with integrity.
Goh Meng Seng
More than 20 years ago, I was just an Officer Cadet in OCS. Day in day out, right from dawn till dusk, our trainers would shout at us and punish us for the slightest fault we made. I remembered very clearly that the most often used phrase was "All of you have integrity problem is it?"
In fact, several fellow cadets were kicked out of course due to "integrity problems". Integrity problems could range from telling white lies, breaking rules knowingly to outright stealing. Looking back, all those little issues are really minor and OCS might have been too strict. However, it set the expectation of every officer-to-be: Integrity is the most important virtue valued.
I would expect any persons in the positions of public service to uphold the highest integrity level. This should apply to both ruling and opposition parties MPs. Even in Hong Kong, where they are having election of the Chief Executive by a mere 1200 electorates, they were fighting on the issue of integrity.
It is really disappointing to note that in the recent months, certain events had happened and it exposed the lack of due respect to integrity in the leadership of the highest authority of law making, parliament. Integrity encompasses a whole range of issues, from Yaw-gate (saving grace for WP, Low Thia Khiang finally decided to expel him), plagiarism, intellectual dishonesty, refusing to admit glaring mistakes and use lots of lame excuses like "it is just a joke" or "it is not against the rules and law" to explain away their spoken words cum actions, to the disrespect of our written Constitution on by-election (Well, the saving grace for PAP is that PM Lee has decided to call for Hougang by-elections) etc. People just couldn't think straight and talk straight but tried every ways to twist and turn, flaunting with words and "interpretations".
If this is the First World Parliament that we are supposed to build, I would rather not have it. Contrary to some people, including my friends who thought that I am "trumpeting" about "High Moral Standards" in my expectation of our representatives in parliament, I have only asked for the very basic quality of leadership in terms of Integrity, transparency, accountability and democracy to be part of the core values of them, to be upheld and safe guarded.
I understand it is unrealistic to ask for saints to fill all the parliamentary seats but at the very least, we should have people with basic integrity and honesty to lead the country.
As for opposition party supporters who have been criticising me for being too vocal on opposition MPs, particularly WP MPs and I should cut them some slack because they are, as IPS Gillian Koh said, "rookie politicians", I have only this to say to them: I have been the Secretary General of NSP and I understand it is really difficult to attract good and upright individuals to join the opposition cause.
However, if we do not keep our "role model" opposition MPs in check and keep reminding them what qualities are expected from them, especially in the aspect of Integrity, then those good and upright people would think thrice before they want to join any opposition parties. In the end, only those who do not put emphasis on integrity will join opposition parities. Do we want that to happen?
On the other hand, the middle ground voters who are mostly better educated would feel disappointed after giving opposition parties their votes in last GE. We should not take their support for granted and be mindful that the only way to continue to get their support or even convince others in the middle ground to support opposition cause, is to give them full confidence in our opposition MPs. Integrity is part of the confidence building process.
I thought with the break through in a GRC by WP is a major step forward a more balanced democracy but I was wrong. It seems that we just have a long way to go in achieving an upright democratic development for Singapore. I hope future political players will work harder to achieve that goal, with integrity.
Goh Meng Seng
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
