Election
The
ideal MP
A graduate, gifted at working with heartlanders, in Parliament
fearlessly speaking up for his constituency. By Seah Chiang
Nee.
April 1, 2006
Politics never stands still, not even in Singapore.
In the
'50 and '60s, MPs in Singapore, PAP or Barisan Sosialis,
emerged from the heartlands.
They
were hawkers, bicycle shop owners, Chinese medicine sellers,
with little education. But with silver tongues and the ability
to work up a crowd, they won elections and kept their seats.
An example
was a former classmate, Robin Sim Boon Woo, who disappeared
from my life before the Senior Cambridge exam (now 'O' levels).
The next time I saw him, I was a reporter and he was speaking
with adrenalin pumping in him at a PAP rally - in Tamil.
He campaigned
in Malay, Mandarin and English. Robin was a PAP MP in a
rural constituency for many years.
Years
later, he told me of his frequent combats with the leftist
Barisan Socialis. His constituency work involved things
like driving a voter's sick wife to a 'sinseh' or attending
marriages, funerals and birthdays.
'I knew
every household in my ward by their names, how many children
they had and where they studied and I made regular visits,
election or not,' he said.
Was
that necessary? 'Yes. My rival lived among the people and
bonded with them. It was a powerful factor.'
I have
not forgotten this dapper, street-wise guy, who truly represented
his generation of politicians.
Voters
today no longer care for these poorly-schooled grassroots
workers, preferring graduate MPs.
The
PAP went into self-renewal. Unless you were young, had a
degree, you were not MP material.
But
the pendulum may have swung too far. A new breed of MPs,
comprising mostly scholars and the successful, has taken
over.
They
may run a town council well but may fare less well at interacting
patiently with ordinary people.
For
the ruling party, 'the good, qualified candidate' is both
a winning formula and a vulnerable asset.
The
wind of change, which blew out the heartland-type politician
might again change direction and make them popular again
one day.
The
pre-election discussions have revealed a growing demand
for more opposition MPs to provide alternative views and
more active debate in Parliament. That is as it should be.
It remains
to be seen if this is reflected in the polling outcome.
To the
critics, today's Parliament is at worst a 'rubber stamp'
and, at best, a polite discussion group that reinforces
the official line.
The
ruling party usually carries out a post-mortem after an
election.
I hope
this time it will include a review of its concept of 'a
good candidate' - to see if it has moved too far from what
voters want - and of the MP's role in a changing Singapore.
Some
perceive the new PAP MP as intelligent and a capable problem-solver
but a political lightweight who needs help from the big
guns to be elected.
He is
both a tower of strength and a political liability in the
face of a changing electorate.
This
is because voters want their MPs to firmly represent their
interests and voice their concerns, not just to reinforce
the party's position.
He's
required to pursue a debate, challenge the Government if
necessary, not merely ask a question then sit down.
This
may require a loosening-up at a rate faster than what PM
Lee Hsien Loong had promised.
We await
to see how fast Parliament will change in this area.
(This
article was published in The New Paper on Mar 30 under the
headline "Intellects, yes but street cred adds value
to MP")