Workers Party
Storm in a teacup
Its newcomers can't escape this lesson: Politics is about staying the course for years, however tough. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Nov 19, 2006

IN the past 40 years, Singapore has produced a good number of bankers, engineers and scholars, etc, but fewer career politicians than other developed nations.

With few exceptions, representatives of the People’s Action Party (PAP) are co-opted from outside the party rather than the best being allowed to come from the ranks.

The politician in most of them somehow never quite emerged from their years of Parliament experience; most remain technocrats and problem solvers.

The fledgling opposition parties are no different. Only a few leaders are battle-hardened, the rest being newcomers who move straight from the professions or business to stand in elections.

As a result, the majority of Singapore’s politicians lack campaign or debating skills or political acumen.

That’s the way politics was designed here. Lee Kuan Yew had long steered the country away from “debate” politics either in or out of Parliament.

There’s another reason. Few citizens are interested in entering – or even discussing – politics, and those who join parties nowadays are mostly young, inexperienced people with questionable staying power.

Recently, the lack of experience has told on the largest opposition party, Workers Party (WP), at a time when its fortunes are looking up after years of struggle.

It is undergoing a phase that all outfits face when expanding.

It stems from a natural law, which says that when you are a one-man party (as it was under J.B. Jeyaratnan), internal cohesion was no problem; you lose it only when you grow big.

With its recent expansion, the invigorated party (its leader Low Thia Khiang is a cautious, consensus-seeking person) has gained more public acceptance but it has come with a price.

The new recruits are better-quality, Internet-savvy youths who are new to the ways of the real world of politics – like their counterparts in the ruling party.

Barely six months after the election, the party has hit its first teacup storm. Several new recruits who fared credibly as first-timers in the May election began questioning their leaders.

The big issue is party discipline that the free-spirited members dislike but without which no political party can function.

Specifically, it hinges on two issues. First is a new directive that forbids members of the Central Executive Committee from taking part in online forums under their real names.

They could, however, use a moniker or alternately operate a weblog, so free speech is not an issue as the detractors charge.

The ban, the party explained, is to prevent leaders from expressing individual views that contradict each other or the party’s objectives that could project the party as a weak, disunited organisation.

It could also give its rivals an opportunity to hit out at it or – as happened recently – get themselves entangled in squabbles with the public or provocateurs.

Two CEC members, Chia Ti Lik and Goh Meng Seng, both promising members with some following among young Singaporeans, resigned.

There is a larger issue at stake. There are rumblings among young Turks that the leadership is too passive in engaging the PAP.

These are strong-minded individuals who had joined with a passion to bring social and political changes to Singapore.

Supporters of the ruling party, whose vote fell from 75.1% to 66.6%, are cheered by the opposition’s dilemma, but not all PAP leaders find comfort in it.

The reason? It stems from a strong anti-government mood among a section of Singaporean youths who are growing impatient for a more aggressive opposition to bring down the PAP.

Since the election, new political and social issues have arisen that bother the public, these complainers feel, and yet the party has not spoken out.

Chia Ti Lik, a 33-year-old litigation lawyer, gave his reason for resigning in an interview.

“I think the party leadership is overly conservative,” he said. “The opposition at the moment does not live up to its role. It is too (...) restrained in its criticism of the Government.”

At least one other CEC member admires the more aggressive strategy of Chee Soon Juan, who staged a public protest to confront the government during the World Bank-IMF meeting here recently.

Abdul Salim, a WP election candidate, brought some food to Chee apparently to show sympathy, which the party leaders did not find amusing.

All this points to a dilemma that is affecting society in general, especially the opposition.

A new breed of Singaporeans may be emerging that is different from their more passive peers. These want quick action to change what they see as an unfair system, and “to heck with discipline”.

For now, their number is small, but they are very articulate and active in the Internet and could have a long-term impact on the young generation.

Observers say the resignations show how difficult it is for the opposition to impose discipline on its younger recruits.

That it happens now and not after they become MPs is a good thing for WP. “How will they respond to the party whip?” one political scientist asked.

It will remain as long as political experience is low.

“Generally, young Singaporeans who are used to the easy life resign too easily,” commented a lawyer, quoting his experience with his estate management committee.

“As soon as the members disagree with something, they threaten to quit,” he added.

This is, of course, not what politics is about.

The tougher politicians like Lee Kuan Yew or in neighbouring countries stay and fight whatever the obstacles.

(This was published in The Sunday Star on Nov 19, 2006.)