A final assessment

One week of campaigning is finally over and voters are marching to the polling stations to decide their own fate. I am just wondering whether they know what they are in for? Are they casting their votes for their own good or for their own doom? Whoever they vote for, they will have to live with their choices for the next 5 years. Will they be voting for a party to look after them or to boss over them? The democratic process is a funny thing. It gives you a choice to choose. To choose what? To choose someone to look after your interest or someone to carry a cane to whip you. So far it has been like that. The people are there to choose their master, and happily doing so. In this election it is not to vote for a new govt. The key issue is whether to have more voices to restrain the govt or to confirm that there is no need to restrain the govt. For the former, it is an indication that the people wanted some change, that they are not totally happy with what had happened over the last few years. In the later case, the people will be saying yes, we like what the govt has been doing and the govt can continue to do what it thinks best for the people. The bread and butter issues, a better tomorrow where jobs are aplenty, people can make a living easier, lower cost of living etc will thus be the key decider on who to vote for. Both the opposition parties and ruling parties have addressed these issues to some extent. The rest of the issues raised like quality of candidates, their commitments, upgradings etc were side issues. Then the Gomez incident however, has taken centre stage and could really become the key factor that really tips the scale. PAP has rightly saw an opportunity to discredit the WP's team in Aljunied by creating a big doubt in Gomez. Initially they scored big. But after opening a big wound they got carried away and made themselves into a wolf pack devouring the carcass. The sight turned ugly and nauseating to many people. It shows the ugly side of the PAP at its worst. Even the NKF and Chee Soon Juan saga faded to the background. Chee was silenced and the NKF issue sidelined. In a way this turned out to favour the opposition as they distanced away from Chee and appeared very reasonable. It was a personal vendetta or family feud between the Chees and Lees. Nobody wants to get involved. And without Chee making fiery and reckless speeches, the rally was what it should be with the opposition parties saying what they should be saying and PAP trying to sell their plans for the people. Then things took a plunge for the PAP on the last two days of campaigning. The word 'fix' took on a new meaning. Earlier it was Gomez trying to fix the Elections Dept and the whole government. Now it has a different angle. Gomez made his slip. Now PAP has its slip as well. And this may prove very costly. Though the PMO quickly came out with an apology that it was a slip, the negative thought has already been planted in people's mind. My gut feel of the outcome. Aljunied will go to WP. The WP put up a credible team but got derailed by Gomez. I thought that was the end of WP in Aljunied. But the subsequent barrage of persistent attacks against his blunder levelled the ground again. Then came the PAP slip at Raffles Place and this could be what the WP needs. On the single constituency, Steve Chia has come out quite strongly, very flamboyant and charming in his own ways. His little flirtation with the law seems to be totally forgiven and forgotten. And compare to a goody and clean but dull Gan Kim Yong, Steve Chia comes out a more popular guy. Ho Peng Kee tried his very best but there seems to be a gap. It was quite obvious that he could not bridge and connect with the people in his rally speeches. His attempt to speak the voters lingo was a big effort that did not seem to get through. Ong Ah Heng, the veteran, may lose out to the youthfulness of Lian Chin Way. This is a refreshing face of a young professional, a serious young man who is equal to the PAP's slate of candidates. The voters will have no problem voting for him. Seng Han Thong may find Yip Weng Kee too good a match for him despite his advantage as a current MP. Yip could match him in every area and that should be good enough to carry him to Parliament. Tan Bin Seng would be a close call for Chan Soo Sen. Not that Tan Bin Seng is more superior. But if the people are looking for a decent and credible candidate, they might just give their votes to Bin Seng. As for Hougang and Potong Pasir, it was a gallant attempt by the PAP. But the truth will be repeated and the PAP would have to try harder another time. The PAP's waving of millions of dollars of upgrading programmes did not really draw the right responses they want from the people. Everyone knows that it is the taxpayers' money they are throwing back at the people. Nothing to crow about. In fact Steve Chia's challenge of using his own money, though not much, created more positive impact than the millions being promised by the PAP. The above is just my take. I could be totally wrong.

The forgotten and unappreciated group of people

What can the opposition candidates do? Can they negotiate FTAs, can they invest our huge reserves, work out master plans, bring in investments etc etc etc. Sure they can't. But do they need to? Who are the ones that do all the donkey work? Many may curse and swear at them, faceless policy makers who only know how to play by the books. But they are the real people who do all the thinking and hard work in planning and making sure that the country works like clockwork everyday. You guess it. They are the faceless and thankless civil servants. Politicians mainly set directions and build dreams. The civil servants are the one that get things done. Politicians may say I want medical fees to be reduced. And the civil servants will find ways to get it done. And if the objective is to make more money in transportation, the civil servants in LTA will get to work. Make SIA and PSA the number airport and seaport, and the civil servants will start cracking. Politicians need to have vision, to know what is good for the country, set the goals like Malaysia's 2020 and not winning the world cup in 2010. And politicians must also know that they must look after the people and not be obsessed with profit making per se. What is the point of SIA or DBS making billions when people are retrenched and become jobless? We need political leaders who think and care for the people and their welfare. Not political leaders who care about which organisation is making the most money while the people's welfare is neglected. The political leaders lead and the civil servants do the work. Political leaders must be caring men, decent men. Not necessary clever men who only think of their own pockets.

spreading rumours and inciting anger and insecurity

Chua Chin Hon's article in the ST starts like this: The WP has offered no concrete plans ofr Singapore's future, and has instead been spreading rumours about the rising cost of living, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday. He also criticised the opposition for dwelling on lift upgrading and means testing for hospital stays, with the aim to 'incite' feelings of insecurity and anger among Singaporeans so they would vote for their candidates.' Did Hsien Loong really said these? If people complain or talk about rising cost of living are guilty of spreading rumours, I think all of us are equally guilty. If people question or raise issues about upgrading and means testing, they are inciting feelings of insecurity and anger, I think we all better stop talking about them. Don't want to be accused of spreading rumours and inciting the people. This is dangerous stuff.

Hu scores in his visit to the US

Looks like Hu Jintao went to the US with a very important message during his last trip. I thought he was being slighted by Bush. But from what the way the Bush Administration is treating Chen Shuibian's request for a stop over to Paraguay, it seems that Hu had passed a very strong message to Bush. And the message has sunk in. The Bush is now distancing his administration from Chen and not sleeping with him anymore. In this sense, apart from the intentional American protocol slips, Hu has been successful in getting Bush not to meddle with China Taiwan relations.

invited and uninvited guest politicians

Over the last few days, many descriptions were made of our fresh face politicians. One description compares them to sprinters and long distance runners. The former will appear for a short run and disappear immediately. The latter is in for a long haul, will run the distance, always there. I would like to put the two groups into a clearer perspective. The long distant runners are normally high achievers, academically very brilliant and very successful or promising young people in their professions. They have spend a major part of their lives chasing their dreams of building a successful professional career, not in politics. Then the invitation card came for tea. And most of them will turn down the offer, citing other commitments of work and family. Only after a lot of persuasion will they then reluctantly accept to come forward to serve the people. It seems that to appear not keen to be politicians is a hall mark of this group. Eager beavers are not seen favourably. And once in, they are assured of a long haul. They are virtually assured of winning and becoming MPs. For even if they lose in the election, they will still be appointed as the de facto MP with grassroot leaders and organisations in their charge. And they will have more financial muscles to do more for the people than an elected opposition candidate. They can be assured of a wonderful career ahead of them, win or lose the election. On the other hand, the sprinters, or uninvited guest politicians are normally not that high achievers or very young and untested. They did not wait to be invited. They invited themselves to the political fray, risking a career, reputation and maybe even a lawsuit. This group has no qualms or hesitation about family or career commitment. To serve the people or be politicians seems to be their main life objective. They did not pretend to be uninterested in politics. They came forward on their own to be judged by the people during an election. And if they lose, they have no other means of support, financially or grassroot organisations or a big machinery to keep them active in the constituency. They have to go back to earn a living and be part time politicians. This is a reversal of what they will be, full time politicians when elected but part time politicians if not elected. This is a mark difference from the long distant runner who will be part time politicians when elected and full time politicians when not elected. The above practically sums up the differences between invited and uninvited guest politicians.