Wanted: MPs with courage to speak out
Monday, March 26, 2007
NEEDED in 21st Century Singapore: A new breed of articulate Members of Parliament, who can match the likes of Lee Kuan Yew, S Rajaratnam and David Marshall.
With few exceptions, today's lot, whether in government or opposition, lacks that sharp tongue and fire in the belly that marked the previous generation of politicians.
As the Old Guards left one after another, they were replaced by young, co-opted technocrat-MPs, who were good problem solvers, but who lacked the passion and ability to motivate Singaporeans.
Neither are they good at debates or explaining policies in the pull-no-punches way that Minister Mentor Lee and his peers could do with ease.
The lack is fine as long as the People's Action Party (PAP) continues to enjoy the complete trust of voters the way Lee had.
But his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, is dealing with better educated, more cynical citizens with high expectations.
That requires the party to govern with more than top scholars and good policies; it also needs people with the power of persuasion.
After demolishing all strong opposition one way or another, Minister Mentor Lee has admitted that many young MPs lack the opportunities to learn the thrusts of political debate.
For its own survival, the PAP has to allow its MPs to speak frankly and openly on issues of the day.
It has another reason to do this. It has rejected the opposition playing a checks-and-balance role in the government, saying it can do it by itself. For this to be credible, observers say, it has to be seen doing it.
Most Parliament sessions in Singapore, unlike in Kuala Lumpur, have been tame, polite affairs involving prepared questions and answers.
Despite the leaders exhortations to MPs to speak their minds, not many had done so.
The debate on the budget when tabled in parliament is a case in point.
A sample of backbenchers' respones reveals exuberant praises such as, generous and forward looking, good intentioned and made in heaven, a landmark budget, wonderful, innovative and pragmatic.
The generosity of the budget is possible under the stewardship of the ruling People's Action Party, said one MP, sounding like a Pyongyang news headline.
Another remarked: Nowhere else in the world can you get a budget which includes love and compassion in abundance as this one.
Some young Singaporeans say they were turned off by these flowery but useless descriptions.
Even a commentator of the pro-government Straits Times, Chua Mui Hoong, was moved to call on the MPs to go beyond cheerleading. Too much self-praise is off-putting, she wrote.
An MP's role should include critiquing policies, voicing independent points of view and scrutinising the executive's decisions, she said, but they were in the minority.
Former PAP MP Hwang Soo Jin, 71, related how a doctor had surprised him by asking why Parliament had bothered to debate the budget when the government had already decided to implement it. Hwang wrote in the Chinese Lianhe Zaobao that there was a "chasm" between Parliament and the people.
After Lee Kuan Yew stepped down as Prime Minister in 1990, his successor, Goh Chok Tong had steadily eased up on control of people's lives. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who took over from Goh, has pledged to continue the process.
Some feel Parliament could do with the return of several strong-minded ex-PAP backbenchers, who had the moral courage and skills to take on ministers.
They included former Speaker Tan Soo Khoon, Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Dr Wang Kai Yuen, who have left behind an outspokenly biting legacy.
Soo Khoon once hit out at government wastage, targeting seven grand ministerial building projects, labelling them sarcastically as the Seven Wonders of Singapore.
He likened some of these gleaming new buildings to five-star hotels, which led him to wonder if the ministries were competing to see which of them could be better than the Four Seasons Hotel.
People complain because they realise that if you spend so much money, then we will be taxed more.
Parliament is a stepping-stone for tomorrow's leaders, which explains why MPs should be encouraged to use their flair.
Some analysts, however, believe that sustained periods of affluence and stability are not ideal to producing brilliant leaders; only chaos or wars can.
It was chaotic Singapore in the 50s and 60s that threw up leaders like Lee and his contemporaries and that just can't be re-created. The Star/Asia News Network
With few exceptions, today's lot, whether in government or opposition, lacks that sharp tongue and fire in the belly that marked the previous generation of politicians.
As the Old Guards left one after another, they were replaced by young, co-opted technocrat-MPs, who were good problem solvers, but who lacked the passion and ability to motivate Singaporeans.
Neither are they good at debates or explaining policies in the pull-no-punches way that Minister Mentor Lee and his peers could do with ease.
The lack is fine as long as the People's Action Party (PAP) continues to enjoy the complete trust of voters the way Lee had.
But his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, is dealing with better educated, more cynical citizens with high expectations.
That requires the party to govern with more than top scholars and good policies; it also needs people with the power of persuasion.
After demolishing all strong opposition one way or another, Minister Mentor Lee has admitted that many young MPs lack the opportunities to learn the thrusts of political debate.
For its own survival, the PAP has to allow its MPs to speak frankly and openly on issues of the day.
It has another reason to do this. It has rejected the opposition playing a checks-and-balance role in the government, saying it can do it by itself. For this to be credible, observers say, it has to be seen doing it.
Most Parliament sessions in Singapore, unlike in Kuala Lumpur, have been tame, polite affairs involving prepared questions and answers.
Despite the leaders exhortations to MPs to speak their minds, not many had done so.
The debate on the budget when tabled in parliament is a case in point.
A sample of backbenchers' respones reveals exuberant praises such as, generous and forward looking, good intentioned and made in heaven, a landmark budget, wonderful, innovative and pragmatic.
The generosity of the budget is possible under the stewardship of the ruling People's Action Party, said one MP, sounding like a Pyongyang news headline.
Another remarked: Nowhere else in the world can you get a budget which includes love and compassion in abundance as this one.
Some young Singaporeans say they were turned off by these flowery but useless descriptions.
Even a commentator of the pro-government Straits Times, Chua Mui Hoong, was moved to call on the MPs to go beyond cheerleading. Too much self-praise is off-putting, she wrote.
An MP's role should include critiquing policies, voicing independent points of view and scrutinising the executive's decisions, she said, but they were in the minority.
Former PAP MP Hwang Soo Jin, 71, related how a doctor had surprised him by asking why Parliament had bothered to debate the budget when the government had already decided to implement it. Hwang wrote in the Chinese Lianhe Zaobao that there was a "chasm" between Parliament and the people.
After Lee Kuan Yew stepped down as Prime Minister in 1990, his successor, Goh Chok Tong had steadily eased up on control of people's lives. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who took over from Goh, has pledged to continue the process.
Some feel Parliament could do with the return of several strong-minded ex-PAP backbenchers, who had the moral courage and skills to take on ministers.
They included former Speaker Tan Soo Khoon, Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Dr Wang Kai Yuen, who have left behind an outspokenly biting legacy.
Soo Khoon once hit out at government wastage, targeting seven grand ministerial building projects, labelling them sarcastically as the Seven Wonders of Singapore.
He likened some of these gleaming new buildings to five-star hotels, which led him to wonder if the ministries were competing to see which of them could be better than the Four Seasons Hotel.
People complain because they realise that if you spend so much money, then we will be taxed more.
Parliament is a stepping-stone for tomorrow's leaders, which explains why MPs should be encouraged to use their flair.
Some analysts, however, believe that sustained periods of affluence and stability are not ideal to producing brilliant leaders; only chaos or wars can.
It was chaotic Singapore in the 50s and 60s that threw up leaders like Lee and his contemporaries and that just can't be re-created. The Star/Asia News Network
Business Besides Oil
