A foregone conclusion in Singapore

A foregone conclusion in Singapore
By Alex Au
SINGAPORE - The campaign strategy employed by the ruling People's Action Party would be considered political suicide in many countries, but not in Singapore, where the PAP will win a landslide victory in Saturday's general election despite its tactics.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his party are aware that public services and the rising cost of living are the main issues going into the election. Nonetheless, the PAP for the most part has campaigned on its traditional social-cohesion and progress ticket.
Still, some analysts believe the party could capture all 84 seats, returning Singapore to a one-party parliament as it was when the
PAP ruled from 1965-81. The party currently holds 82 seats.
"We have dealt with many issues on the ground, like health costs and low-wage workers," said Lee, who became prime minister in August 2004. "The PAP has a clear message for voters: stay together and move ahead."
The Workers' Party appears to be the best organized among the opposition parties. It has distributed a 50-page manifesto proposing specific changes to existing PAP policies, ranging from abolishing race quotas in housing blocks and compulsory hospitalization insurance co-paid by the state to full-fledged unemployment insurance.
The Workers' Party and the other two opposition parties have been hoping to tap into the somewhat disaffected younger generation of Singaporeans who desire more checks and balances on the government. Chiam See Tong, one of the leaders of the Singapore Democratic Alliance, has said that if the PAP sweeps the election, the island nation may "degenerate" into a dictatorship and its people "become slaves to the mighty PAP".
Even Lee Kuan Yew, the country's first prime minister, father of Lee Hsien Loong and now PAP minister mentor, has acknowledged that Singaporeans "want to have a First World parliament for Singapore. So we need to have a First World government and a First World opposition."
But in the same breath, he dismissed the opposition parties as not up to par, saying, "If they behave like hooligans, they must expect to be treated like hooligans."
He was referring in particular to the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), which in a recent party newsletter alleged government complicity in a money scandal at the National Kidney Foundation, which - surprisingly, given the country's tight media control - received attention last year.
The Lees have filed a libel suit against SDP leaders over the report, including aggravated-libel charges against party secretary general Chee Soon Juan, who was recently bankrupted after losing a three-year legal defamation battle filed by the senior Lee. The Lees' latest legal action will likely bankrupt his party, Chee said.
Opposition politicians have regularly been sued by the PAP for libel and have suffered from financially crippling, court-mandated monetary damages. While the latest case will remind some voters of the heavy-handed style of the PAP government and the adverse effects criminal-defamation cases have on the development of a healthy opposition, Singaporeans have come to expect such actions from the PAP.
But these are not the only voter concerns. Some feel it's unjust that the PAP is again threatening to withhold taxpayers' money from constituencies that vote for opposition candidates. Given that 80% of Singaporeans live in government-built apartments, that tactic has historically helped to swing the majority of votes toward the PAP.
Another criticism of the PAP is the manner in which the party has consolidated its power through delineating super-sized constituencies that swallow up known pockets of discontent.
A recent survey by the main government-influenced English-language newspaper, The Straits Times, indicated that among younger voters the top concerns were not those of political freedoms and fairness, but old-fashioned bread-and-butter issues.
It would seem this assessment suggests support for the PAP, given its historical track record of economic growth. But even here, much depends on whether memories are long or short. In the past few years, the income gap in Singapore has widened considerably, which, as in many countries, can be traced to the impact of globalization and China's spectacular economic rise as the world's factory floor.
Tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs in Singapore have recently been lost to lower-cost destinations in the region. Many who have been laid off have been unable to find secure, equivalent-paying employment in the services sector, even though year-on-year gross domestic product growth hit 6.4% in 2005. The opposition often refers to the displaced workers as Singapore's "new poor".
In response, the government gave cash handouts in March and April to almost every adult, using the accumulated budget surplus from the past five years. Amounts ranged from S$200 to S$2,000 (US$125-$1,250) per head, skewed in favor of low-income earners.
The populist policy marks a dramatic U-turn from the PAP's past reputation for being tight-fisted with subsidies and its famous pro-capitalist, "no welfarism" rhetoric, which has characterized the ruling party since 1959. It remains to be seen how many votes the handouts will reap among the less well-off.
Grumbles about the rising cost of living are perennial in every general election. Increases in public-transport fares and hospital charges have figured prominently this time. The annual round of fare adjustments, scheduled for May and June, was adroitly delayed by the PAP for three months as soon as the election was called.
With a gradually aging population, medical costs have assumed new importance. Opposition attacks on the proposed "means testing" for eligibility to state-subsidized hospital wards seemed to have popular resonance. But in an apparent backtrack by the PAP, Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan said on Tuesday that implementing the policy was not a top priority.
Other opposition complaints include long queues at public hospitals - one general hospital admitted it was so overcrowded that on many days it has to turn away ambulances - and a shortage of beds.
This is hardly the picture the economic-growth-obsessed PAP-led government likes to see painted. That's a big reason the government has moved to shut down political discussion and electioneering over the Internet during the 10-day election season, opposition politicians say.
The PAP has also taken aim at Worker's Party candidate James Gomez, a well-known free-speech advocate. Controversy has erupted over his registration with the Elections Department as a minority-race candidate, which he said he filed but the government agency claims isn't on record. The PAP has accused him of vying to win sympathy votes by unfairly casting the department in a bad light.
"I say Mr Gomez is a liar and he's dishonest," Lee Kuan Yew said. "If he thinks it's libel, he can sue me."
In the 2001 election, about 75% of voters in constituencies where seats were contested voted for the PAP, led by then-prime minister Goh Chok Tong. That stunning mandate was considered by some analysts to be a freak result, arising from security fears in the wake of the terror attacks on the United States on September 11 that year.
Voter behavior then was widely characterized as a "flight to safety".
This Saturday, the PAP is hoping to win 65-70% of the vote. A government ban on pre-polling voter intentions makes it difficult to gauge their perceptions. In the mainstream media and on blogs, however, there is a palpable sense that the younger generation of voters - those under 40 who comprise about 40% of the electorate - may be chafing for a less authoritarian style of governance and a more level political playing field.
But that does not seem to be in the cards for this election. Already 37 seats have been decided because of opposition parties not fielding candidates.
Alex Au is an independent social and political commentator and freelance writer based in Singapore. He often speaks at public forums on politics, culture and gay issues.
(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd