It’s funny, actually, that I turned 21 in the right year. Some people in Singapore (I am looking at the poor brethren in Tanjong Pagar GRC) probably have never voted in their adult lives before and probably will not get to vote this time round if they are in Tanjong Pagar. Yet, for the first time since I turned 21 and became eligible to vote, I actually get to vote, twice actually (or maybe thrice, I might have missed that though).
The first vote is a vote to change the UK’s systems of election in a referendum. Yes, you are not reading wrongly. I am actually going to vote in a referendum of a foreign country before I even get to vote for my member of parliament in my own country. You must be wondering, rightly I might add, how can I even vote in another country? Turns out, that’s because I am a citizen of the Commonwealth Countries and because I am currently a resident in the UK. Funny how things turn out. There is supposed to be an election for the local authorities on the same day but since the polling card I received did not mention anything about it and that one actually has to register to vote in that election, I don’t think I am eligible for that. Frankly, though, I am not really interested in voting for that. It might be interesting to see how the referendum turn out though. I am not really convinced, either way, on the merits of both voting systems and I am simply undecided.
It might be interesting to note that Singapore uses the “first-past-the-post” system that the UK uses.
———————————
It seems heartening that an increasing number of young people are generally more interested in this election than the one prior in 2006. Maybe you could chalk this up to the increased prominence of the internet, especially social media like Facebook, Twitter and Blogs. Or you could probably also say this is because of the stronger opposition. As PM Lee puts it, stronger opposition will “make voters sit up and and pay attention and decide – what is at stake for [him].” Nevertheless, it is a promising sign.
From what I have read so far on the internet, I can sort of divide people into three categories, each with their own sub-groups. Note that I am no expert and these are simply my views.
The first group would belong to the group of people who are, simply put, apathetic. They don’t really care about what’s going on, for reasons of their own. I respect your opinion but I implore you to at least be kept up to date about ongoing. This election is deciding on the future of your country, the living breathing country that you are presently in or are going to return to. The issues that many raise might one day be affecting you as well. By then, you will have to be concerned about it whether you like it, or not. Why not start early and prevent that from happening?
The second group of people would be what I call the “staunch supporters”, either in favour of the ruling party or the “alternative”. (Some people balk at the idea of calling them the “opposition”.) There is plenty of both sides of the fence. The PAP side is equally numerous (at least from the netizens demographics) as that of the alternative. I am not familiar with the PAP side of the fence but suffice to say that these people generally feel that the PAP has done a good job and that despite some “small hiccups” along the way, they will continue to do good. In MM Lee’s terms, these people don’t want to “rock [the] foundation”. On the other side of fence, the staunch alternative views can probably be split into two camps: the want for a change and the simple belief that they need to oppose the ruling party. The former yearns for change. They want Singapore to change. And they feel that the only way to do so is to have opposing views in parliament or at least have checks in place to prevent steam-rolling of policies through the parliament. They want more “radical” change, if I would use the term “radical” loosely. Some of these people are probably disgruntled Singaporeans who have gotten the wrong end of the stick for a while now. The latter might, well, just be a bunch of people who simply hate the PAP for the sake of hating. Unfortunately, amidst the second group of staunch supporters, there has been a lot of arguments that are simply ad hominem.
The third and final group of people are the “swing supporters”. They recognise that there needs to be change but are generally more conservative. They won’t simply vote for the opposition simply because they want change. They will give each side of the fence an equal amount of credit and take what each says in an equivocal manner. They will then assess the merits of each side and then decide for themselves.
Suffice to say, I belong to the third group. I am undecided. My GRC is seeing competition from both sides. I believe that change is in order, but I also acknowledge that the PAP is still needed to run Singapore smoothly. I feel that just because they have done a good job in the past, this does not warrant them the liberty to make huge mistakes like the YOG budget fiasco, the flood fiasco and the Mas Selemat fiasco for example. Nor should they expect to be absolved from all blame when such incidents take place. They must realise that they CAN actually be voted out if they do not do well. They are answerable to the nation and the people. I also acknowledge that the opposition is sometimes grasping at straws even though, to be fair, they have not had the chance to prove themselves. I believe that this election should give them a small step to prove their worth and the polls will speak for themselves again in five years’ time. On the whole, I guess this will effectively force both sides to be more accountable and transparent when the threat of being actually voted out is very real. I guess you could say that I am more conservative.
——————————————————————
‘If people don’t vote in their own self-interest, then it will create unintended outcomes.’ – George Yeo
To sum up, I thought it would be apt to respond to this quote, published in The Straits Times on 27/4/2011. I am actually, to be honest, quite appalled that our Minister can come up with such a line. Unlike what the PAP has meant for us to believe in, voting should be not be decided by whether your HDB flats will be getting any upgrades or what not. In other words, we should not vote for self-interest. We need to take a look at the big picture. Our votes will count towards the future of Singapore. Whether your house will get lifts on every floor or not is a small matter, the pricing of your house is another matter.
I am not trying to say that we should not vote for PAP. I am trying to say that when voting, we should think about the big picture. Get out of that bubble of self-interest and instead think of how your vote could potentially change the landscape, figuratively and literally, of Singapore in years to come. Otherwise, “it will created unintended outcomes”. Mr Wang says it better than I do.
