poor guy – your specialist/officer analogy is probably accurate for the PAP. :)

If community service is one’s goal, perhaps a political party is the least effective arena to achieve that goal. You’ll prob be more effective in some VWO.

Miccheng

1) Traditional source of PAP candidates for succession have always been outside the party. This is for fear of inbreeding of ideas. Internal selection is possible – but must be one with a certain quality they are looking for.

The truth is that the YP, on the whole, is quite impotent as an engine for political change and policy influence. Its been pretty much reduced to social engagements – shying away from real hard politics. Why would the party leadership need impotent team players?

2) They want technocrats in government. Those they select for political positions are born and bred for the job – either having a history of civil service work or have the administrative aptitude for government work (ie. policy making). Charisma and brains are a bonus.

3) Perpetuate weak leadership beyond the Sec-Gen / CEC.

The PAP survives as long as the party machinery (the grassroots and the party’s mobilisation mechanisms – the local branch committees & branch secretaries) remains loyal to one leadership – the Sec-Gen and the CEC.

Its is a deliberate tactic that the party makes in “helicoptering” fresh faces into the GE war zone – the candidate has no power base to tap on – thus the party line and the party mechanism remains intact to run the elections campaign. Although, this ensures the constituency can run the election with any candidate, it also perpetuates weak MP leadership.

Here’s the “Archille’s heel”, YP Members with vast grassroots involvements (on top of their YP portfolios) have a tendency of drawing a fan base (ie. a power base). When they are called to serve as a candidate, they will not run in the same constituency where they served as grassroots. As such, in a new environment, they will want to surround themselves with trustworthy people – including pulling people from their old branch (possibly key branch members & supporters). This could potentially weaken the old branch’s ability to fight a GE.

Post-GE, the YP candidate / MP could draw in more people from his old power base to fill positions in the new constituency. This will upset the grassroots, branch members & supporters of the new branch. The strife and division is something the PAP can’t afford to have.mt

Interesting post and I think that I should add one point to your discussion.

Not all people who joined YP are opportunists. I have friends who are in YP just for the sake of helping out with the community, and they have admitted on many occasions that it would be impossible to become a MP. To be selected for a MP job, you must either have a top notched job or a good family background.

To some of them who dedicated their time to help, they work around the opportunists and try to do something to resolve the income gap and problem of old age. It’s just that the YP offers them a bigger platform for reaching out to people. The estate I used to live in now has 4 in 10 people who are living in old age. One of the YP members I know, don’t get to meet his MP on the days which he worked to help old folks on several community service.

There will always be opportunists in any political party. PAP will have to solve their own problems to weed those guys out.

But I think that we should be fair to people who spent hours of their time just wanting to help.

My two cents worth,
BL

if you compare the military rank-and-file model with the yp, you will find similarity in that “once a specialist, forever a specialist”.

if one does exceptionally well at the grassroots level, chances are the yp will want to keep the person at that level (as a “specialist”) to continue to communicate with residents and act as that delicate bridge between the govt and the masses. how else is the govt going to keep control of this island if they promote the “specialist” into an “officer” (i.e. mp) and there are no suitable/capable fellas to take over from this hardworking “specialist”?

it can also be viewed that the most yp members are good in their current capacity (or “job” scope) but are not seen to be people with the “potential” to be put in-charge since they are practically the men-in-the-middle who merely takes instructions from their bosses and disseminate it to the ground.

as the saying goes, if one works like a dog, the boss will treat one like a dog.

i agree with your final point that one will actually need to focus his/her energies in building up a strong résumé (as opposed to spending/wasting time working & walking the ground as part of yp) in order to get invited for tea.