My letter to the Straits Times as it appeared in today’s Forum section.

————–

What makes a democracy

MS MARGO McCutcheon surprised me last Friday (’No say? It’s simply not true, she says’) when she wrote that Singaporeans have far more say in what their government does than Canadians.

She offered as an example that Singaporeans were consulted before the goods and services tax (GST) was introduced, while Canadians like her were not for a ‘harmony tax’ imposed by Ottawa.

There is more to democracy than government-led consultation exercises. A democracy not only ensures that citizens are consulted on policies, but gives citizens real bargaining power to affect government decisions.

Ms McCutcheon’s American husband also described democracy as a fancy word for partisan bickering and gridlocked government. Rejecting democracy that way is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

While we shouldn’t adopt democracy’s negative aspects, we should not cling blindly to the status quo simply because it may have worked in the past.

The form of democracy which works is one in which all political parties compete vigorously; and present better proposals for voters to choose.

It should include an open and transparent government, strong and independent institutions not easily manipulated by partisan interests, and capable, upright politicians.

Democracy should afford citizens the freedom to express their opinions without fear of unjust repercussions. The mass media should report objectively and fairly, and be willing to criticise the government when necessary.

Building such a democracy requires the effort and participation of all citizens. We need an informed citizenry that is able to elect leaders based on merit, rather than out of fear or ignorance, and hold them to account for their actions in office.

We can build such a democracy while avoiding the trappings that bog down some other countries.

Gerald Giam

—

Get my latest updates. Join my Facebook Page.

Many Singaporeans harbour the misconception that their vote during elections is not secret. I’ve talked to many people, both educated and less educated, and the overwhelming majority seem to think this way. This is despite the fact that at every election, the Elections Department takes pains to communicate to voters two main points: Voting is compulsory, and voting is secret. I guess this is a point that Singaporeans just refuse to believe our government about.

It is even more unfortunate that some persist in perpetuating this urban myth, which only serves to strike more fear into the hearts of Singaporeans who are thinking of voting for the opposition. A letter in Temasek Review today exhorted Singaporeans to spoil their votes because, the writer reasoned, then the PAP won’t “mark” you for voting against them and if there are enough invalid votes, it will indirectly increase the opposition’s share of the valid vote.

This is wrong on many counts. I’ll highlight just two: Firstly, the PAP does not know which party you voted for, so they won’t know who to “mark”, even if they wanted to. Secondly, invalid votes do not factor in the final count, which is based on valid votes. This means that if there were 10 votes–six for the PAP, three for the opposition and one spoiled–the final tally is 66.6 per cent to the PAP (six divided by nine, with the spoiled vote excluded), not 60 per cent.

Let’s be very clear: YOUR VOTE IS SECRET. I will take you through the whole balloting process to see why:

Read more »

—

Get my latest updates. Join my Facebook Page.

Technorati Tags: elections, voting secrecy

Workers’ Party chairman and NCMP Sylvia Lim will ask the following questions in Parliament on 15 September 2010:

1. To ask Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports:

(a) why is the final budget for the Youth Olympic Games more than triple the original estimate;

(b) where were the additional funds drawn from;

(c) whether any of his Ministry programmes were cut back for this purpose; and

(d) what was the amount paid for the tickets purchased by the Ministry of Education and whether this was also part of the YOG budget.

2. To ask the Minister for National Development:

(a) if he will explain the basis on which the new anti-speculation measures announced on 30 August 2010 were devised; and

(b) whether any assessment was done on their impact on genuine home buyers and Singaporean investors.

3. To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs:

(a) what is the proportion of licences that are issued to non-Singapore citizens to work as security officers; and

(b) what proportion of licensees are not working in that industry.

4. To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs whether the Government has detained under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act any person believed to have been organising drug trafficking activities which involved Yong Vui Kong, an inmate on death row.

—

Get my latest updates. Join my Facebook Page.

Technorati Tags: PQs

I’d like to wish all my Muslim readers Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri and Eid Mubarak. Maaf zahir dan batin (especially for any wrong stuff I wrote on my blog!)

—

Get my latest updates. Join my Facebook Page.

My Workers’ Party colleague, Pritam Singh, wrote an excellent article on his blog, titled “The PAP’s Retirement Nightmare: 2nd and 3rd Generation PAP policymakers to blame?”

In the article, Pritam asks:

Is the PAP of today the same one that pulled an entire generation out of poverty in the 1960s and 1970s, introduced sensible policies and kept political salaries within a prudent range – or is today’s PAP one that pays itself millions of dollars, while coasting along on autopilot and shrewdly making use of statistics to justify its policies, with a view to keep itself in power?

I think this is a very important question that all Singaporeans need to ask ourselves. After all, past performance is no guarantee of future results.

—

Get my latest updates. Join my Facebook Page.