Can Tan Jee Say win?

A crowd of about 20,000 turned up yesterday at Toa Payoh Stadium to support Tan Jee Say.
Whether or not it is reflective of how the votes will go, its anybody's guess.

In my opinion, Tony Tan started as the front runner, implicitly backed by the PAP machinery.
A few weeks later, Dr. Tan is just about clinging onto the lead and this shift in momentum is largely due to the fairly rapid rise of the obscure dark horse Tan Jee Say.

I think many neutrals have been turned off by Dr Tan's wishy washy statements, his son's unprecedented 12 year deferment from National Service and his new starring role as the "Interruptor".

So PAP, and credit to them for always having "plan B", realises this. If you've been reading between the lines in State Media these past few days, they've thrown more weight behind Tan Cheng Bok. The man whom many in the current establishment saw as the party pooper may actually be PAP's best hope if Dr. Tan's popularity continues to dip.

To any rational citizen, the President must be independent, not just independent-minded, but independent of the ruling party.
Most of us have fond memories of our schooldays. 20, 30 years after leaving school, many of us still hold a sense of pride and loyalty to our Alma Mater, whether or not we've been actively involved in alumni activities.
I still reminisce my first job about a decade ago. Ten years later, I still hold a degree of attachment to that company and from time to time turn to them for certain services I require in my current capacity.

The point I'm trying to make is that we are all human beings and one of the things that makes us unique among living creatures is memory and nostalgia.
Last I checked, all four Presidential candidates are human beings.
Now do you seriously believe that Tony Tan, Tan Cheng Bok and Tan Kin Lian, each with 2-3 decades of ties and service to the PAP, can suddenly erase all the emotional and nostalgic attachment to the regime?

As Tan Jee Say puts it, "there may be constitutional constraints in what the President can or cannot do but there is no limit to what I can do as a Singaporean for Singaporeans".
A President that has cultivated decades of ties to the PAP is very likely to be alot more limited in what he can do for Singaporeans.
And that is bad for us because the PAP will continue to shove unpopular policies like immigration, unrestrained investments by GIC and Temasek and CPF withdrawal age/sum down our throats without aa moral authority to protect Singaporeans.

The power of independence and alternative views cannot be taken for granted.
Many Singaporeans are appalled by the People's Association move to ban Workers' Party MPs from attending grassroot events in their own Aljunied-Hougang Town Council.
The move is obviously politically motivated and serves to diminish the WP's outreach effectiveness.
But today, State Media reported that the PAP has sort of retracted this probably in response to public anger which may hurt its candidates chance in the Elections.
The four candidates had also come out to question the move by PA and HDB (some from the heart, others to score voter points) Is this an "exercise" of moral pressure?
I think it's clear that if used courageously and wisely, the President has significant influence over day-to-day operations of the PAP.

It will be a close fight down to the wire but I feel that Tan Jee Say has a genuine chance of winning this.
1) He has some sort of machinery behind him. His campaign posters are suddenly everywhere. His merchandise also pretty deccent. Presence = votes
2) We don't know how PAP candidates Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bok will split the votes. We do know they will
3) I don't think Tan Kin Lian will have as big an effect on Jee Say's votes. I admire what he tried to do for minibond investors but I just don't think he has the machinery or aura for this job
4) Public anger over the WP v PA incident, transport fare increase, SMRT vandalism, weak economy etc etc could sway swing voters toward the alternative vote
5) His rag to riches story- washerwoman mother and poor childhood to successful civil servant and investment banker and now, running for the highest office in the land

In the meanwhile, coming to a polling booth near you, I present the blockbuster "The Interruptor".

The People's Association must have no association

The People’s Association (PA) was established in Singapore as a statutory board on 1 July 1960 to promote racial harmony and social cohesion.
It was supposed to be a non partisan group interested in fostering better ties between citizens of all races.

The PA also oversees various grassroots organisatoins like Citizens' Consultative Committees, Residents' Committees, Neighbourhood Committees etc.

Therefore, the mission of the PA is clearly non-partisan.

The Chairman is none other than PM Lee Hsien Loong himself.
What's worse, they've just added even more PAP MPs into the ranks.

Further, the PA is funded by grants via taxpayers' monies.

Because of the one-sided nature of PA, it's obvious that the grassroot leaders all toe the part line.
These activists are blamed for not passing on proper feedback to the Ministers. In all likelihood, they would rather paint the rosiest picture on the ground firstly to impress the Ministers and secondly to save them the trouble of explaining otherwise.
This has prompted PM Lee to openly defend the activists.

It can be argued that PAP activists are a huge factor in General Elections. Using taxpayers grants, they hire "volunteers" to go door to door, distribute pamphlets, attend rallies etc etc.

The end result is they end up representing the views of the PAP and alienate the views of non supporters. The goal of promoting social cohesion is invariably lost.

Therefore, I would like to request for a radical overhaul of the PA and committees under its charge.

1) The management of the PA should consist of memebers from each registered political party
2) The Chairman of the PA is decided by a popular vote
3) Disallow PA funds from being used for party campaigning during elections

Obviously, it's not going to be easy.
MM Lee once told Chinese Officials visiting Singapore to see how the former ran his country:

“They discover that the People’s Action Party (PAP) has only a small office in Bedok.

But everywhere they go, they see the PAP – in the RCs (residents’ committees), CCCs (citizens’ consultative committees), and the CCs (community clubs).”

That to me, smells of a party wanting to perpetuate it's grip on power indefinitely, regardless of the hard truths on the ground.

If PM Lee is sincere about engaging Singaporeans better, there's no better place to start than a total overhaul of the PA.



So why then is it OK for the PA management to include only PAP MPs?