Wanted: A united Parliament

May 21, 2011

YouthInk writers state their wishes for the newly elected Parliament

MY WISH for the new Parliament is for greater cooperation and unity among elected MPs, Nominated MPs and Non-Constituency MPs (NCMPs), across party lines. It is vital to retain a mechanism that has seamless flow, especially now we have a greater diversity of voices.

With Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, as well as ministers who were part of the losing team that contested Aljunied GRC, leaving the Cabinet, we are faced with some uncertainty in governance. More than ever before, elected candidates - both from the incumbent and the opposition - need to work together and steer the nation forward instead of focusing on differences. Parliament will need to pool its resources. That is pivotal to our survival.

[MM and SM presence or absence is not an issue. What is an issue is that there are more elected opposition MPs. It would be terrible if we went the way of the US with gridlock government. With the opposition presence in parliament stronger than ever, it is important that the governing party should engage the opposition for that united parliament.]

Many Singaporeans are waiting to see how the six newly elected MPs from the Workers' Party and the three new NCMPs will perform. To ensure a united Parliament, I expect rational choices and analytical ability on their part. They need to show maturity, tact and proficiency if they wish us, the electorate, to take them seriously at the next general election.

As for members of the ruling People's Action Party, they will need to be open-minded and serious in engaging the opposition and other alternative voices. They will need to forge a brand of politics that is civil but not sterile, dynamic but not vociferous, consensual but not insistent.

Lastly, a united Parliament needs the electorate to support it too. We need to accept whatever has transpired from this general election, lay to rest any dissatisfaction we still have, and support our leaders to take the nation forward. Let us not send double signals by making discouraging criticisms at this critical juncture. Only if we are a mature electorate, do we deserve a mature system of governance.

All Singaporeans need to work and make this come true.

Tan Wei Lie, 21, is a first-year political science student at the National University of Singapore.

[Ok, the cynic in me, thinks this is idealistic. But the optimist in me agrees that this must be so for the good of Singapore. There are problems.

In the US, the Republicans do not cooperate with Obama because if they did and Obama's policy succeeds, they would have handed Obama political capital. So while Obama is in power, they work to obstruct his policies. Take the killing of Osama. The Republicans twisted themselves all over the place to try to shift the credit to George Bush so that Obama would not gain politically from that.

So while I do agree that it is in the interest of Singapore for a united Parliament, there are fundamental problems with an adversarial system of parliament.]

Anguish and agony paved Low's road to victory

May 21, 2011
MEANWHILE, IN ALJUNIED GRC...
 
By Kor Kian Beng

CONFIDENT as he may be, even Workers' Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang was not completely sure if he was going to win the ultimate battle of his political career.

On the afternoon of May 7, Polling Day, he wrote two speeches. One was for victory and the other, if he was defeated in the contest for Aljunied GRC.

Speaking to The Straits Times in an exclusive interview yesterday, Mr Low said: 'I'm always prepared to lose and I prepared both speeches.'

History has on record his winning speech, which he delivered to thunderous cheers and applause at Hougang Stadium in the early hours of May 8, when Singapore heard that the WP had become the first opposition party to capture a group representation constituency (GRC).

But the road to victory is paved with much anguish and agony, said the opposition veteran, speaking for the first time on the General Election results, in an interview at which his tears and emotions flowed freely.

As he spoke about the tough decision he had to make on whether to leave single-seat Hougang and its residents for a GRC bid, tears welled up in his eyes as the memories of his 20 years as an MP in the constituency came flooding back.

Overwhelmed, the usually jocular Mr Low left the meeting room at the Hougang Town Council office for 10 minutes to compose himself. When he returned, he said he wanted the interview to continue outside the office.

'I miss a lot of things in Hougang, but I have to move on,' said Mr Low, 54.

A key factor in his anguish was the opposition he faced from detractors of his GRC bid, with some telling him pointedly to his face that should he fail, he would become a 'li shi jui ren'. The Chinese saying loosely means 'a sinner in historical records'.

They felt his action could land Singapore with no elected opposition MP, as both he and long-serving Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong were leaving their strongholds to contest in GRCs.

But Mr Low persisted as he believed a GRC win was necessary for the opposition to play an effective, long-term role in Parliament, as a check on the ruling party or in forming an alternative government in the future.

He also believed he would be shortchanging the people of Hougang and their aspirations, had he stayed put.

'I think Hougang wanted me to represent them and also to play a role. So I can't just say 'never mind, stay here'. I think it's not correct.'

A heavy load is now off his back, following his triumph as the leader of the first opposition party to win, with 54.7 per cent of votes, against a People's Action Party (PAP) team led by two ministers: Mr George Yeo and Mrs Lim Hwee Hua.

Others on the WP team were law lecturer Sylvia Lim, 46; top corporate lawyer Chen Show Mao, 50; postgraduate law student Pritam Singh, 34; and family counsellor Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, 35.

But going down in history as the first opposition leader to win a GRC did not figure in Mr Low's decision to gun for Aljunied GRC: 'It's not important because you'll die one day. So what?'

The party had also discussed and prepared itself for the worst-case scenario of it losing in all the eight constituencies it contested, including Aljunied GRC and Hougang, said Mr Low.

In the end, it felt its leadership renewal process was in place for the party to move forward as 'a viable platform for Singaporeans who want to participate in politics'.

Said Mr Low: 'So we thought that even in the worst-case scenario, let's say, we lost Hougang and Aljunied, our assessment is that the party would be able to carry on to serve Singaporeans.'

Asked if he would have quit politics had he lost, he shot back: 'No. I think that would be irresponsible of me, throw and then cabut (flee in Malay), retire. No, I'm not doing that.'

On Polling Day, Mr Low, who was at two counting stations in the Bedok Reservoir-Hougang division of the GRC, said he knew the WP was possibly headed for victory, judging from the number of ballot slips bearing a tick for the WP.

The outcome has, however, brought an end to the political career of the PAP's Mr Yeo, whom he described as 'a respectable opponent'.

But Mr Low said the result represented the wishes and aspirations of Singaporeans for Singapore, adding that 'in everything that you do, including election, there's always a trade-off and the PAP knows trade-off very well'.

He became subdued when asked about the significance of the WP's GRC feat. While admitting that it has allowed more opposition into Parliament at one fell swoop, he pointed out that the opposition has six elected MPs against 81 PAP MPs in a 'grossly imbalanced' Parliament.

'So if you're talking about significance, I think we still have miles to go compared to that.'

But he said the GE has helped cement the WP's leadership renewal efforts by putting its younger leaders, such as Mr Singh, into strategic positions, both in Parliament and in the party's central executive committee.

He was, however, coy about his potential successor, declining to say whether he had begun the search or identified anyone in the party.

For now, he is focused on running the Aljunied and Hougang constituencies well, saying 'we have made our pledge known to Singaporeans as well as to the residents of Aljunied GRC that we will serve to the best of our ability'.

He added: 'Because if we fail, we're not only failing the Workers' Party, but also the aspirations of Singaporeans. So we must not fail.'

Refocus on social values, engagement

May 21, 2011
 
By Elgin Toh

FEW would claim to understand the importance of economic efficiency as well as Mr Heng Swee Keat does.

After all, the former managing director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) is seen as the economics wizard among the 23 new People's Action Party (PAP) MPs.

With a mixture of scholarly acumen and steely resolve, he is said to have steered Singapore safely out of the recent global financial storm, which sank a few European countries.

Mr Heng was permanent secretary of the Ministry of Trade and Industry before his move to MAS.

Yet those who expect the 50-year-old to sing lavish praises of Singapore Incorporated may be surprised to find him humming a slightly different tune these days.

'We need to change some of the ways we view our society,' he declares in a post-election interview with Insight.

Economic efficiency must not be the be-all and end-all because many things hold a social value 'that is not measured by how many dollars and cents people are prepared to pay for them'.

Mom and pop shops are a good example, he points out. They may not be competitive when placed alongside sprawling hypermarkets. But they can act as natural gathering points for local communities - where neighbours meet, chat and chill out.

'I met some residents who lamented the loss of their neighbourhood shops,' he says, recalling one of countless conversations he had with ordinary Singaporeans while on the campaign trail.

The same can be said about hawker centres, where Singaporeans from different ends of the class spectrum can share a table without batting an eyelid, he notes.

[This is the problem. To enable hawkers to afford the rent, HDB can either sell the stall to them at a concessionary price, or rent to them at a concessionary rate. The good effects are: prices are kept low and food remains affordable. The bad effects: The hawkers don't have to work as hard to pay the rent or they get older and they don't wish to work such long hours. So they close early. This then leads other people to offer to rent the stalls from them. And they think: good deal, I get an income, and I don't have to work. So they rent to a sub-tenant, and because the sub-tenant pays a premium over the original rent, they have to work longer and harder. And they may or may not raise the price. Maybe they don't in the first place. But then the lease ends and they offer the same rent, but the original hawker now says, I have a better offer. So either the sub-tenant raise their offer (and the rent they pay), or they lose the stall. So they raise the rent. And now they have to raise their prices. Market forces at work.]

This need to refocus on the 'socio-cultural aspects of our society', as he puts it, is just one of many lessons he hopes his party will take away from the watershed general election earlier this month.

It forms part of a new vision for Singapore - being articulated by Mr Heng and his comrades - as a more caring and inclusive society.

The election result that sparked the introspection was a sobering one for the PAP, which was returned to power with its lowest share of votes in its post-independence history.

Post-mortems are still under way, but up and down the pyramid of PAP hierarchy, one word is being uttered more frequently than others: transformation.

And as the ranking MP among the newcomers - he was the only one appointed full minister in the new line-up of office holders - Mr Heng is not afraid to ruminate on how a party in power for more than five decades has to reform to stay relevant.

There needs to be a paradigm shift by the PAP in its relationship with the people. 'We need a process of constructive engagement,' muses the new Education Minister.

At both the national and municipal levels, the Government has to listen, connect and respond to Singaporeans more than it has done in the past, he says.

Along with that, policy implementation has to be made more flexible so that help reaches those who should get it, and harm does not inadvertently befall anyone in the process.

All this requires an intensified conversation between those who govern and those who are governed.

In many ways, that conversation can be seen as a natural continuation of one that began during the election campaign.

For Mr Heng, talking and listening to residents as he pounded pavements in Tampines GRC - where the PAP team was elected with 57 per cent of the votes - proved to be rewarding.

He was encouraged by how Singaporeans appeared readier than ever to get involved in the community - as if they were only waiting to be asked.

A pair of cyclists he met provided feedback on how road safety could be improved. When he invited them to volunteer their services at the grassroots, they agreed immediately.

Of course, not all conversations were carried out amid such bonhomie.

One resident nearly blew his top when relating to Mr Heng how he felt government agencies were pushing him from pillar to post when he approached them about a problem he had with a neighbour.

And often, there is simply 'no magic bullet', he says.

He met a woman who declared herself 'breathless' due to the influx of foreign workers. But he also met a man whose car washing business would go bust if foreign worker quotas went down any further.

Nevertheless, talking through even the most difficult of trade-offs with Singaporeans is necessary under this new vision for Singapore, he argues.

It promises to inject energy into the whole of society, as the ideas and knowledge that Singaporeans possess are harnessed and put to constructive use.

But he also offers a few caveats.

Important as it is, the transformation of the PAP and of society should not mean rejecting every element of the status quo - for there are many things that do work.

The Government must also avoid becoming short-termist or populist.

And, he adds, when decisions have to be made robustly, the Government must be willing to move forward.

'Singapore must not become ungovernable,' he says.

An impossible balancing act? Perhaps.

Mr Heng and the other PAP newcomers couldn't have chosen a more exciting time to breathe new air into the Government and politics.

elgintoh@sph.com.sg

Raymond Lim 'inherited public transport woes'

May 21, 2011

Issue of overcrowding started before he took over ministry: Analysts

By Tessa Wong

SINGAPORE'S public transport system faced tremendous strain in recent years because planners failed to anticipate the surge in foreigners, and also because they took their eyes off the ball.

Transport analysts told The Straits Times yesterday that they believed outgoing Transport Minister Raymond Lim inherited the situation from predecessors at the ministry.

The public transport squeeze generated much discontent, and became a hot-button issue in the run-up to the general election this month.

Many have since speculated that Mr Lim retired from the Cabinet after serving only one term as the Transport Minister because he had failed to adequately address this discontent.

But analysts said yesterday that the problem of overcrowded buses and trains started even before Mr Lim took over the ministry in 2006.

'Certainly, his predecessors had a hand in the problems Mr Lim faced,' said industry veteran and transport consultant Bruno Wildermuth, who was closely involved in the planning of the MRT system in the 1970s.

He said the Government should have moved earlier to address capacity problems, noting that efforts to increase train frequency - such as the addition of another platform at Jurong East interchange and a review of MRT signalling systems - materialised only in recent years.

'Ever since the lines were planned and building began decades ago, planners knew that our system had capacity limitations and was not good enough for the long term. So why did we wait until now to address these problems?' he said.

One reason could have been an earlier change in leadership.

In 1996, when Mr Mah Bow Tan was Communications Minister and handled transport issues, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) released a White Paper entitled A World Class Land Transport System.

One aim was to create a denser rail network, and the LTA committed to launching one major rail project a year.

In 1999, Mr Yeo Cheow Tong succeeded Mr Mah at the helm of the ministry, which was now known as Communications and Information Technology.

Though Mr Yeo tweaked development goals, such as extending rail line targets, 'he didn't really follow Mr Mah's plan very well', said Associate Professor Lee Der Horng of the National University of Singapore.

Transport economist Michael Li of the Nanyang Business School noted that Mr Yeo had focused more on developing the air transport sector, through open-skies agreements and developing demand for services at Singapore's airport.

'Thirty years ago, the Government had the mindset of building ahead of demand for all transport modes. But it later became more cautious, introducing a more systematic approach, which could have slowed things down.

'After the 1996 White Paper was introduced, the Government became more reactive instead of proactive in urban transport development,' he said.

Some have said that the 2004 Nicoll Highway collapse during the construction of the Circle Line reinforced this cautious approach.

But a decade ago, transport planners may have also expected far slower growth in Singapore's population.

In 2000, Mr Mah as the National Development Minister projected that the population could possibly rise from 3.9 million in 2000 to 5.5 million by 2040 or 2050.

By last year, however, Singapore's population had already surpassed five million, largely because of a greater influx of foreigners over the decade.

'My feeling is that the current spike caught the Government off-guard. If it had known there would be so much more people earlier than expected, it would have planned for them,' said Associate Professor Gopinath Menon of Nanyang Technological University.

Prof Lee said that overall, the Government should have had closer coordination between ministries to prepare for the impact of the influx: 'We should have had very well-planned coordination between the National Development Ministry and the Transport Ministry. And at the statutory board level, the Urban Redevelopment Authority and the LTA should have worked more hand in hand.'

twong@sph.com.sg

On the road to good democracy

May 18, 2011
 
By Zheng Yongnian

THOUGH the People's Action Party (PAP) will remain in power, the opposition has also achieved a historic breakthrough in the recent General Election.

To a large extent, it is a win-win situation. The Workers' Party's unprecedented victory in one Group Representation Constituency (GRC) is a 'win' for the opposition.

And though the PAP lost a GRC, in the long term it is also a 'win' for the ruling party. This is because the valuable information it gained during the elections will help it chart its future development.

Any ruling party that wishes to remain in power for the long haul needs to adjust its direction, style and methods of governing in line with changing social realities.

However, the significance of the development of democratic politics in Singapore goes beyond the country.

If one places Singapore within the context of the development and progress of democracy in Asia, what is of equal significance is the fact that the results of the recent elections signal the development of another good system of democratic politics in Asia, following Japan's lead in the early years.

The history of the world teaches us that the development of democracy in itself is not a difficult thing. What is difficult is bringing about good democracy.

Soon after democratic elections were introduced in Singapore, the PAP took power and continued governing for a long time. There wasn't any change of government at all, quite unlike in Western democracies.

As a result, Singapore was often severely criticised by the West, with some calling it a 'phoney democracy' or a 'pseudo-democracy'. Some claimed that there was 'rule of law but no democracy' in Singapore, while others simply described its government as 'authoritarian'.

The late Harvard professor Samuel Huntington once wrote a piece comparing the political systems of Taiwan and Singapore. In it, he said that Taiwan's political system would survive because it was democratic but Singapore's political system will find it hard to survive after Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew passes away.

Yet the results of the recent elections tell us that not only is Singapore's political system getting more and more democratic, it is also full of vitality. No matter how one interprets the results, from a practical point of view, Singapore has begun laying a strong institutional structure for good democracy in the country.

Democratic politics has its roots in the West. But for a long period of time, Western democracy remained in the hands of the elite and only a small number of people could participate in it. The popular democracy that we have today doesn't have a long history. It is very difficult for developing countries to enjoy the sort of good democracy that is found in Western Europe or North America.

In Asia, Japan was the first country to become a good democracy. Beyond Japan, the development of democracy in Asia had not been smooth. Some borrowed excessively from the West, but the working of democracy in these countries experienced many problems.

Singapore's progress towards a good democracy exhibits many similarities to the path taken by West, except that the time taken by Singapore is much shorter. We can look at it from various angles.

First, socio-economic development: Singapore took just a few decades to develop from 'Third World' to 'First World'. A highly developed social economy is the material basis for democratic politics. By contrast, when Western-style democracy spread to developing nations, it failed to bring about the development of their social economy.

In many developing nations, the focus of democracy was not on developing and growing their economies, but on how to carve out and share their economic pie. When a country's economy fails to develop, democracy becomes closely linked to violence, with the various political forces competing with each other for a share of the economic pie.

Singapore is different. For a long period of time, the focus of its democracy was on how to build an effective and yet legitimate government. Singapore has what academics would call a 'developmental-type' government, one which gains the people's trust through economic development and letting them have an equitable share of the economic pie.

The development of the economy and society is the key to good democracy. Although democracy is portrayed as the simple act of casting a vote, behind that act lies the culture of democracy. For example, the act of voting is, in actual fact, an embodiment of economic rationality. When a country's social economy reaches a certain level of development and a middle class emerges, voters will no longer sell their votes for some paltry economic benefits.

Further, the development of economy and society also gives rise to higher educational standards. As a result, the standards of political reasoning among the populace will become higher. The rational interaction between rational politicians and rational voters is the embodiment of good democratic culture.

Next is the establishment of rule of law. Good democracy in Singapore is based on an effective political order that is built on the basis of the rule of law. This political order ensures the stable development of the social economy. Huntington once said that for developing nations, the most important thing is how to establish an effective political order. Without this order, there won't be any safeguards for social stability and economic development.

Singapore has established a highly effective political order, one that can grow hand in hand with democratic politics. This makes it different from other developing nations.

In some countries, there is democracy but no order and no development. In others, there is political order built upon authoritarianism as well as development but no democracy. Of course there are even states that are authoritarian and have no democracy and no development at all.

The practice of politics in Singapore since its independence tells us that democratic institutions need not be copied wholesale from the West. Not only is innovation extremely important, it is also doable. The GRC system is one example.

In many countries, democratic elections often give rise to racial and religious conflict and violence. Singapore achieved nationhood amid serious racial conflicts between its people.

After achieving independence, the country's leaders designed many schemes to prevent these conflicts from occurring. The GRC system is one of them. As a Chinese-majority country, Parliament could be 100 per cent Chinese if the GRC system was not in place.

Another area is the Singapore government's cultivation of the democratic sophistication of its citizens. Unlike many Western democracies, voting in Singapore is compulsory. Based on Western democratic theory, compulsory voting is in itself anti-democratic. Yet in practical logic, it is a different matter altogether.

In Western nations, many a time the voting rate would fall below 50 per cent. If it is only a small percentage vote, democracy itself would lose its meaning.

Virtually all democratic theories would agree that a civic spirit is the cultural pre-condition for the survival of democratic politics. Yet civic-spiritedness is not something that is inborn; it is something that has to be cultivated through the practice of politics. Compulsory voting in Singapore has played a crucial role in achieving this goal.

Of equal importance is the setting of the agenda within the democratic political process. In all democracies, the key is organisation first, followed by agenda next. This issue is further connected to the question of freedom of speech.

In the West, freedom of speech is the crux of democracy. However, the West has also failed to resolve the extremely negative social consequences that could be brought about as a result of freedom of speech. Issues relating to race and religion can be raised repeatedly during the election campaigning, and candidates can use these sensitive issues to appeal for votes.

In Singapore, sensitive issues like religion, race and language cannot be raised during the elections. It is clear that sensitive issues like these cannot be resolved through arguments. Singapore's way of resolving these issues is through consultation and consensus. This has become a conscious political culture here.

Elections in Singapore have become a mechanism for social integration rather than division. Many countries often suffer a huge split after every election. On the contrary, we see democracy helping to achieve social integration in Singapore.

For the opposition parties, the pre-condition for good democracy is how these parties play the role of a 'loyal opposition'. Which is to say, like the ruling party, these opposition parties identify with the nation and its political system and structure. Political debate is carried out without opposing for the sake of opposing, but for the goal of making the country a better place. Opposition parties in Singapore generally exhibit this trait.

No party in the world is immune to challenge. In democratic countries, governments have been replaced for various reasons, including failures in governance.

The situation in Singapore is rather different. It is not a case of the government failing, but rather of Singaporeans wanting the government to do better under the new environment.

Over the years, Singapore has faced many external challenges. Rapid globalisation has increased the income gap among Singaporeans. The increasing number of immigrants has also placed huge stress on the transport system and other public infrastructure. Housing prices have also been affected.

The recent elections reflect the people's desire for the government to pay greater heed to grassroots voices. Generational changes among the voters have also increased Singaporeans' involvement in politics.

The new generation of voters has views that are different from that of the older generation. The latter group, who had lived through the tough times, is better able to bear with pressures. The younger voters, however, hope to make Singapore a better place. At the same time, they hope to exert political pressure and prevent those in power from becoming too arrogant.

Democracy in Singapore is undergoing self-upgrading. With people's involvement in politics growing, political competition is set to increase.

By not importing Western democratic institutions wholesale but rather, stressing innovation within the system, Singapore has the potential to surpass the West and become a model of democracy in Asia.

The writer is the director of the East Asian Institute, NUS. This article first appeared in Lianhe Zaobao on May 10. Translated by Terence Tan.

Social turmoil behind Catholic sex abuse crisis

May 19, 2011

Priests unprepared for 1960s 'sex revolution'
 
NEW YORK: A study commissioned by the United States Roman Catholic bishops has found that the sexual abuse cases plaguing the Church is not due to priests having to be celibate nor that they are operating in an all-male environment.

Instead, the report says, the abuse occurred because priests, who were poorly prepared, monitored and under stress, landed in the midst of the social and sexual turmoil of the 1960s and 1970s.

Known occurrences of sexual abuse of minors by priests rose sharply during those decades, the report found, and the problem grew worse when the Church's hierarchy responded by showing more care for the perpetrators than the victims.

The 'blame Woodstock' explanation is the same floated by bishops since the Church was engulfed by scandal in the US in 2002 and by Pope Benedict XVI after the issue erupted in Europe last year. But this study is likely to be regarded as the most authoritative analysis of the scandal in the Catholic Church in America.

The study, started in 2006, was conducted by a team of researchers at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York at a cost of US$1.8 million (S$2.2 million).

Widespread abuse scandals involving Roman Catholic priests first erupted in Boston a decade ago, and the US Church has paid settlements totalling US$3 billion.

The report was to be released yesterday by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops in Washington, but the Religion News Service published an account of the report on its website on Tuesday.

The bishops have said they hope the report will advance the understanding and prevention of child sexual abuse in society at large.

The researchers concluded, however, that it was not possible for the Church, or for anyone, to identify abusive priests in advance.

Priests who abused minors have no particular 'psychological characteristics', 'developmental histories' or mood disorders that distinguished them from priests who had not abused, the researchers found.

Since the scandal broke, conservatives in the Church have blamed gay priests for perpetrating the abuse, while liberals have argued that the all-male, celibate culture of the priesthood was the cause. This report will satisfy neither flank.

The report also found that homosexual priests had little to do with the problem. If anything, the report noted, the abuse decreased, not increased, as more gay priests began serving the Church.

It noted that homosexual men began entering the seminaries 'in noticeable numbers' from the late 1970s to the 1980s.

By the time this cohort entered the priesthood, in the mid-1980s, the reports of sexual abuse of minors by priests began to drop and then to level off.

Many more boys than girls were victimised, the report says, not because the perpetrators were gay but simply because the priests had more access to boys than to girls, in parishes, schools and extra-curricular activities.

The Vatican has, for years, struggled to control the damage that sexual abuse scandals in the US and several European countries have done to the Church's image.

On Monday, the Vatican told bishops around the world they must make it a global priority to root out sexual abuse of children by priests.

NEW YORK TIMES, REUTERS

[Well, this may explain why there is more of these abuse cases in the US and UK, and less so in Asia countries - unless the lower incidents in Asia is due to under-reporting. But it still sounds like an excuse.]

A Cabinet for 2020

May 19, 2011
 
COMMENTARY
Major reshuffle is clear signal of 'radical change', but also raises questions
 
By Chua Lee Hoong

IN A WAY, the Cabinet changes started all because of Aljunied GRC.

Because of the loss of Foreign Minister George Yeo in the General Election, Mr K. Shanmugam moved from Home Affairs to fill Mr Yeo's shoes. Mr Teo Chee Hean moved from Defence to Home Affairs, and Dr Ng Eng Hen from Education to Defence.

But yesterday's Cabinet changes were anything but another routine game of musical chairs.

First off was the dramatic departure of three ministers - Mr Wong Kan Seng, Mr Mah Bow Tan and Mr Raymond Lim. Mr Wong and Mr Mah, at age 64 and 62 respectively, would have been the oldest ministers in the Cabinet after Mr Lee Kuan Yew, 87, and Mr Goh Chok Tong, 69. That they also retired surprised many, although not all.

Mr Lim, at 51, is relatively young, and while some are reportedly not surprised, many are.

With the departure of nine current ministers and the induction of two new faces, the average age of the new Cabinet is now 53 years, down from 55 in 2006. Without the departure of the older ministers, it would have been 59.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is now, at 59, the oldest face in Cabinet, followed by Mr Khaw Boon Wan at 58. Mr Lee is also the longest-serving, having entered politics in 1984. Yesterday, he said he has set himself the goal of handing over to a new leadership by 2020.

In the meantime, however, the clear signal from him is that his government is serious about relooking government policies that have made Singaporeans unhappy.

'Certainly, the outcome of the elections affected my thinking in deciding how to make this Cabinet. I wanted a fresh start and that's why I'm calling for radical change,' he said.

His demeanour was more serious than usual.

Of the 14 ministries, 11 will have new ministers, who will have 'a free hand to rethink and reshape policies'.

The fact that Mr Khaw goes to the Ministry of National Development, which is in charge of the political hot potato of housing, speaks volumes about the shake-up that is expected in areas which are electoral flash points.

Mr Khaw is ideal for housing - he has ground empathy, understands markets, and can do complex mathematics.

He also understands politics. At the Health Ministry, he was particularly adept at floating potentially controversial policy matters as trial balloons for public discussion, before embarking on actual policy formulation and implementation.

Indeed, he succeeded in taking the political sting out of health issues so much so that, unlike housing, they captured the interest of only a handful of opposition players in the recent election.

If he can de-fang housing with the same political acumen that he managed health, Mr Khaw would prove himself the master policymaker-politician that all policy wonks must learn at the feet of.

The two other politically significant appointments yesterday were those to the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (MCYS) and the Ministry of Education.

Compared with economic ministries like Finance or Trade and Industry, or security ones like Home Affairs and Defence, MCYS has for too long been paid insufficient political attention.

The new Acting Minister is Major-General (NS) Chan Chun Sing, who at 41 will be the youngest person in Cabinet. He is also energetic and resourceful, and a key face to watch in the coming years.

The new Education Minister, Mr Heng Swee Keat, is a new entry to politics but an old hand at policymaking, having served in the Administrative Service for many years, including in the Ministry of Education.

PM Lee did not quite spell it out yesterday, but there is clearly an unspoken charter for these new ministers to engage young Singaporeans and, more than that, win their understanding and support.

It was a key theme in the election platform of the People's Action Party (PAP) and it will be a key theme in the PAP Government's policy-making in the coming years.

Overall, I would say that the new appointments are all excellent ones.

But two questions remain.

One: Are the changes an over-reaction to the reduced vote share suffered by the PAP on May 7?

Already, the charge of appeasement has been levelled by some. For example, they see the departures of Mr Wong, Mr Mah and Mr Lim as due to various ministry failures which affected their electoral standing. The sharks will be circling and demanding more blood in future general elections, say these critics.

Two: Will expectations be raised too high by the changes?

With the current emphasis on rethinking and reshaping policies, and re-examining the fundamental philosophies behind policies, there is a danger that the Government is setting the public up for expectations of policy change which it cannot fulfil.

On the other hand, perhaps there will indeed be major policy changes and shake-ups - but that in turn raises another question.

Prior to this, the Government said often that there are only a few policy options open to Singapore. Whether on economic growth, social welfare or political development, the conventional wisdom that prevailed for years was that the existing policy mix was the best solution and one that was arrived at after much careful consideration and understanding of what could work here.

If we now have major policy shake-ups, the question that will inevitably be asked is: Did the results of GE 2011 topple the conventional wisdom? And if they did, why did it have to be this way?

Whatever the answers, hopefully with the review that is now ongoing, Singaporeans do not have to wait for the loss of another GRC to realise that there are policies and measures which need to be fixed.

leehoong@sph.com.sg