The Value Of Moderate Opposition
Much of the post-mortem analysis on the results of GE2015 has been focused on the likely reasons for the almost 10% swing towards the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP). There has been little, if any, analysis on the vast disparity in percentage votes secured across the eight opposition parties. This article is an initial attempt to address this.
I am not going to get into a detailed analysis of all the eight parties, instead, I am simply going to focus on the first and second placed finishers among the opposition parties. These were the Workers’ Party (WP) and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP).
The WP garnered an average 39.75% of the vote in the 10 electoral divisions it contested. It succeeded in returning six candidates to Parliament out of 28 it put up for election. On balance, this was a credible result when going up against the PAP behemoth.
On the other hand, the SDP garnered an average 31.23% of the vote in five divisions. None of its 11 candidates came close to getting elected.
In electoral terms, the 8.5% popular vote gap between the WP and SDP is vast. If one looks at it in perspective where WP contested twice as many divisions as the SDP, then the gap is even greater as more divisions contested would naturally mean that some relatively weak results would pull down the WP’s average vote.
So, the question that arises is this: Why the huge gap between WP and SDP, let alone the WP and the other minor parties? The answer, as I have stated publicly for quite a number of years, is that WP has positioned itself as moderate opposition and, more importantly, is widely perceived to be so by most voters.
In contrast, the SDP is viewed by many voters, especially in the crucial middle ground, as positioned more towards the left of the political spectrum or in being liberal. This, however, was not always the case. The SDP under its first leader, Chiam See Tong, made it a point to keep his party closer towards the political centre.
When Dr Chee took over as leader of the SDP he moved the party more towards the left. This, in the perception of many Singaporeans, seemed to be too radical a move. The SDP’s perceptional problem in the eyes of the Singapore public was compounded by a civil disobedience campaign that Dr Chee and his colleagues engaged in for many years before it was quietly abandoned just before 2009.
All of the foregoing quite pertinently comes into focus as a consequence of a Facebook status update made by Dr Chee on September 13, where, among other things, he said to his supporters:
One thing that many of you have pointed out is that the SDP and WP should work closer together to present a more coordinated opposition strategy and message at the next GE. Given the outcome of the polls, I think so too. I'll discuss the idea with my CEC [Central Executive Committee] colleagues when we meet later this week. Will keep you posted.”
(https://www.facebook.com/cheesoonjuan/posts/10154453565198849)
I do not speak for the WP, or indeed for any political party, but given what I have already said, this proposal would seem like a non-starter from the WP’s point of view. Any association that WP had with SDP would damage the WP’s brand of being moderate opposition.
Policy Differences
Let us be clear, there are major policy differences between the WP and SDP. I will just mention two here.
At the International Bar Association’s symposium in Singapore in 2007, WP Chairman, Sylvia Lim, argued that Singaporeans were more than capable of handling domestic legal issues on their own, including that of the rule of law, and that they did not require support from the international community.
Her remarks drew the ire of the SDP, whose senior members took to its party portal to take a potshot at Lim, not once but twice. The first article was titled, “SDP disappointed with WP’s IBA comments”, Oct 21, 2007. The second article, the next day, was titled, “Observations at the IBA symposium”. The implications of this difference should be obvious.
The second clear policy difference between WP and the SDP, relates to Section 377a of Singapore’s Penal Code, which criminalises sex between mutually consenting adult men. The SDP has taken the policy decision that it wants this law repealed. On the other hand, the WP has made plain that, given that there is no consensus within the party on this issue, it takes no stand on it. The WP’s effectively status quo position on S377a has been assailed by some gay rights activists, even as it has been quietly applauded by some religious leaders.
By now most Singaporeans should be aware that Singapore remains a generally socially and politically conservative society. Even the polling data from the August 2011 Presidential Election would support this view. The first and second placed finishers in the four-candidate election, namely Dr Tony Tan and Dr Tan Cheng Bock, secured a combined 70.05% of the valid votes. The first, who prevailed, was seen as the Establishment or status quo candidate, while the second was viewed widely as the moderate alternative.
The third-placed candidate, Mr Tan Jee Say, who had just months earlier stood as an SDP candidate in GE2011, and had differentiated himself markedly from the other candidates, secured just 25.04% of the vote, i.e., almost 10% adrift from the first and second placed finishers.
Read more at: http://six-six.com/article/the-value-of-moderate-opposition
Much of the post-mortem analysis on the results of GE2015 has been focused on the likely reasons for the almost 10% swing towards the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP). There has been little, if any, analysis on the vast disparity in percentage votes secured across the eight opposition parties. This article is an initial attempt to address this.
I am not going to get into a detailed analysis of all the eight parties, instead, I am simply going to focus on the first and second placed finishers among the opposition parties. These were the Workers’ Party (WP) and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP).
The WP garnered an average 39.75% of the vote in the 10 electoral divisions it contested. It succeeded in returning six candidates to Parliament out of 28 it put up for election. On balance, this was a credible result when going up against the PAP behemoth.
On the other hand, the SDP garnered an average 31.23% of the vote in five divisions. None of its 11 candidates came close to getting elected.
In electoral terms, the 8.5% popular vote gap between the WP and SDP is vast. If one looks at it in perspective where WP contested twice as many divisions as the SDP, then the gap is even greater as more divisions contested would naturally mean that some relatively weak results would pull down the WP’s average vote.
So, the question that arises is this: Why the huge gap between WP and SDP, let alone the WP and the other minor parties? The answer, as I have stated publicly for quite a number of years, is that WP has positioned itself as moderate opposition and, more importantly, is widely perceived to be so by most voters.
In contrast, the SDP is viewed by many voters, especially in the crucial middle ground, as positioned more towards the left of the political spectrum or in being liberal. This, however, was not always the case. The SDP under its first leader, Chiam See Tong, made it a point to keep his party closer towards the political centre.
When Dr Chee took over as leader of the SDP he moved the party more towards the left. This, in the perception of many Singaporeans, seemed to be too radical a move. The SDP’s perceptional problem in the eyes of the Singapore public was compounded by a civil disobedience campaign that Dr Chee and his colleagues engaged in for many years before it was quietly abandoned just before 2009.
All of the foregoing quite pertinently comes into focus as a consequence of a Facebook status update made by Dr Chee on September 13, where, among other things, he said to his supporters:
One thing that many of you have pointed out is that the SDP and WP should work closer together to present a more coordinated opposition strategy and message at the next GE. Given the outcome of the polls, I think so too. I'll discuss the idea with my CEC [Central Executive Committee] colleagues when we meet later this week. Will keep you posted.”
(https://www.facebook.com/cheesoonjuan/posts/10154453565198849)
I do not speak for the WP, or indeed for any political party, but given what I have already said, this proposal would seem like a non-starter from the WP’s point of view. Any association that WP had with SDP would damage the WP’s brand of being moderate opposition.
Policy Differences
Let us be clear, there are major policy differences between the WP and SDP. I will just mention two here.
At the International Bar Association’s symposium in Singapore in 2007, WP Chairman, Sylvia Lim, argued that Singaporeans were more than capable of handling domestic legal issues on their own, including that of the rule of law, and that they did not require support from the international community.
Her remarks drew the ire of the SDP, whose senior members took to its party portal to take a potshot at Lim, not once but twice. The first article was titled, “SDP disappointed with WP’s IBA comments”, Oct 21, 2007. The second article, the next day, was titled, “Observations at the IBA symposium”. The implications of this difference should be obvious.
The second clear policy difference between WP and the SDP, relates to Section 377a of Singapore’s Penal Code, which criminalises sex between mutually consenting adult men. The SDP has taken the policy decision that it wants this law repealed. On the other hand, the WP has made plain that, given that there is no consensus within the party on this issue, it takes no stand on it. The WP’s effectively status quo position on S377a has been assailed by some gay rights activists, even as it has been quietly applauded by some religious leaders.
By now most Singaporeans should be aware that Singapore remains a generally socially and politically conservative society. Even the polling data from the August 2011 Presidential Election would support this view. The first and second placed finishers in the four-candidate election, namely Dr Tony Tan and Dr Tan Cheng Bock, secured a combined 70.05% of the valid votes. The first, who prevailed, was seen as the Establishment or status quo candidate, while the second was viewed widely as the moderate alternative.
The third-placed candidate, Mr Tan Jee Say, who had just months earlier stood as an SDP candidate in GE2011, and had differentiated himself markedly from the other candidates, secured just 25.04% of the vote, i.e., almost 10% adrift from the first and second placed finishers.
Read more at: http://six-six.com/article/the-value-of-moderate-opposition
