primer [globalization]

By LYDIA LIMDEPUTY POLITICAL EDITOR

PRIMER

L PEOPLE describe General Elec-tion 2011 as a watershed election.In what way did it mark a newphase in Singapore politics?

SINGAPORE will hold its nextGeneral Election in about fouryears’ time.

By then, 2016, most of youwho are taking part in this year’scurrent affairs quiz will be of vot-ing age, that is 21. More likelythan not, you will have a chanceto cast your vote, and elect yourMember of Parliament. You couldsay voting in elections is a newnorm in the so-called “new nor-mal”.

How so?In the decade from 1991 to 2001,the number of seats contested bythe opposition in each electionfell, from 40 out of 81 in 1991, to36 out of 83 in 1997 and finally tojust 29 out of 84 in 2001.

That meant that two-thirds ofeligible voters sat out the GeneralElection of November 2001.

They did not have a chance tovote because they lived in constit-uencies where there was no oppo-sition slate of candidates to takeon the team from the ruling Peo-ple’s Action Party (PAP).

In 2004, The Straits Timescoined the phrase GenerationWalkover to describe those Singa-poreans who reached voting ageduring those years. They wereborn between 1970 and 1980,grew up largely in the era of thenPrime Minister Goh Chok Tong,and did not experience the turbu-lence of the early years of inde-pendence.

The PAP was effectively the on-ly party they knew and their mainform of political activism was inthe giving and collecting of feed-back, the ST article said.

The tide turned in 2006. Thatwas the first General Electionsince 1988 in which the PAP didnot immediately form the Govern-ment on Nomination Day.

In GE 2011, 82 out of 87 seatswere contested. It was the mostkeenly fought election since Singa-pore became independent in 1965.It was a watershed because itseemed to signal the start of anew era of political contestation.

The presidential election thattook place three months later sawfour candidates – all surnamedTan – vying to become Singa-pore’s head of state. It was themost fiercely fought since 1991,when the presidency became anelected office.

How significant is this change?Political competition lies at the

heart of democratic politics,which Ambassador Chan HengChee has said is about “groups ofpeople uniting behind differentleaderships to compete, bargainand negotiate in the shaping andsharing of political power and toinfluence or control policy direc-tions”.

That definition is to be foundin her seminal essay of 1975: “Sin-gapore the Administrative State:Where has all the politics gone?”

In a recent interview, Ambassa-dor Chan, a political scientist,said what she had seen in the1970s was “the steady and system-atic depoliticisation of a political-ly active and aggressive citizen-ry”.

From 1968 to 1981, the PAP en-joyed a monopoly of seats in Par-liament. The opposition benchwas empty during those years af-ter a series of walkouts by Mem-bers of Parliament from the Ba-risan Sosialis, an opposition partyformed by a faction that brokeaway from the PAP over mergerwith Malaysia.

In 1981, then Workers’ Partychief J. B. Jeyaretnam made histo-ry by winning a by-election in An-son. He was the first oppositionpolitician to be elected in 13 years.

Since then, the number of oppo-sition MPs has hovered betweenone and four, rising to six in GE2011 when the WP finally succeed-ed in winning a GRC or Group Rep-resentation Constituency, namelyAljunied.

Ambassador Chan said shenow sees the return of politics toSingapore, in the form of a “moreactive citizenry, which is more de-manding of elected governmentand MPs’ performance”.

Another change has been notedby opposition politician Yee JennJong. The WP Non-ConstituencyMP said “professionals, civil serv-ants and business people are com-ing forward to help in the opposi-tion movement. The fear elementis diminishing”.

Change at the top

ANOTHER major impact of GE2011 was how it sped up change atthe top tiers of Singapore’s politi-cal leadership.

Two weeks after the election,on May 21 last year, Prime Minis-ter Lee Hsien Loong announced anew Cabinet line-up. The Cabinetis the team of ministers who gov-ern the country.

The Cabinet shake-up was themost far-reaching since at least1984, with movement of ministersat the helm of 14 of the 17 minis-tries.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew steppeddown as minister mentor after 52years in government, 31 of themas Singapore’s first prime minis-

ter. Mr Goh Chok Tong also re-tired from Cabinet. He was Singa-pore’s second prime ministerfrom 1990 to 2004, and seniorminister after that.

PM Lee described the sweepingchanges as “epochal”.

He said the outcome of GE 2011– which saw the PAP receive itslowest share of the vote since In-dependence – had shaped histhinking on the Cabinet.

“I wanted a fresh start andthat’s why I’m calling for radicalchange,” he said.

Since then, the Government

has acted to remedy policies gonewrong. The new ministers incharge of housing and transporthave moved fast to increasesupply of both, so as to ensureenough affordable homes foryoung Singaporeans, and reducecongestion on trains and buses.

PM Lee himself ordered an im-mediate review of high ministerialsalaries, which led to a sizeableone-third reduction in their pay.

That marked a significant de-parture from the past, as the PAPgovernment had for decades faceddown criticisms of, and

resentment against, its controver-sial policy of paying ministers topdollar.

The sense is that the Govern-ment now feels a need to be moreresponsive to the views and senti-ments of the voting public.

Certainly, it has, since lastyear’s polls, paid more attentionto public engagement.

The Prime Minister has evenrestructured the ministry incharge of information. To becalled Ministry of Communica-tions and Information, it will over-see the Government’s efforts toimprove public communicationsand engagement, which PM Leesaid “are more important in theage of social media and a moreactive citizenry”.

A new normal?

IS THERE a new normal in Singa-pore politics?

If new normal refers to a newstatus quo, then the answer is notquite.

The PAP, which has governedSingapore continuously for 53years, remains very much incharge. It still has 81 out of 87elected seats in Parliament andfaces no immediate threat to itsdominance.

Most Singaporeans do not yetsee in any of the opposition par-ties a credible alternative.

Young Singaporean Tay JieMing, 25, eloquently summed upthe post GE 2011 landscape: “Wehave taken mere baby steps and,as a young democracy, we havesome way to go before we can seri-ously consider if there is indeed anew normal.”

lydia@sph.com.sg

SIX student teams will competein the semi-final round of theBig Quiz on Wednesday.

They are: Hwa ChongInstitution, Pioneer JuniorCollege, Anglo-Chinese JuniorCollege, Raffles Institution,River Valley High School, andNUS High School ofMathematics and Science.

The top four teams willproceed to the final round next

Friday at Raffles CityConvention Centre.

The teams will compete forthe top cash prize of $5,000and a trophy.

The next best teams willreceive $3,000, $1,000 and$500 respectively.

The competition is open tostudents in the first year ofjunior college or the equivalent,such as Year 5 of a six-year

integrated programme.The Big Quiz started last

month with a preliminaryround involving 23 schoolteams, and a quarter-finalinvolving 18 teams.

Quiz questions are based onreports in The Straits Times.For more information, go towww.straitstimes.com/thebigquiz.View clips from the quiz rounds andschool talks at www.razortv.com.sg.

By DAMIEN D. CHEONGFOR THE STRAITS TIMES

MINISTER for Infor-mation, Communi-cations and the ArtsYaacob Ibrahim hasonce again appealed

to Singapore’s online communityto develop an Internet code of con-duct (ICoC) to help foster a morecivilised cyberspace behaviourhere.

He made his call at the Harmo-nyWorks! conference, organisedby OnePeople.sg, last month.

The minister first called for thedevelopment of an ICoC or “neti-quette” last year, following inves-tigations of several Singaporeanswho had posted derogatory and re-ligiously insensitive comments on-line.

The Government has now alsoestablished the Media LiteracyCouncil (MLC) to help “promote asafe, secure and civil media envi-ronment through public educa-tion”. The Council is also taskedwith advising the Government onmedia issues.

These initiatives are arguablyin response to increases in: (a)“trolling”, that is, the posting ofinappropriate, uncivil and offen-sive comments online; (b) inflam-

matory postings about religion orethnicity or any sensitive issue;and (c) contentious postings relat-ed to Singapore politics, the pub-lic sector and the Government.

Such posts are often highly pro-vocative, and have the potential,as the Government believes, toprovoke disquiet. This in turnmay undermine social cohesionand confidence in the public sec-tor as well as the Government.

As existing legislation cannotbe effectively applied in cyber-space, with the exception perhapsof anti-defamation and nationalsecurity laws, and as censorshipof the Internet is not a viable op-tion, the establishment of an IC-oC and an MLC, from the Govern-ment’s perspective, does havesome merit.

However, many in the onlinecommunity see such moves as yetanother attempt to regulate the In-ternet. It is useful to seek a mid-dle ground on Internet govern-ance, where both sides appreciatethe other’s concerns.

The Internet has come to be re-garded by many as the last bas-tion of free speech. So any at-tempt by governments or privatecompanies to censor or regulatethe Internet is often met withfierce opposition.

In Asia, where freedom of

speech is not a universal sharedvalue, cyberspace represents theonly space where people can free-ly express themselves seeminglywithout fear from the authorities.

In reality, this is obviously notthe case but as an ideal, cyber-space freedom resonates stronglyamong many, particularly in theSingaporean online community,who are determined to protectthis space from any real or per-ceived intrusion from the Govern-ment.

To many bloggers and onlineusers, trolling, while objectiona-ble, is a small price to pay for free-dom of expression. This groupwould rather avoid having online“OB markers” to regulate behav-iour in cyberspace, as this wouldcurtail freedom of expression andstifle creativity.

They would prefer a self-polic-ing community approach to dealwith errant bloggers and users.Such self-policing includes repri-manding or seeking remedial ac-tion from the offender; and ignor-ing the culprit(s) in the hope thatthey would eventually be discredit-ed and shunned by other users.

In extreme cases of so-called“online vigilante justice”, as inthe recent XiaXue example, the“targets” of offensive posts mayhit back at their attackers by ex-

posing and humiliating them in cy-berspace.

The first two options assumethat most users are discerning, so-phisticated and courageousenough to detect, reject and repri-mand the offending blogger/user.But this might not always be thecase. The last option – vigilanteaction – is controversial and mayeven result in the vigilante’s prose-cution.

The Government perforcetakes a wider view of society andadopts policies that protect all citi-zens, not just those who are activeonline. From this perspective, itadopts a more pre-emptive andcautionary approach to mattersthat impact on security.

If inflammatory comments can-not be contained in cyberspaceand have the potential to igniteproblems within the wider com-munity, then online behaviourmay have to be heavily regulated.

However, the Government real-ises that heavy regulation is not aviable solution, nor is permittinginflammatory comments to beposted online unabated.

Its compromise solution hasbeen to appeal to users to developtheir own netiquette to guide on-line behaviour and educate cur-rent and future generations of Sin-gaporeans on how best to use the

Internet, with emphasis beingplaced on how to be discerningabout what is posted on social me-dia and other online channels.

The proposed ICoC may not bethe best way to manage online be-haviour since it is difficult to en-force and to ensure compliance.

Perhaps the only way to get us-ers to abide by a code is to havethe international community rati-fy and accept a universal Internetcode of conduct. But such an out-come is virtually impossible.

At this juncture, if an ICoC isto be enforced in Singapore, it canmost likely be done at the “microlevel”, that is, between Internetservice providers and their cus-tomers. Even so, enforcementproblems will persist. If the ICoCcannot be enforced, it will mostlikely be ignored by users.

The posting of questionableand inappropriate content will re-main as long as the Internet’scloak of anonymity exists. As regu-lation is likely to be unsuccessful,it might be easier simply to pro-mote the golden rule of neti-quette: “Do unto others online asyou would have done to you”(www.networketiquette.net).

For inflammatory postings, theGovernment has the mandate totake action against users who de-liberately break the law to pro-

voke tensions and instigate con-flict. It should, of course, accorddue process to the suspect(s) inthe interests of transparency andaccountability. The Government’scredibility on and offline would befurther increased if it becomesmore transparent in its dealings.

The Government’s aim to in-crease public education in socialmedia usage through the MLC isnecessary, timely and relevant.

Individuals, especially theyoung, should be taught how to in-teract and engage on social mediaas well as guard against unsa-voury individuals and predatorybehaviour. They should also betaught to be more selective anddiscerning, not just of informa-tion on social media but also of in-formation on traditional media.This implies the need for the edu-cation system to encourage morecritical thinking in students.

Any new policy is bound tofrustrate as many as it satisfies.Therefore, a better understandingof competing perspectives andmoves towards a middle groundmust be sought, especially nowwhen communication and mediaroles are on the cusp of change.The writer is a research fellow at theCentre of Excellence for NationalSecurity, S. Rajaratnam School ofInternational Studies, NTU.

Stay on top of the Big Quiz

Towards better online conduct

This primer is the final instalment of a 12-partseries in the Opinion pages, in the lead-up toThe Straits Times-Ministry of EducationNational Current Affairs Quiz.

Singapore’schangingpoliticallandscape

F R I D A Y , A U G U S T 1 7 , 2 0 1 2 OOPPIINNIIOONN A29