The PAP had many things going their way this election, some of which are to their own credit. Firstly, the timing of the election coincided with the SG50 celebrations and LKY's passing. These events were thought to have turned the public sentiment in favour of PAP. Secondly, over the past few years, the government released a slew of initiatives aimed to address public concerns from GE 2011, increase social support as well as distribute the usual freebies. These schemes include the BTO flats, the progressive wage scheme, Medishield Life and of course, the Pioneer Generation Package. Thirdly, the AHPETC saga was caused some voters to begin to distrust the strongest opposition party, WP. Lastly, the PAP has always had the upper hand of having an entrenched "PAP machinery" which stems from the grassroots - Residents' Committees, Peoples' Association - to the civil service, statutory boards and even the various government departments.
With the wind blowing Goh Chok Tong's allegorical PAP luxury cruise ship through calm waters, why does it look like the ruling party is headed for an iceberg?
1. No captain at the ship's wheel
The PAP's campaign strategy throughout the election has been to let the various candidates for each constituency settle their own campaign. No one has coordinated the overall campaign. This is evident in the holding rallies in close proximity on the same day, the lack of a coordinated message in candidate speeches and the lack of coordination in the conducting of the rallies themselves.
On Sep 7, PAP held rallies for Yuhua SMC, Holland-Bukit Timah GRC and Sembawang GRC. On Sep 8, PAP held rallies for Tampines GRC and Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC. These rallies were held in close proximity to each other. In fact, they border each other. The proximity of the rallies would have cannibalised each other's attendance and of course reduced the hype generated. In fact, on Sep 8, the PAP held 6 rallies at the same time. In contrast, most opposition groups held at most 1 rally on each day. For the 2 major parties - WP and SDP, attendance was concentrated at a large venue which promoted high levels of attendance. Like this.
Even though the PAP has more constituencies to cover, they could have spread out the rallies over the course of the election and planned for the rallies to be organised in electoral divisions further away from each other.
While the opposition parties mostly had a coordinated message, the speeches given by PAP candidates seemed to sway from bashing opposition candidates, to promising more upgrading and "report card" references. Just a few PAP candidates detailed policies that had been implemented with some mentions of future plans. All of these speeches have their merits and demerits. However, besides the "report card" reference, candidates did not end up with the same overall message in their speeches. On the other hand the other parties seemed to have distinct messages:
WP - we made the government work harder, we have alternative policies, vote us in to empower your future
SDP - we too have good alternative policies and are avoiding character assassination
The rest - return our CPF! oh, and free stuff for all!
Finally, some GRCs chose not to have rallies while some SMCs (Mountbatten, MacPherson, Hong Kah North) just had their single candidates speak with a couple of grassroots volunteers. This deprived some candidates of speaking opportunities while the SMCs had meagre turnouts.
These hint at an overall lack of coordination.
2. Unchartered course for the next 500 miles
WP candidate Leon Perera accused PAP of being a backward looking party. My opinion is that the PAP does have plans for the future. I doubt that the PAP has left the future to chance and let the PAP ship sail wherever the wind blows. However, the PAP has not expressed any of their future plans in their rally speeches. Much of the focus has been on the past 50 years. Trust PAP for the next 50. But where are we going next?
Both the SDP and WP have detailed counter proposals to current PAP schemes. WP has an overall plan which is about developing the Singapore Core. SDP's overall plan is for more efficient spending so that more money can be channelled to fund welfare programmes. While the proposals lack detail and most glaringly leave out foreign policy, at least they have developed their ideas. The PAP manifesto is long enough but focusses on what has already been done. Of course, most other opposition parties do not have detailed plans. NSP has an appalling 6-slide powerpoint presentation and I question the effort they have put in to counter-propose.
But this should not be the case for the ruling party. If the PAP wants voters to trust them for the next 500 miles, it is important to tell voters where the ship is headed.
3. Crew members puncturing the ship's hull
Instead of even focussing on what the PAP has accomplished, PAP candidates have been drawn into local fistfights. Sim Ann and her "chu pattern", the attacking of Chee Soon Juan's character and the AHPETC management have not bode well with the electorate. Attacking the opposition if perfectly fine but this hand has been overplayed. Too much rally time has been used to say the same things. Sim even dedicated 3.5 minutes to her "chu pattern" assualt on Chee. WP and SDP candidates on the contrary briefly alluded to shortfalls of PAP MPs and ministers and then moved on to future plans and policy ideas.
This not only wasted rally time for ideas to be fleshed out, but also painted PAP as the bully as WP gleefully has pointed out throughout the campaign. Chee won the moral high ground by refusing to respond to the attacks on him. The PAP is disadvantaged in that it will always seem like the bully, being the dominant party. However, if they had played this "character and integrity" card judiciously, they would have caused electoral distrust of the opposition candidates without going too far down the bully road. This was seen at the start of the AHPETC saga when the PAP had just begun to mention the accounting problems. Distrust was sown but PAP was not seen as the bad guy.
The overemphasis on personal attacks have backfired and hurt the PAP more than it did the opposition.
4. First Mates wanted
"This election is about leadership renewal" - Lee Hsien Loong
The PAP's campaign says otherwise. Lee Hsien Loong's face has been plastered in every polling district, suggesting that he is still and still going to be PAP's number 1. The next generation of leaders have been fairly silent. Labour Chief, Chan Chun Sing and DPM Tharman have given rousing speeches, or more accurately, a rousing speech each. MSF minister Tan Chuan-Jin has opted to go without a rally. Ministers Lawrence Wong and Sim Ann who have been given the bulk of speaking opportunities (rally speeches + NUS forum, CNA dialogue) have pretty much gutted their entire campaign by attacking the now meek Chee Soon Juan and by going in unprepared for their forums.
Instead of having the new generation of leaders stepping up to speak for PAP and spearhead the campaign, we have our previous prime minister, Goh Chok Tong acting as the spokesperson for PAP with his interesting analogies. Ex-DPM Wong Kan Seng was recalled to deliver his speech and even a SEA games athlete - Dipna Lim spoke at the Sembawang Rally. I've nothing against these speakers but shouldn't the focus of the campaign be on - the next generation of leaders?
The PAP has also demonstrated to have been unable to attract candidates outside the civil service and military who have new ideas to contribute. In contrast, SDP and WP have attracted candidates from various backgrounds and what is impressive is that a lot of these candidates are academics that present new and inspiring ideas both in the policy paper and in speeches. Candidates with academic background such as Prof Tambyah, Leon Perera and Daniel Goh were once thought to have shunned the opposition.
In conclusion, I don't actually think the PAP will lose the election but there is a good chance they will lose seats. East Coast GRC, Fengshan SMC and Holland-Bukit Timah GRC are areas where the opposition has sent their better candidates and sadly where PAP candidates have committed faux pas. I feel the PAP could have played to their advantages and extended their advantage by introducing their plans for the next 50 years. The laissez faire management of their campaign has led to the PAP sending unclear messages to the voters and even painted themselves as bullies, uncaring and out of touch. The PAP has thrown away golden opportunity to hit the opposition back hard and maybe even reclaim Punggol-East SMC. If only they had managed and packaged their campaign better.
No comments:
Post a Comment