Have Singaporeans “awakened” from their political apathy? (Yahoo! file photo)
By Andrew Loh
Budget 2012 has been lauded by some, such as Low Thia Khiang of the Workers' Party, who called it a "pro-people budget". Others, such as the Singapore Democratic Party, decried the Budget as "nothing new".
Whatever it is, there is no denying that Budget 2012 has placed a more significant focus on the less better off in Singapore — the elderly, the sick, the disabled — and such a move is welcome.
It is akin to a new social compact between the government and the people.
Indeed, Nominated Member of Parliament Laurence Lien went further and called for the Government to set up a Social Review Committee "that will help create a new social compact". Lien said "this is necessary because Singapore is in a 'social recession' now."
Lien said the committee "could be co-led by the Government and civil society groups, and could evolve into a permanent platform or movement."
It is not a bad idea and the government should give it some thought.
In a similar vein, perhaps it is also time for a new political compact. To be sure, the old one — if it existed at all — was a one-way street in that the people's political inclinations were effectively curtailed in lieu of economic prosperity. Power was entirely bestowed on, some would say usurped by, the People's Action Party (PAP) government so much so that the word politics itself became a sort of dirty word, anathema, something to be scorned and be terrified of.
But times have changed.
Following the general election in May 2011, Singaporeans were said to have "awakened" from their political apathy. However, on closer inspection, much of this new sense of empowerment has flowed onto expression on the Internet. It is, of course, not a bad thing. Singaporeans should express themselves freely, even if it's in the "cowboy towns" online.
But that is also the danger, one which the government and others have recognised. Not everything one reads online is true or even accurate at times. But this is just as true for mainstream reports. The government, however, has taken a more unkind or a deeper suspicion towards online content and netizens.
Ministers' suggestions
To counter these, various ideas have been proferred. Law Minister K Shanmugam suggested "political education" be introduced into the schools, with the curricula focused on "comparative political system". This "was to create a citizenry that was better informed about its political choices," he was reported to have said.
More directly, vis a vis online discourse, Minister for Communications and the Arts Yacob Ibrahim ventured that a "code of conduct" for online behaviour be introduced for netizens.
And from a wider perspective, certain laws were created — such as the Public Order Act and Cooling Off Day — and amendments — such as to the Films Act — have been introduced to curb citizens' political expression.
More recently, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's lawyer's letter to a certain blog site for publishing allegedly defamatory statements have critics up in arms.
All these can be seen in the context of a government not seeming to know what to make of online expression, and which is still feeling its way around to find the best method of control.
But this is needless. The underlying reason why Singaporeans have found space and voice online is simple: because in the "real world", such expression has been all but completely sanitised and indeed erased in the course of 50 years of PAP rule.
With the Prime Minister himself promising change, there is no better time than the present to relook the curbs which have been put in place for political expression. Ignoring this, and worse, burying one's head in the sand and thinking that wielding the big stick still scares, is living in a warped time zone.
The government, really, need not be too wary or afraid of Singaporeans finding expression or even participating more fully in our political life. In fact, ministers in the past have urged Singaporeans to do precisely this. But how should one do so with all the restrictions, regulations and fear of reprisals still so distinct in our collective national consciousness?
A way forward
One way to do so is through taking baby steps in correcting and eventually erasing such fears. Civil society, and yes bloggers, have taken the lead in this, together with the opposition parties.
What more can be done? One of the problems which activists and ordinary Singaporeans face when it comes to organising political activities is looking for a suitable and affordable venue. There is hardly any such establishment where activists and Singaporeans can gather, save for perhaps Speakers' Corner which, incidentally, isn't exactly a conducive venue for talks and forums.
It is also perhaps improbable that civil society itself can ever come together to establish such a centre for activities and participation. Would the government consider setting up such a non-partisan — and I mean a truly non-partisan — venue? Much like what it has done for the centre for youths, called *Scape located at Orchard, a similar one could be set up for political and civil society activities — at affordable or token fees.
A new political compact can start with this — which will benefit all, opposition parties, the PAP, civil society, and anyone who is interested in the political affairs of our nation. It would signal, quite clearly, that the government is sincere and is courageous enough to go off the beaten track it has taken the last 50 years, and that it recognises that political expression will and can only become more pronounced in our society.
But ultimately, it will be Singapore the nation which will benefit. Giving space to political expression, with the government itself showing wisdom and establishing such a venue for it, will erase once and for all the self-inflicted fears which Singaporeans have had to endure for decades.
A new political compact does not have to be anything fancy, promising the heavens and beyond, and endowed with bells and whistles. It can start with small steps. And in this day and age, it is becoming increasingly clear that Singapore and Singaporeans are ready for more open expression and participation.
Andrew helms publichouse.sg as Editor-in-Chief. His writings have been reproduced in other publications, including the Australian Housing Journal in 2010. He was nominated by Yahoo! Singapore as one of Singapore's most influential media persons in 2011.
76 comments