Singapore’s ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) has built its reputation on honesty and integrity, while delivering superior economic progress to its citizens. Those credentials are at stake as the party grapples with the latest scandal in its ranks: the case of former minister for transport S. Iswaran.
On Tuesday, Iswaran pleaded guilty to five charges, four for obtaining valuable items as a public servant and one for obstructing the course of justice. Newly appointed Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong (黃循財) has a chance to renew trust with voters, and refresh the social contract between the government and the people.
Iswaran was meant to face a lengthy trial, but his last-minute about-face has dominated conversations in coffee shops and social media forums across the city-state. He was charged in January for allegedly taking expensive gifts from two businessmen — property tycoon Ong Beng Seng (王明星), who owns the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix and played a key role in bringing the Formula One race to the city-state, and construction boss Lum Kok Seng (林國城).
When the charges were first filed, Iswaran insisted he was innocent and vowed to contest them. On Tuesday, the prosecution amended the accusations and dropped the corruption crimes. Iswaran subsequently pled guilty to a smaller set of five indictments. He is on bail and due to be sentenced on Thursday next week. Such is the public interest in the case that people were lining up for tickets to watch the proceedings.
This is almost certainly the end of Iswaran’s political career, and the latest stain on the PAP’s once spotless record.
In June last year, two senior cadres were cleared of wrongdoing by the anti-corruption bureau for their rental of colonial-era houses in an upscale neighborhood, after the opposition alleged they paid below-market rates. A month later, two parliamentarians who had an extramarital affair resigned, after then-Singaporean prime minister Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍) intervened to break them up — twice.
The government could do without the distraction. Elections must be held before November next year, and the focus is on reminding Singaporeans about the challenges ahead, and which party is best placed to guide the nation through them.
Earlier this week, a headline in the Straits Times read: “More Singaporean deaths than births possible by first half of 2030s,” warning that the population would shrink without immigration. Then the government released figures that showed the population is now above 6 million people — a record — with the biggest growth among non-residents.
Immigration and the cost of living are key concerns for voters. The PAP had one of its worst-ever showings in 2020 — despite winning 61 percent of the popular vote — due in part to concerns about the economy.
It is a tricky balancing act for Wong, who just this week has been warning of the “dark clouds over the horizon” regarding the US-China contest for dominance in the Asia-Pacific region. He is leading a team of ministers who are vastly different from the ones who built the nation, bringing it, in the words of the late founding father, Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), from Third World to First. The current crop, or the 4G, as they are known, are viewed by a segment of Singaporeans as arrogant and out of touch. The fact that they earn million-dollar salaries, more than 10 times the average Singaporean’s wages, is also a sore point.
The government implemented private-sector standard salaries in 1994 to attract the best talent and prevent a culture of graft. However, times have changed, said Chong Ja Ian (莊嘉穎), an associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore.
“These rules were established at a time when the PAP could legitimately say if we pay our ministers the highest salaries, they will be corruption-free. With the wealth that is available in Singapore today, is this approach still feasible? Whether the PAP can come up with some alternative mechanisms remains untested,” Chong said.
As the new leader, Wong has already clocked that there is an image problem, saying when Iswaran was first charged in January that maintaining clean government is non-negotiable.
“This is part of our DNA,” he added. “There can be no compromise, no relaxation, no fudging of this, no matter the political price.”
There are things Wong can do to remind voters of the party’s principled history, and hark back to the can-do philosophy that helped build Singapore’s success. He has an opportunity for radical transparency and could impose sweeping changes. One option is to mandate that parliamentarians, elected officials and their families publicly disclose their assets. Currently, Singaporean political office holders only have to declare their income and assets to the prime minister. Wong could also argue that a parliamentarian or civil servant should not hold another job or directorship in the private sector, as some currently do.
The prime minister addressed this in a dialogue with students in July, saying the government recognized some lawmakers have “other private-sector commitments” and that they were allowed to have full-time jobs, but that they were also fully expected to discharge their parliamentarian duties.
Divorcing public service from private-sector pay could go a long way toward weeding out those not fully committed to their electorates. In the past, it was thought that if you want to attract the best talent to the ranks of Singapore’s elite, you need to pay them handsomely. However, perhaps the new philosophy should be: If you do not want to make some sacrifices to serve the people, then perhaps you are not cut out for politics.
After all, it is not a management or executive job — it is a calling. Singaporeans deserve that much.
Karishma Vaswani is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia politics with a special focus on China. Previously, she was the BBC’s lead Asia presenter, and worked for the BBC across Asia and South Asia for two decades. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS