The General Elections of Singapore, 2011

The recently over General Elections 2011 in Singapore has seen intense competition, the opposition putting up a stronger fight than ever. The People’s Action Party (PAP), had not seen such strong opposition for such a long time. As many said, this was a watershed election. For one, a Group Representative Constituency (GRC), has been wrested from the control of the PAP, the GRC being Aljunied GRC. Many before uncontested GRCs, such as the Bishan – Toa Payoh GRC, which has not been contested since its formation in 1997, were being contested. Votes for the PAP generally, dropped, with only two constituencies with an increase in votes – Potong Pasir Single Member Constituency (SMC) and Ang Mo Kio GRC, and only one walkover, Tanjong Pagar GRC. Whereas the PAP had attained 75.3% of Singaporean’s votes in 2001, it has dropped to 60.1% in this election. What went wrong?

Firstly, the quality of the candidates of the opposition has improved. An opposition member such as Chen Show Mao has been described as with having “credentials like no other that we have seen”. Many government scholars have also chosen to join the opposition parties, stating reasons such as that they “truly want to help the residents”. The qualities of speakers in opposition parties have also increased, for example, Mr. Benjamin Pwee of the Singapore People’s Party. Opposition parties also used social media such as Facebook in order to attract more fans. This has managed to sway quite a number of young first-time voters, who make up a large portion of Singaporean voters.

Next, the PAP has also been blamed for being too arrogant and stuck-up, and not caring about resident’s needs. The PAP has used the policy of estate upgrading as an incentive for voters, however, with many estates already upgraded, the residents seemed to have gotten tired of this bait. Furthermore, residents are dissatisfied that their opinions were not considered when upgrading the estates, for example, some residents were not given the choice to decide which colour they wanted their flats to be painted. The oppositions’ similar slogans to be the residents’ voice in the Parliament has drawn many voters to vote for them, as many Singaporeans are dissatisfied that they are not given the right to consider a policy before it is implemented. Thus, voters believe that with more opposition in the Parliament, policies that do not benefit anyone but the PAP will be questioned and thus, policies implemented in Singapore would be more beneficial to Singaporeans.

However, I think that some voters have not truly considered what the PAP has done before voting, and instead voted blindly. Some people merely think that just because the PAP is arrogant and self-centered, all that they have done is to implement policies that have only benefitted the PAP, thus whatever the PAP has done is wrong and the opposition should take its place. This is a wrong way of thinking, because the PAP has truly done a lot for Singapore. Perhaps they are becoming more complacent, but they have been effective in managing Singapore. Voters should sit back and think, which is probably what the cooling-off day is for, and consider both points of view carefully before reaching a decision. The standard of PAP may have been lackluster in the recent years, but what they need is just a wake-up call, and not an overthrow of the current government. After all, with sudden changes in the government and policies, foreign investors would be less confident and decide to withdraw their investments from Singapore, thus resulting in a financial crisis in Singapore which would definitely affect many people in Singapore negatively.