The issues at stake

This was an interesting article which I read when I was browsing through the news on Yahoo webpage. Yeah, hope the ones able to vote are mature enough to open up their eyes and mind to what's going on around them and the larger issues at stake. And not let the nitty-gritty silly arguments affect their decision... Wake up, guys!

Saturday May 6, 8:17 AM

Will the real First World voter please stand up?

SINGAPORE: Desepite the James Gomez sideshow and the hysteria that has accompanied it, there is a certain neatness to this particular General Election.

In the first forays that got the campaign on its way, the People's Action Party (PAP) asked: You have this yearning for opposition, but are you being offered a First World opposition?

The Opposition replied: Do we have a First World Government in the first place?

Rhetoric, perhaps, but the real test of Singapore's electoral process coming of age must, we think, hinge on a related theme: Do we have First World voters?

The by-election strategy practised by Singapore's Opposition parties had all but taken this factor out of the equation. Since 1988, by conceding the Government before the first vote was cast, they had reduced the polls to rather narrow dimensions.

By force of circumstances, the debate was narrowed from who should form the next Government to one centred on whether or why an Opposition was needed in Parliament and which candidate was willing to work harder to serve his constituents and manage a Town Council to bring about improvements.

No longer. With only 37 seats uncontested this time around and 47 still to fight for (still too few by First World standards, but it's a start), voters actually have an opportunity to think beyond their immediate surroundings and send a signal on the kind of country they want to live in. They will get the Government they deserve.

Singapore's evolving electorate has in the past shown that it still has some way to go before it can be considered enlightened. In his dialogue with young Singaporeans, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew mentioned how the PAP generally preferred to field Chinese males in single-member wards, presumably because the electorate still carried racial and gender biases to the polling both.

A voter who will refuse to vote for a Ramalingam because he is Indian, a Diana Chan because she is female or a Hazlinda because she is neither Chinese nor male does not deserve to be called a First World voter. Quite simply, the vote should go to the party or candidate that can serve best - and nothing else should matter.

A First World voter would be more persuaded by the bigger picture than who gives the most entertaining rally speech. He would not be swayed by sniping and potshots aimed at the political opponent - empty talk that rates high on style but low on substance.

He will compare visions, weigh the philosophies and examine the personnel before him - without double standards for the incumbent or the opponent. After all, why should the First World voter settle for anyone less capable or with less integrity?

In this campaign, the Opposition has stuck to one recurring theme: Alternative voices, checks and balances. It has argued that no government, however good and honest, can be endlessly trusted to be its own watchdog. It has asked Singaporeans to send its members to Parliament so that they can keep an eye on what, despite the Opposition's nominal challenge, will certainly be a PAP Government.

The ruling party has stressed that the Singapore system is unique. It has asked whether Singapore really needs to follow a model of democracy in which governments are forced to think short-term - from election to election - and come up with populist, if harmful, policies just to keep the Opposition at bay. It has pointed to its track record and asserted that it has both the vision and the personnel to deliver the goods.

A First World voter will think, weigh and decide what is good for him in the long term. He will not be churlish or petty.

He will use his vote wisely. - TODAY /dt