The Lessons of Singapore’s Presidential Election


August 31, 2011

Home

The Lessons of Singapore’s Presidential Election

Author: K Kesavapany, ISEAS  (08-30-11)

The results of Singapore’s 27 August Presidential Election were a cliff-hanger. In the four-way contest, the government’s preferred candidate, former Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan, won 35.2 per cent of the valid votes after a recount. That represented a razor-thin victory of 0.34 of a percentage point over his nearest contender, former Member of Parliament Tan Cheng Bock. Both were previously members of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).

The third contestant, former civil servant Tan Jee Say, took a quarter of the vote, and the last contestant lost his election deposit after having obtained only 4.9 per cent of the vote.

The break-up of votes is an interesting throwback to the results of the General Election held in May 2011. Then, the PAP secured 60.1 per cent of the vote in what was seen as a setback for the party, particularly since it lost a Group Representation Constituency for the first time as well. The thin margin of Tony Tan’s victory in the Presidential Election suggests that the anti-incumbency factor was at play, for Tan Cheng Bock ran on a platform distancing him from the government.

The substantial 25 per cent of votes that went to Tan Jee Say, who had contested the General Election as a candidate for the opposition Singapore Democratic Party, reinforced the sense of anti-incumbency sentiments. In a first-past-the-post system, a victory by even one vote is a victory: Tony Tan’s margin was 7,269 votes. Critics of the government, however, were quick to point out that almost 65 per cent of Singaporeans did not vote for him.

Elections are divisive by nature. What matters now is whether Tony Tan can unite the people behind him. Here, there is reason to believe that the new president can do so. His long years in Parliament have given him an instinctive understanding of what unites citizens over and above the necessary divisiveness of democratic politics.

He realises that he has to reach out to the 65 per cent who did not vote for him because he is their president as well. He has promised not to be an ivory-tower president, just as his predecessor, President S R Nathan, was not. Charitable and other projects were an area in which President Nathan made his mark. Tony Tan will no doubt do the same.

This is not to say that Tan will be the kind of interventionist president that the other three candidates, in different degrees, offered to be. Singapore has an elected presidency, not an executive presidency. Tan is keenly aware of the constitutional parameters within which he must function. These restrict him from blocking actions to five key areas: the spending of Singapore’s past reserves; key public service appointments; detentions under the Internal Security Act; restraining orders under the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act; and investigations carried out by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau.

That said, the ‘new normal’ in Singapore politics will require the new president to listen more keenly to sentiments on the ground. The next six years, in which Tan occupies the highest position in the state, will show how well he uses his power and authority to make a difference to the lives of Singaporeans, whatever their background.

Ambassador K. Kesavapany is the Director of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies and former Singapore High Commissioner to Malaysia.

7 thoughts on “The Lessons of Singapore’s Presidential Election

  1. This is pro-PAP piece by Ambassador Kesavapany. But all the same, Singaporeans have voted Dr. Tony Tan as their President. He will be sworn in on September 1, 2011. He knows what he must do for them. PAP too must change to meet new challenges.

  2. “President S R Nathan, was not. Charitable and other projects were an area in which President Nathan made his mark.”

    Ha, ha, ha! So, that’s what S’poreans need a President for at a whacking salary of S$4 million a year.

    dpp
    we are all of 1 Race, the Human Race

  3. Don,
    It’s better to pay the President 4 million dollars than to let unscrupulous fella especially the maharaja in sarawak siphoning the state coffer.
    We have seen enough already.

  4. Malaysian GLC’s pay multi million ringgit salaries, so Malaysian politicians and political elites have no choice BUT TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX ( to put it mildly) to play catch up !! Remember Mahathir says he managed to save every sen of his miserable salary, as everything ( perks and proxies) in the discharge of his official (and unofficial) duties is free from the air !!

  5. Yea , better pay them well then have someone like Mahathir take a ” loan ” from the treasury to buy his ranch in Argentina and buy his son 19.9% of sam miguel for RM2.9 billion !

  6. Esso/Mobil pump stations will have to be rebranded with the exit of an international icon Exon/Mobil. Ibrahim Ali of PERKOSA, take your pick…shall it be SAN MIGUEL or SAN MIRZAN when you top up your tank. ( Halal or not?) Both SM maa, better than SADO MACHOISM !!!

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.