Clintongate in Singapore's politics

Clintongate in Singapore’s politics

SINGAPORE - Keen observers of our local political scene will not fail to observe the polemicity in our mainstream media’s portrayal of key PAP and opposition candidates. Indeed there was a huge gulf of difference in how PAP candidate Mr Lui Tuck Yew and SDA opposition candiate, Steve Chia, were portrayed.

Mr Lui cuts a clean image. A pious man committed to his church and family, he is an academic high-achiever having won an SAF overseas scholarship to study at Cambridge, and later rising to Chief of Navy. He also does volunteer work at a pet-assisted therapy home at Bishan. In short, he is everything an ACS boy is expected to be - a scholar, an officer and a gentleman.

Steve’s portrayal was unfortunately at the other end of the spectrum. It was unfortunate that his wife reported her discovery of the topless photos of their maid in his computer, and the police was to get involved. Our media swooped down on Steve like hawks on their prey. Seemed like a Clintongate in the making, no? Obviously, it turned out that Steve didn’t commit any offense, but ironically the police “let him off with a warning”. So where was the police during the height of the Tammy Tan scandal when her handphone containing explicit videos of her intercourse with her boyfriend was released to the public? Did Tammy even get a warning?

It seems like our police is being magnanimous, no? To be let off with a warning appears to give an impression that an offense was committed, but the policing authority chooses to be generous in giving a second chance. Even Jack Neo chose to rub that in in his movie “One more chance”, which I found distasteful. Guang, a compulsive gambler successfully obtained a job at a firm which employs ex-convicts. His colleagues described the offenses they were convicted for, and one of them was a be-spectacled man nicknamed “Lecher” who was convicted for taking nude photos of his maid after his wife reported him to the police.

Jack’s movie was intended to achieve a noble aim which is to send a clear message to Singaporeans the importance of giving ex-convicts a second chance, and thus the tagline - help them (ex-convicts) unlock the second prison, the raison d’etre of the Yellow Ribbon campaign. Well, Jack, you just contradicted yourself. You convicted Steve for an “offense”, when in actual fact, it is a non-offense.

Back to the portrayal of PAP candidates, Mr Lui wasn’t the only Mr Picture Perfect. Similar new candidates had that kind of exposure too. Thus, it seems that an advertisement to join the PAP as a candidate for elections would read “Only whiter than white need apply”.

However, the most crucial question is if the electorate really place top priority on a candidate’s conduct over anything else. Maybe, a rhetorical question to ask is, if given a choice between candidate A whose profile reads strong in public policies but has a penchant for flings at Singapore’s red light districts and candidate B, a deeply religious family man who is weak in public policies, who will you choose?

My personal choice will be candidate A. Why? Simply pragmatism above anything else. And I am not the only voter with such a belief. We have to recognize that we are not perfect, and the fact that everyone inclusive of politicans are prone to certain faults serves to illustrate the frailty of our human self. Steve is no different from the rest of us.

And Steve has made his fair share of contributions during his time as a Non-constituency MP, an accolade awarded to the best performing opposition. For instance, Mr Chiam and him were pro-active in pushing for improvements within our education system. He has also touched on pertinent issues regarding transport and national service for instance.

Was Steve’s popularity even affected by that minor hiccup? Perhaps, not it seems. He actually improved on his showing at Chua Chu Kang SMC, garnering 39.63% of the votes during the elections of 2006 as compared to his previous showing in 2001 when he garnered 34.66%. Thus, it seems that Steve has done a Bill Clinton, except that no sex was involved. In both cases, the so-called scandals had little effect on their popularity. Like Steve’s improved showing during the electoral contest, Clinton left the presidential office with an approval rating of 66%, the best showing by an American president since World War II.

It is important for voters to realize that an electoral contest is different from a contest to elect a religious head who must display an exemplary conduct. Voters should select candidates who can best articulate their concerns in parliament, don’t you agree?

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=24925.1