Category: Politics

Falsehoods repeated often enough can be perceived as the truth, and there is a risk this is happening in the general election.

The latest example is the slew of statements on social media platforms and online forums, echoed by several political parties, saying that the Government plans to increase the population to 10 million by bringing in more foreigners.

Some online commentators point to a Straits Times report of a dialogue Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had with around 700 students at Nanyang Technological University last year.

Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan cited the report at a televised debate on Wednesday night, claiming that Mr Heng had, in an interview, toyed with the idea of raising the population to 10 million – a charge that was refuted several times by Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan of the People’s Action Party (PAP).

Dr Balakrishnan had categorically stated: “We will never have 10 million. We won’t even have 6.9 million. The Government doesn’t have a target for the population.”

Shortly after the debate ended, Dr Chee put up a Facebook post with a link to the ST article.

He highlighted two paragraphs: “Singapore’s population density is not excessive, he (DPM Heng) said, noting that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of liveable space. He cited former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who said in 2014 that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term.”

No ordinary reader of the article – let alone these sentences – would think that Mr Heng wants Singapore to plan for 10 million people.

For good measure, ST’s report on the TV debate stated that Mr Heng did not say Singapore should plan for 10 million people – nor did he mention the figure.

Had he done so, it would have been the headline, and very likely on the front page.

Instead, the headline for the article was: “S’poreans must remain open to foreigners, says Heng”. It was on page 10 of ST’s print edition.​

What was actually said

MARCH 29, 2019

A Straits Times report, headlined “Heng Swee Keat on keeping Singapore open: We don’t want a world where people build walls”, on a dialogue that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had with Nanyang Technological University students, reads: “On the projected population of 6.9 million by 2030, set out in the Government’s 2013 Population White Paper, Mr Heng said the number goes beyond how densely populated Singapore would be. The social space is as important. Singapore’s population density is not excessive, he said, noting that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of liveable space.

“He cited former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who said in 2014 that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term.”

Mr Heng neither said Singapore should plan for 10 million people – nor mentioned the figure.

JULY 1, 2020

The National Population and Talent Division, under the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), issues a clarification saying recent statements on various online platforms that the Government proposes or plans to increase the population in Singapore to 10 million are untrue.

It adds that an update on the population outlook, provided in Parliament in March 2018, said given recent trends, the total population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030, and this outlook remains valid today.

In a televised general election debate, Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan says Mr Heng “toys with the idea of bringing our population up to 10 million”, and asks Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan if he would categorically tell Singaporeans that his party has no intention of raising the population to 10 million by continuing to bring in foreigners.

Dr Balakrishnan replies that the PMO has just issued a statement advising people like Dr Chee not to indulge in falsehoods, saying: “The Government doesn’t have a target for the population.” Shortly after the debate ends, Dr Chee puts up a Facebook post with a link to the March 29, 2019, ST article. He writes: “Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said at the debate that my claim that Mr Heng Swee Keat was toying with the idea of a 10m population was a falsehood. Here’s what ST reported on 29 Mar 2019…”

JULY 2 

Mr Heng makes a Facebook post noting that he did not say Singapore should plan to increase its population to 10 million, or mention the figure. “Let me be clear: The Government has never proposed or targeted for Singapore to increase its population to 10 million. And if we look at today’s situation, our population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030,” he writes.

Mr Heng also posts a video of his response on the subject at the forum, which shows him saying: “On the population issue, the 6.9 million number that was put out earlier on. In fact, I met Mr Liu Thai Ker, our former chief planner, he had publicly said – it has been reported in the papers – that we should go for an even higher number and this little red dot can accommodate many more people.

“Now whether this little red dot can accommodate many more people, actually, is not strictly just a physical constraint. We cannot be thinking of 50 million people on this little red dot because it will just be so dense and unpleasant.

“But if you look at our population density as a city, it is not excessive. There are many cities which, if you look at the liveable space, it is actually a lot, a lot more crowded. But the population number is not just about physical space, it is also about the social space, it is about the sense of togetherness.”

The main point, captured in paragraphs preceding those cited above, reads: “The need for Singaporeans to have an open mindset and a multicultural outlook was one of his key messages at the two-hour forum, during which he was questioned on a raft of issues, including population growth, technological disruption and meritocracy.

“On the projected population of 6.9 million by 2030, set out in the Government’s 2013 Population White Paper, Mr Heng said the number goes beyond how densely populated Singapore would be. The social space is as important.”

Yet, as misperceptions about the matter continued to swirl on social media, Mr Heng had to come out to refute them strongly.

Yesterday morning, he made a Facebook post to state clearly that he did not say Singapore should plan to increase its population to 10 million, nor did he mention the figure.

He also released a brief video clip of this segment of the dialogue.

It is also worth noting the wider context in which the 10 million figure was first raised. The SDP noted that it is not an invention or something of the party’s imagination.

But neither has the Government put out plans or targets for a Singapore with 10 million. Rather, the figure was floated by a retired public servant as something to consider for the long term, out of concern about Singapore’s future and its ability to continue planning for the long term. It is a point worth thinking about as Singapore’s politics becomes more contested.

Three months after the Population White Paper drew negative reactions from many quarters – in particular, over its projection that Singapore’s total population could reach between 6.5 million and 6.9 million by 2030 – Mr Liu, former Housing Board chief executive, suggested that Singapore should actually plan for a more distant future if it is to remain a viable, liveable city.

At a public forum in April 2013 on the topic of planning for 2030, Mr Liu said: “The world doesn’t end in 2030, and population growth doesn’t end at 6.9 million.”

ST reported him suggesting that Singapore could do well to look ahead, perhaps to 2100, when it might have a population of 10 million. Since Singapore’s land area is essentially fixed, higher density is thus inevitable. But liveability can be preserved with adequate amenities and buffers of greenery.

Mr Liu repeated the figure in July 2014, saying Singapore should plan for a population of 10 million in the long term if it is to remain sustainable as a country. “The question is: How long do you want Singapore to exist as a sovereign state?” he said.

He also said that if projections were based on the upper limit of 6.9 million by 2030, Singapore could reach a population of 10 million by 2090. If it is based on the lower limit of 6.5 million, the population may reach 10 million by 2200.

We may never hit these numbers. And 2090 is 70 years away, while 2200 is 180 years away. In fact, recent trends ensure that Singapore’s population will be significantly below 6.9 million in 2030.

But for some, these facts get in the way of a campaign slogan to sway voters.

Singapore GE2020: Get full election coverage on our dedicated site here.

Source: Read Full Article

SINGAPORE – Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh on Thursday pushed back on the suggestions that the WP is just a lite version of the PAP, calling the claim made by Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan during a televised debate as an electoral ploy.

Asked during a walkabout in Kovan on Thursday about Dr Balakrishnan’s remarks that the WP manifesto outlined positions so similar to that of the PAP that the ruling party could have written it, Mr Singh said: “If that was the case, I hope the PAP takes up all our manifesto points and introduces them into their agenda, because that will really change the shape of Singapore, and we will have a more caring and compassionate society.”

During an exchange with WP Sengkang GRC candidate Jamus Lim at the debate, Dr Balakrishnan had said: “…It’s almost a position where whatever line or stand the PAP has taken, you basically use that as your reference point and take a half step to the left.”

Mr Singh on Thursday pointed to questions the WP parliamentarians had asked about the corruption scandal involving Keppel Corp and the fake news laws to draw the distinction between the parties.

“The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Did any PAP MP file any question on the Keppel Marine scandal? I think voters should think about that. Did any of them step up to consider the other alternatives to Bills like Pofma (Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act)? I think these are the questions Singaporeans need to ask,” he said.

A key plank of the WP campaign at the election is the argument that checks and balances in Parliament remain important even as Singapore faces a crisis.

Mr Singh, alluding to the WP’s motto of being a responsible opposition party that will provide constructive criticism, said that even though Singaporeans want opposition politicians in Parliament to scrutinise the PAP, they are “very discerning as to the type of opposition they want”.

“We’ve tried very hard to take that perspective on board and we have created a sort of culture within the party of an opposition that is credible. Not just locally but internationally as well, we’re proud to stand as Singaporeans in spite of being the opposition,” he added.

Asked about the plaudits Assoc Prof Lim received from the performance at the debate, Mr Singh said the he “did credibly for the party”, but that there was still a loot of work to do for the upcoming polls.

He added: “All our candidates have to work hard to serve people on the ground and in Parliament, it’s more than just debates as well.”

The praise for the WP Sengkang candidate, who had participated in a debate on CNA against Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, representing the People’s Action Party, as well as Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan and Progress Singapore Party candidate Francis Yuen came amid criticism for the party’s no show at the Mandarin debate.

Mr Singh apologised to voters and explained that the party did not have any candidate proficient enough to debate in the language.

He said that while the WP has members who are comfortable making speeches and communicating to residents in Mandarin, the “qualify of the proficiency required to participate in a live debate is of a higher order”.

He asked for the forbearance and understanding of the party’s Chinese-speaking supporters, adding that the party will continue to work hard to attract bicultural Singaporeans.

Party chairman Sylvia Lim later made similar remarks in Mandarin, asking voters to support the party so that more of such talented bicultural Singaporeans will step forward to join its ranks.

But they both emphasised that any candidates they field must also have a heart for public service.

Mr Singh also pointed out that former party chief Low Thia Khiang himself had joined the party in the early 1980s because he felt that the Mandarin translations in the party’s collaterals were not up to mark and had wanted to help improve the quality.

“Hee stepped forward, and contributed.” said Mr Singh. “We hope more bicultural Singaporeans do so as well. That’s really at the heart and soul of WP and we don’t want to change.”

The issue is a particularly sensitive one for the WP, which had gained a following among Chinese-speaking Singaporeans under Mr Low, a Teochew-speaking businessman who graduated from Nantah.

It is said that part of Mr Low’s appeal in Hougang constituency, where he was first elected into Parliament in 1991, was his ability to connect with the large population of Teochew Singaporeans who were relocated there after the Government decided to clear out the pig farms that once occupied the area.

Some viewers had wondered if the party’s decision signalled that it was pivoting away from its Chinese-speaking supporter base.

On Thursday, Mr Singh sought to dispel this notion, saying: “I’m very grateful for the support of our Mandarin-only speaking supporters, and I do have to apologise for the party not sending a representative to the Channel 8 debate yesterday.”

He added that the party would send a representative to a dialogue organised by Lianhe Zaobao on Thursday.

Mr Singh was also asked if the WP’s Aljunied GRC team would take up the NCMP spots if the team loses.

He said it was too speculative to answer the question before the polls.

Singapore GE2020: Get full election coverage on our dedicated site here.

Source: Read Full Article

SINGAPORE – Education Minister Ong Ye Kung has removed a three-minute video from his Facebook page, featuring a young boy living in Sembawang, after he was informed the video violates election rules.

“I had a nice conversation with a boy Jony who lives in Sembawang about how it is a good place to grow up. Jony is a great sport, we had a good chat, and we put up a short (video),” said Mr Ong in a Facebook post on Thursday (July 2).

“However, we have been informed by authorities that this is not in line with electoral rules. We have therefore taken down the video. We are sorry for any inconvenience caused.”

The Parliamentary Elections Act prohibits primary and secondary school students from taking part in election activities between Nomination Day and Polling Day.

This means they are not allowed to appear in a video or take part in activities to promote a political party during this period.

“While this prohibition does not apply outside of this period, political parties should refrain from inappropriate use of young children who will not fully understand what they may be promoting or subjecting themselves to,” the Elections Department website says.

Mr Ong is running for re-election in Sembawang GRC, where he has been overseeing the Gambas ward.

The video shows Mr Ong in conversation with Jony, a boy in school uniform who lives in Sembawang Crescent.

“What are the places in Sembawang that you like?” Mr Ong asks him in the video.

He replies he likes Canberra Park, the beach and the hot springs park. And Mr Ong responds that “there was nothing” in that area before Sembawang GRC MP Lim Wee Kiak decided to “make this into a nice park”.

The minister also explains the concept of Build-to-Order (BTO) Housing Board flats to Jony.

“Sembawang is growing, with more and more people moving into Sembawang, because it is a happening place, it is a fun place,” Mr Ong says.

“I’m explaining all this to you so that you know, if you support us, these are all the things we will deliver and make life better for you.”

Jony then asks Mr Ong: “But what if you guys don’t get elected?”

This prompts Mr Ong to reply: “Good point.”

The video ends with the phrase “Sayang Sembawang” and “Make Sembawang Special” before the People’s Action Party (PAP) logo is shown.

Singapore GE2020: Get full election coverage on our dedicated site here.

Source: Read Full Article