Thoughts on Singapore's 2011 Elections (Updated)

Last night, Singapore's People's Action Party secured 81 out of 87 seats in the General Elections winning 60.1% of the vote. What would pass as a landslide anywhere else in the world was viewed as a watershed election in Singapore by none other than PM Lee himself. The opposition WP won a 5 seat Group Representation Constituency (GRC) - beating a PAP team that included the respected and cerebral Foreign Minister George Yeo - and retained the single seat in Hougang. Amidst all that, the Opposition lost Potong Pasir (that has been in Opposition hands for 2 decades) by a whisker.

Although this will mark the beginning of a bigger role for the Opposition in Singapore politics, it is still be far from the end of PAP's 53 years (and counting) of governing Singapore which oversaw a 49 fold increase in GDP. A PAP government plus a more established Opposition seems to the state of affairs that suit most Singaporeans just fine. Even the WP wished and promised nothing more.

To be returned to government with 60% of the electorate is a very respectable majority, unless one's objective is complete political dominance. With total dominance no longer a reasonable or even desirable outcome for the PAP, its objective would be a "soft landing" from its half century of dominance. I won't be surprised if the strategists in the PAP regard a gradual transition to a new equilibrium where the PAP continues to govern along with a credible (but not too ambitious or successful) Opposition occupying 10%-12% of the seats as a long term "win" for the PAP. If Singaporeans voted for the idea of having opposition rather than for any particular party, person or platform, then what the PAP would hope for is to find that "golden mean" just enough to absorb the sentiments but not enough to replace the PAP in government.

That thinking was in fact underlined by the creation in the past decade of up to 10 non-constituency MPs for the top Opposition poll losers to join parliament. It is not as cynical as people might think, because this gives Opposition members a platform in between elections to demonstrate their abilities and get noticed - but without the demands of running town councils and managing the constituency. So the PAP was not against Opposition voices, but unlike the 6 who were elected, NCMPs were often not regarded as "real" MPs and not providing "real" opposition.

[A closer look at the pattern of votes seem to indicate that the 40% who voted Opposition were more of a vote against the PAP than any particular Opposition party or personality. Historically, 25-30% vote for anyone-but-PAP while I would say PAP's bedrock of support to be 35-40%. That leaves 30-40% as the "swing" voters depending on strength of Opposition candidates or weakness of the public sentiment for the PAP. Of the swing voters, Opposition stalwards or flag-bearers with good track record can attract another 20% on his own strength - because those 20% would vote Opposition if there is a credible candidate. Established - and more importantly electorally successful - Opposition leaders were therefore usually re-elected. The wild card is the remaining 10% - 20% swing voters that "lean" but not committed to the PAP which makes the difference in the PAP's margin or Opposition gains. In 2011, I estimate these were split half-half where as in previous years they backed the PAP. I believe the PAP will focus on winning those 20% back while the Opposition will try to build up credible incumbents.]

This general elections coincided with a marked shift in the PAP's political tactics. The official media has never been more hospitable to Opposition candidates - fair and even-handed even. The online media was even more deliberately liberalised because a tech-savvy global financial center like Singapore would not accept China-style controls anyway. Consequently, there have been fewer calls of foul-play or accusations of PAP dirty tricks like in the past.

In many ways, the PAP has changed and matured as much as the political expectations of Singaporeans have been changing. It would be a mistake to see the PAP as a political dinosaur. Apart from its policy of constant rejuvenation of its ranks with younger and younger people to keep pace with Singapore's demographic changes, it has also undergone a sea change from LKY's autocratic and uncompromising style to one that is more respectful, tolerant and compassionate. Nothing illustrates this better than PM Lee's admission and apology that the Singapore Government is not perfect but will always do its best to learn from mistakes. Far from showing weakness, I believe this sense of humility will be a source of lasting respect. Singaporeans do not generally want a change of government, just a better, kinder and gentler version of the one thay have.

In fact, the PAP has also been pretty good losers (and winners) this time round, by accepting that the PAP will listen to all the voices out there even those who disagree/voted against it, and improve from this experience. Contrast that with many other governments in the region, or even with the PAP in 1991 when the Opposition made unexpected gains in Goh Chok Tong's first election as PM; during the press conference that followed LKY was openly annoyed and disdainful for those who voted against the PAP. In fact, the PAP was probably damaged by LKY going off the script last week when he warned that people voting for the Opposition would "repent" for the next 5 years - which attracted an exesperated clarification from PM Lee himself.

At the same time, the integrity of the Singapore system stood-out: despite razor thin margins in some wards there was no suggestion that the PAP rigged the system or refuse to accept results against it. Singapore's meritocratic system was a winner because, arguably, the WP won the Aljuneid GRC when it fielded a strong team of credible people. In a sense, Singapore's Opposition has internalised the PAP's mantra by trying to show they van field good quality people on their side. In the past, the opposition often fielded lightweights or attention-seekers and then claim to be a victim of the PAP or being disadvantaged by the GRC system. Now the PAP and WP has shown that it is possible to play by the rules and win, and system has been vindicated having proven that what benefitted the PAP can also benefit the Opposition.

So, there will be some satisfaction on both sides. In the months ahead, the PAP will no doubt come out of its soul searching with a tremendous response. Be prepared for a PAP that is not only savvy in government but will be more attunated to the ground and have a better political PR operation between elections. The Singapore system is nothing if not for its ability to be self-critical, benchmark against the best and improve. The PAP has intellectual, organization and financial prowess on its side and it will make them count. The Opposition will try to demonstrate their value in Parliament and earn the respect of an electorate beyond being non-PAP. They will be held to the high standards that the PAP has set for politicians in Singapore. In light of the rising political maturity in PAP, the Opposition and the Singaporean people, there are new lessons from Singapore for many countries in the region in building a stable and responsible political system.