|
|
2006-05-07 - 7:24 p.m. Was hovering at a forum, and decided to put pen some thoughts...much of it was in response to the general perception that Malay 'swing voters' had given the PAP their Aljunied victory. PS: AP stands for 'Alternative Party', which I have a preference for over 'Opposition Party'. ******************* I do think the AP should invest more effort in courting the Malay vote. I would like to point out, though, that the Malay minority in Singapore (currently standing at 14%) are NOT traditional supporters of the PAP. In the past, there were Malay-dominated constituencies in Geylang Serai, Kampong Kembangan, the Southern Islands and Pasir Panjang. Their choice of PAP candidates in these constituencies were mostly due to the PAP wooing the support of the Malay Left. Dr Lily Zubaidah Rahim has a very interesting analysis of this courtship strategy, and compares this to the PAP's dalliance with the Chinese-educated and the trade union workers, only to exterminate them once the PAP has risen to power. A lot of people point out the narrow victory of Cheng San GRC in 1997. The AP's share of votes (in a 5-man team that consisted of JBJ as well as Tang Liang Hong) was 45.18%. But an even narrow fight was witnessed in the 1991 GE, when Eunos GRC registered a 47.62% showing for the AP. The candidates who were standing included Lee Siew Choh, Mohd Jufrie Mahmood, Neo Chuan Aik and Wee Han Kim. Near the end of the campaigning period, and I quote here from an SDP statement: "In the 1991 GE, the PAP, for its own selfish ends, attacked a standard and customary remark ("God willing") by Opposition candidate, Mr Jufrie Mahmood. The instance showed that the ruling party had no compunction in using religious sentiment to win votes." I think the anxiety to defame Jufrie Mahmood was an attempt to paint him as a dangerous Malay chauvinist, in the process eroding his Malay support base by appealing to non-Malay voters and 'moderate Malays'. And from a report on a study of Minorities at Risk, in a section on the Chronology of the Malays in Singapore: "Although the PAP has always stressed that it is a multi-racial, non-communal party in terms of its leadership, membership, ideology and policies, it has never secured proportionally as much support from the minority Malay and Indian communities, as from the Chinese. Lee Kuan Yew has openly acknowledged that at least half the Malay electorate consistently votes against the PAP." In 1997 Eunos GRC was dissolved and its constituents distributed among Pasir Ris, Aljunied, East Coast and Tampines GRCs. It is widely acknowledged that these constituencies have Malay populations that are above the national average. One can see that in GE 2006 the PAP has gone all out in fielding Malay candidates of highest calibre in these constituencies. Pasir Ris-Punggol--Dr Ahmad Mohamad Magad
For the 14 seats that the PAP has won, the three lowest margins are for: 1) Aljunied--5.1% 2) Chua Chu Kang--10.4% 3) East Coast--13.9% I do not have actual demographic statistics at hand, but I think the proportion of Malay voters in Pasir-Ris Punggol have been sufficiently diluted by the inclusion of Punggol. There's a relatively strong showing for the PAP in Tampines, and part of it I think is due to the appeal of Masagos Zulkifli among the Malay electorate there. As a CEO of a GLC arm, he provides an aspirational (albeit technocratic) role model for Malay Singaporeans. Perdaus is also quite a powerful brand-name among Malay Singaporeans, as it is an association formed by the alumni of religious schools--in other words, the threatened madrasahs. I believe Malay voters were swayed in their endorsement of Mr Masagos because of two main factors: 1) The possibility of there being more proportional representation of Malay ministers in the cabinet. PM's hinting that Masagos might be an office-bearer sweetened the ground. We will have to wait and see whether he will be appointed into one of the more 'heavyweight' ministries or whether he will, like most Malay MP's, be relegated into one of the 'minor' offices--Environment, for example, or Community, Youth and Sports. I think the choice was obvious for many Malay voters--do they want an opposition 2) The closure of the madrasahs is a very sensitive issue for the Malay community, especially after SM Goh's proposal for compulsory education, his anxieties over the non-integration of madrasah students into the mainstream, as well as their perceived poor prospects for employment. Many Malays would like to believe that the presence as Masagos in Parliament would help preserve the madrasahs. I apologise for my skimpy analysis of the 'Malay vote' and I promise to do a fuller one in the near future. I offer a rudimentary summary of the factors that might have swung Malay voters towards the PAP: 1) The co-option of various Malay-Muslim grassroots bodies, voluntary/welfare bodies and self-help organisations, including MENDAKI, Perdaus, Majlis Pusat and 4PM. It is not a secret at all that many of these groups have entrenched links with the PAP. 2) The PAP's ability to recruit candidates with wide appeal to the Malay community. 3) The perception of the AP as Chinese-centric. The visibility of Mr Low Thia Kiang, as the figurehead of the AP, has probably cemented this impression. 4) The pro-PAP Malay media. Berita Harian, the only Malay newspaper in Singapore, has some of the most biased reports and analyses I have ever encountered. If you think the Straits Times and Channel News Asia are deplorable, you should pick up a copy of the Berita Harian. I have merely browsed through some of the articles and was quite stunned by the massive coverage they have given to the PAP. In one article, for example, they focussed on two tudung-wearing grassroots members who were participating in the election campaign. One was shown in a walkabout group, while another was portrayed preparing food. Needless to say, both women were PAP grassroots supporters. I intend to start translating some of these articles into English so more analysts can decide on the extreme non-objectivity of the Malay press. The Malay community has many grievances, many of which are the direct result of the PAP regime's policies. Some of these include non-conscription in the SAF from 1969-1973 (and limited conscription thereafter), which resulted in mass unemployment, youth alienation and the beginning of the drug problem (employers would not hire Malays who had not served their national service, and since the policy was not communicated to the public, no exemption certificates were distributed), the dilution of Malay-majority electoral blocs through gerrymandering and housing quotas, the fact that their parliamentary representatives are ineffective (which as some might remember prompted a call for a non-partisan 'collective leadership)...the list goes on: eviction of the royal bloodline from Istana Kampong Glam, the tudung issue, government support for regimes perceived as anti-Islam, the support provided for monoethnic SAP schools, the encroachment of the Speak Mandarin campaign into non-exclusively-Chinese media spaces, neglect of their indigenous status, etc. There is a strong sense of dispossession and marginalisation in the community. The strategy of the AP in courting the Malay vote would rest on several approaches: 1) Networking with Malay bodies that have still retained some measure of autonomy. The Association of Malay Professionals (AMP) is a good place to start. 2) Recruiting credible Malay candidates. It would be judicious to choose someone with impressive academic credentials and a professional track record, with a strong religious base. This is a radical suggestion, but the AP should consider fielding 2 Malay candidates in a 5-man or 6-man GRC in areas with large Malay populations. The Low Thia Kiang-Sylvia Lim combo has created a beautiful dialectical synergy that was appealing to many. An example of such a synergistic enterprise would be a Malay candidate from the old-school base (a teacher, religious leader, or language activist) and a young, English-educated Malay professional. Maybe one male and one female? This might be an effective challenge to the PAP dangling the ministerial candidate carrot. 3) Encouraging Malay voters to seek alternative sources of information other than from the mainstream Malay media. ******************* I recognise that many Malays come from the working-class segments of society. But this does not automatically mean that they are more persuaded by monetary enticements. The AP support base also constitutes many Chinese voters who come from the lower or middle classes. The voters from Potong Pasir and Hougang are illustrious examples of those who have not succumbed to vote-buying. Your suggestion that Malay voters cast their ballots as a result of being 'bought over' does not take into account their value system as a community. As a matter of fact, one of the most damning and emotive phrases in Malay is jual maruah or gadai maruah, which means to 'sell/pawn your dignity'. This phrase has often been used on Malay community leaders (and there are others too, like pak turut--'yes-man' as well tali barut, meaning a 'covert agent', or to put it crudely, 'running dog'. And quite honestly, Malays are some of the least materialistic people that I know, and I'm not just saying that because I am Malay myself. : ) You are entitled to your view, definitely, but a problem with the Malay community is that pro-PAP and PAP-linked organisations like MENDAKI are perceived in a very benign light (and are less vulnerable as targets than the secretive HDB, MOH, GLC's etc), because the State loves to create some equivalence between the work of MENDAKI and the general uplift of the Malay community (and it is a persuasive argument that there is direct causality--for example, via MENDAKI's low-cost tuition schemes and bursary handouts). There is little discussion, for example, of how the emergence of a Malay middle class is not due so much to interventionist approaches by self-help groups but a natural consequence of a national trend towards social mobility. The PAP is taking dubious credit. Anyway, the granting of scholarships is a bit suspect to me, because a traditional interpretation of Section 152 of the Constitution (which enshrines privileges for the indigenous community) is free (especially tertiary) education for all Malays. In a sense, the government is reneging on its responsibility to provide broad educational support for Malays, and compensates by the symbolic conferring of scholarship grants. One might argue that dangling scholarship carrots provides motivation for Malay students to excel academically, but why can't these be national scholarships which students of all races can have access to? There are many problems that have been created by the establishment of self-help organisations. Will there be more scholarships given out from CDAC than MENDAKI, presumably because the former has a greater pool of contributors? What is the value of each scholarship--would a minority student feel penalised for being of the wrong race and therefore ineligible for higher-value scholarships? And what do we do with those who don't fit into neat racial The work that needs to be done is to somehow bridge racial differences and expose these class commonalities. Only then can the AP enlarge its potential constituency. ******************* I'm not comfortable with the suggestion that Malays are so debt-ridden that any kind of financial reward offered to them translates into votes. I know people are upset by the Aljunied result, but until a proper demographic study is conducted, I think the blame should not be directed at a certain community. I would like to address certain concerns here regarding the visibility of Malays at rallies... Qn 1: Why do I perceive a lower percentage of Malay attendees at opposition rallies? Ans 1: The Malays, as a minority in Singapore, form only 14% of the population, against an overwhelming 78% Chinese. Ans 2: The time between 7 to 8 is more or less the time-window for the Maghrib prayers (Muslims pray five times a day). The time window for the Isyak prayers, on the other hand, starts around 8 plus and can extend until much later. After attending four WP rallies, I have noticed that they tended to let their minority candidates speak first, between the 7-8 time slot. This is perhaps because they think the crowd is not at its maximum capacity yet, and minority languages have limited reach. Imagine a Malay family attending a rally. They would prefer to perhaps perform their prayers and have dinner first before coming down. By the time they reach the venue, it is already 8 pm. The minority candidate has already spoken (it should be borne in mind that if one is nitpicky, one can say that the candidate had missed his Maghrib prayer for the purposes of speaking at the rally. Lose points already). The other speakers take their turns at the podium--speaking in English, Mandarin, Hokkien, Teochew... Ans 3: Which brings me to my third point. A family that attends said rally goes away with the impression that they are not being addressed. "The AP is Chinese-based." The WP, in their last rally, missed an important opportunity when the pledge was recited in English and Mandarin, but not Malay. This Malay family brings home a whole series of impressions, some not entirely accurate, about the AP, communicates such impressions to their friends and relatives, and a cycle is set in motion... Qn 2: Why do I perceive a greater percentage of Malay voters at PAP rallies? Ans 4: The camera zooms in on the reporter. It is a medium shot, and you can see some PAP supporters behind him. My theory is that such shots tend to be planted. I think the strategy is to zoom in on supporters whose markings of racial identity are unmistakable--so as to create the impression of a 'multiracial party'. Hence you have the Malay woman wearing the tudung (the typical sign of the Malay makcik heartlander), or else Sikhs wearing turbans. I have been making cracks about how in many photos of PAP supporters, there's always the standard tudung-wearing woman in the foreground. I wonder if she's the same woman used in every PAP photo-op. : ) I suggest a tudung-wearing woman next time following Low Thia Kiang wherever he goes, stuffing her face into the camera at every chance she gets. Ans 5: Many of these Malays come from grassroots organisations like Residents' Committees. It is not easy recruiting Malays into RC's, but the ones they manage to recruit tend to be very zealous--my theory is that RC-involvement serves as a proxy for the community-spiritness embodied by the gotong-royong spirit in now-vanished kampungs. Political affiliation comes naturally. I think the PAP very cleverly capitalises on this.
|