review insight 쐽 ★
Report card on Class of 2006
I
T HAS been two years and 10
months since the two dozen men
and women, decked out in spanking
new virginal whites, took their plac-
es in front of the cameras for their
first official public appearance.
Uncertain smiles in place, the rookie
candidates from the ruling People’s Ac-
tion Party (PAP) replied to questions
from the media with varying degrees of ar-
ticulation and confidence.
They were the precious 24, carefully
winnowed down from 270 potential candi-
dates after gruelling rounds of tea parties,
individual meetings with ministers and
formal interviews with the Cabinet.
Expectations of them were high.
An unprecedented number – half of
them – were born after 1965.
The move, as PAP second assistant sec-
retary-general Teo Chee Hean said then,
was aimed at keeping the party in step
with younger Singaporeans’ aspirations.
Beyond that was a bigger considera-
tion: Can they become Singapore’s future
leaders? After all, the next generation of
leaders must come from those born in
post-independence Singapore, Prime Min-
ister Lee Hsien Loong had said in his inau-
guration speech in 2004.
Now, 1,050 days after they were elect-
ed on May 6, 2006, the 24 politicians
have grown into their roles – again, with
varying degrees of ease.
Some have distinguished themselves
with thoughtful speeches in Parliament.
Others have become known as “grass-
roots” MPs, popular with constituents.
A few appear to be heading towards
the high-flying route as office-holders.
Yet, there were others who have had
more mixed reviews.
Insight spoke to about 25 politicians,
political observers, grassroots activists
and residents – excluding the 24 MPs
themselves – who gave their impressions
to form the following report card of the
class of 2006. A caveat must be added: It
is by no means meant to be a scientific
survey of the entire population.
Quantitative yardsticks
BUT first, the numbers.
Since the term began on Nov 2, 2006,
Parliament has been in session 72 times.
Sembawang GRC MP Ellen Lee has
been the most regular, turning up for all
72 sittings.
She is followed by Mr Lim Biow Chuan
(Marine Parade GRC) and Mr Christopher
de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC),
who attended 71, and Mr Liang Eng Hwa
(Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) with 70.
The MP who attended the fewest ses-
sions was Mr Lee Yi Shyan (East Coast
GRC), who as Minister of State for Trade
and Industry was often overseas on offi-
cial business.
Meanwhile, Marine Parade GRC MP Fa-
timah Lateef has been the most prolific,
in terms of the number of speeches made.
She has delivered a whopping 101
speeches, followed by Ms Lee Bee Wah
(Ang Mo Kio GRC) with 95, and Dr Lim
Wee Kiak (Sembawang GRC), 78.
These statistics do not fully represent
a politician’s performance in Parliament,
of course. Turning up does not mean full
attention is given to the debates; neither
can his or her impact be measured from
the number of speeches made.
But presence and speaking up in Parlia-
ment are clearly a basic criterion many
Singaporeans would set for their MPs.
Three years ago, Mr Henry Lim Li
Shun wrote to The Straits Times, ques-
tioning the number of empty seats seen at
parliamentary sittings. This year, another
Straits Times reader, Miss Rhea Tan,
raised the issue again, asking: “How can
an MP represent us if he is not present
sufficiently in Parliament?”
The grassroots type
NUMBERS aside, the best in the class
looks to be Jalan Besar MP Denise Phua,
whose name pops up most often among
the interviewees.
The mother of two, who quit her job as
a business consultant to co-found a
school for autistic children, has made her
mark in Parliament with her passionate –
sometimes critical – speeches on issues
from the disabled to high ministerial pay.
On the ground, she is also known for
fighting hard for her residents’ needs.
As veteran MP Chan Soo Sen puts it:
“I’m quite impressed by Denise Phua.
Among those who speak on social issues,
she comes across as the most sincere.”
She has also won the accolades of her
peers, with Mr Teo Ser Luck (Pasir
Ris-Punggol GRC) saying: “She is deter-
mined, compassionate and advocates
strongly for the disabled community.
“She is also not afraid to challenge the
status quo.”
Ms Phua falls into the category of the
grassroots-type MPs, notable for connect-
ing well with the people and whom the
party can count on to rally the ground.
To put it simply, they have “heart”.
In recent years, they have been best ex-
emplified by the likes of Mr Ong Ah
Heng, Mr Ang Mong Seng, Madam Hali-
mah Yacob and Dr Lily Neo.
In Parliament, they often champion so-
cial issues dear to their residents’ hearts.
Other newcomers who have stood out
as grassroots MPs include Ms Ellen Lee,
Mr Sam Tan (Tanjong Pagar GRC), Mr
Lim Biow Chuan and Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim, 40, the only post-65er in the
group, draws praise from general practi-
It is the mid-way mark of this current parliamentary term. How have the 24 first-term
MPs fared so far? Do they have what it takes to form the fourth generation of leaders?
Who has stood out and who has not? Political Correspondent Li Xueying reports.
PM Lee flanked by ministers Lim Boon Heng and Vivian Balakrishnan with the new candidates for General Election 2006. ST FILE PHOTO
Insight asked the 24 to look back on the past three years and reflect
on their strengths and weaknesses as MPs, as well as to share their
plans for the rest of the term:
ANG MO KIO GRC
MS LEE BEE WAH, 48
쐽 Strength: I am task-oriented, a
problem-solver and enjoy solving
problems with government agencies.
쐽 Weakness: My grassroots leaders think
I am too soft-hearted. I always go the
extra mile for my residents in need and
they worry it will affect my health.
쐽 Plans: I will continue to find ways to
make sure all the children in my ward receive proper
education, and help them to get out of the poverty trap.
DR LAM PIN MIN, 36
쐽 Strength: I would often think “out of
the box”, try out fresh ideas and make
things happen. My grassroots leaders
have imbibed the same mindset and
adopt the same philosophy whenever
they organise any event.
쐽 Weakness: My residents and grassroots
leaders have asked why I always look so
jovial and happy. They have never seen me lose my
temper over the three years. Unfortunately, this has
occasionally been “mistaken” as a “weakness” – being
too accommodating and tolerant.
쐽 Plans: My greatest challenge would be to address the
needs of my constituents during this economic downturn.
I am also working with local voluntary welfare as well as
religious organisations to give timely interim help.
JALAN BESAR GRC
MS DENISE PHUA, 49
쐽 Strength: I voice key challenges faced
by the “underdogs”, especially the
disabled and the needy. Tried my best to
not just identify problems but analyse the
root causes and offer solutions to
Government.
Exercised courage in speaking up on
sacred-cow issues such as public sector
pay and the “many helping hands” approach that may
diminish my own political capital in the party.
Built a steady and positive rapport with my residents
and grassroots activists.
쐽 Weakness: An over-developed sense of guilt when I fail
to get the desired outcomes for those whom I genuinely
believe need the help; and altruism.
쐽 Plans: To further use my corporate consulting skills to
make an impact in my pet interest areas: education,
manpower development and social services.
tioner Au Kah Kay as one who appears to
be “in touch with the common folk, hav-
ing grown up in a humble family”.
“I sense he can empathise and connect Email, sms us your views
with heartlanders,” says Dr Au, 48.
WHAT is your assessment of the 24
The debaters first-term MPs? Who has impressed
THEN there are some who have distin- you? And what would you like them to
guished themselves with sharp, thought- focus on for the rest of this term?
ful speeches that show mental acuity.
They tend to be the younger MPs who
are lawyers: Mr Michael Palmer (Pasir
Ris-Punggol GRC), Mr Hri Kumar Nair his good grasp of legal issues.
(Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC) and Mr de Mr Liang is singled out as one who
Souza. speaks out on economic issues.
Says Mr Chan: “The lawyers have done But a veteran PAP MP, who spoke on
quite well in terms of debating – people condition of anonymity, expresses disap-
like Michael Palmer and Hri Kumar.” pointment that he has “not been quite im-
A second-term MP who does not want pressed by this batch” in terms of their
to be named also praises Mr de Souza for performance in Parliament.
THE STRAITS TIMES SATURDAY, MARCH 21 2009 PAGE A32
HOLLAND-BUKIT TIMAH GRC
MR LIANG ENG HWA, 45
쐽 Strength: I enjoy working on the
ground and my close interaction with
residents has given me a good idea of
what they want and what I can do for
them.
쐽 Weakness: I have not yet fully
mastered the art of telling the painful
truth in a less painful way. Each week, I
would receive many requests for help from residents.
Often, I’d struggle within myself whether to come clean
about the chances of success.
쐽 Plans: Essentially, they are on two fronts. First, to
monitor closely the projects we have committed to, like
affordable childcare centres, and see that they are
completed as planned.
Second, I will push ahead with our
new three-year plan – to create a more
family-friendly and lifestyle-centric
heartland in Zhenghua.
MR CHRISTOPHER DE SOUZA, 33
Declined comment
PASIR RIS-PUNGGOL GRC
MR TEO SER LUCK, 40
쐽 Strength: Building rapport and being
mission-focused. It has helped me
achieve changes in the constituency by
focusing the grassroots organisations on
serving the residents, not just organising
events.
쐽 Weakness: Trying to do too much. I
have learnt to manage my time and
involvement to be effective in what to do.
쐽 Plans: Make a greater difference for my constituents. I
would continue to raise the bar for myself.
MR MICHAEL PALMER, 40
쐽 Strength: My legal training and
experience as a lawyer and also my
personality. I would like to believe I can
provide a listening ear to my residents
but at the same time analyse their issues
in a logical, independent manner.
쐽 Weakness: I would like to be able to
speak better Chinese and Malay.
쐽 Plans: Help residents see through this economic crisis as
best as possible. We have started beefing up our social
assistance schemes and networks but unfortunately, more
people are going to need help as things get worse.
“We were hoping that there will be the
Tan Soo Khoons and the Tan Cheng
Bocks who’d stand out for critical, origi-
nal and passionate speeches,” he says, re-
ferring to the retired firebrand MPs who
had crossed swords with their own party
within the chambers.
“Sure, the young ones make logical
speeches, but where is the passion? We
need them to come forward and state pas-
sionately what they stand for.”
The post-65ers
A THIRD group are those that have con-
nected well with younger Singaporeans
born after 1965 – a quality identified as
an urgent need in the party.
Mr Teo Ser Luck, who took over the
mantle as Young PAP (YP) chairman last
year, is mentioned as someone who has
made a discernible effort in this aspect.
Others cite Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tan-
jong Pagar GRC) for his speeches that re-
flect the thinking of younger, liberal Sin-
gaporeans.
Says former NMP Zulkifli Baharuddin:
“I give him credit for coming out early in
the game and using whatever political cap-
ital – which other MPs would be afraid of
using – to pursue issues like gay rights.”
Adds a 30-year-old civil servant: “He
has a distinct personality and views that
do not necessarily coincide with the par-
ty’s position, and manages to express
those views without coming across as at-
tacking his own party. It shows he has
the diplomatic and intellectual skills to
manage opposing viewpoints.”
Also in this category is YP vice-chair-
man Zaqy Mohamad (Hong Kah GRC).
The ground, especially the younger
crowd, seems to find him palatable.
Says Mr Ryan Lee, 42, who is self-
employed: “He’s hip and cool with peo-
ple, especially with the Malay-Muslim
community. And he’s popular with the
non-Malays too.”
The mixed reviews
OTHERS have received more mixed re-
views.
Ms Lee Bee Wah garners repeated men-
tions for her role as Singapore Table Ten-
nis Association president. She is criti-
cised for announcing after Singapore’s
team won an Olympic medal that its man-
ager’s services were no longer required.
In a typical comment, Dr Au says: “Ms
Lee Bee Wah left me with the most nega-
tive impression for her fiasco at the Olym-
pics over the Gao Ning incident.
“She lacks the political finesse, intelli-
gence and EQ expected of an MP. She sim-
ply blurts out whatever is on her mind
without thinking of the sensitivities and
political implications involved.”
But at the same time, Ms Lee receives
positive reports from her Nee Soon South
ward for being hard-working and driven.
Says a grassroots activist: “She’s too
hard-working, and you can even say, she
works people too hard!”
This has paid dividends.
Says Mr Jeffrey Law, 67, a former
grassroots leader in Ang Mo Kio GRC:
“She stands out for her down-to-earth
ways of doing things and also her prompt
response to residents’ needs.”
Dr Fatimah also received both bou-
quets and brickbats.
A 36-year-old media executive notes
approvingly that she has “made some
noise” in Parliament about the economy
and foreign workers.
At the grassroots level, though, a party
cadre observes that she has had some
trouble connecting with the Chinese tem-
ples in her ward over issues such as the
granting of permits for the holding of
events like gods’ birthday celebrations.
“This could be to the detriment of her
standing with residents who are Bud-
dhists or Taoists,” he says.
The big picture
ULTIMATELY, the big questions facing
the party leaders when assessing the class
of 2006 are: Have they been able to con-
nect with younger Singaporeans? Do they
have what it takes to form the fourth gen-
eration of leaders?
On the first, the younger MPs feel they
have done “reasonably well in engaging
young Singaporeans”.
As Ang Mo Kio GRC MP Lam Pin Min
points out, they have “tried many differ-
ent modalities in reaching out to younger
Singaporeans, from new media – such as
blogs, Facebook, et cetera – to the tradi-
tional dialogues, and even hip-hopping,
singing and in sports”.
Observers give credit for such efforts.
They say the MPs have succeeded in that
more younger voters now know of them.
As reinsurance broker Ho Kok Koon,
24, notes: “They have been more visible,
bringing fresh ideas to Parliament.”
But they also evince disappointment
with the substance of the connection so
far.
Mr Hazman Jamil, 33, a system deve-
lopment executive, blames it on this:
“Many of them – if not all – are high-
fliers and scholars, and cannot relate to
the common people on the ground.
I must say I do not feel connected.”
Take, for instance, the post-65 blog,
says another 30-something professional.
Its irregular updating can be seen as a
sign of post-election apathy and the lack
of total commitment to staying in touch
with younger Singaporeans, he adds.
“Ironically, it seems Siew Kum Hong
as a Nominated MP has been more vocal
than many of the elected MPs,” he adds.
They and others urge the younger MPs
to go beyond “the mere stylistics and cos-
metic branding”, as law academic Eugene
Tan puts it.
“They need to connect at the cognitive
and personal level and I don’t think we
have seen enough of that – well, not yet,”
he says. For instance, politically, the
younger MPs have imbibed the party atti-
tudes such that they are almost indistin-
guishable from the pre-65 MPs.
“In Parliament, they have not distin-
guished themselves at articulating the
younger generation’s perspectives, con-
cerns and thoughts on national matters.”
The young civil servant, for one, wish-
CONTINUED
ON PAGE A33