SINGAPORE, July 27 — Voters should not evaluate aspiring presidential hopefuls’ independence based on their past links with the Government as making such “artificial distinctions” would risk putting off good candidates and weaken the system in the long run, said Tharman Shanmugaratnam.
Instead, the public should judge candidates by their experience and quality, the presidential hopeful also said, adding that his two potential rivals are “worthy candidates with positive attributes”.
If elected as the next president, Tharman said he will not only bring deep experience and track record to Singapore’s highest office but also integrity and independence of mind, values which he added he has been known for throughout his life.
The former Senior Minister made these points on yesterday when officially launching his platform for the upcoming Presidential Election and unveiling his team of proposer, seconder and assenters for his candidacy at a press conference.
“Especially when it comes to the President’s powers, on the spending of past reserves, on every aspect of fiscal policy that impinges on our reserves, and when it comes to making key appointments in the system, in the public service, that integrity and independence of mind is critical,” said Mr Tharman, who first made public in June his intent to contest for Singapore’s highest office.
Two other aspiring candidates have since then also thrown their hats into the ring — businessman George Goh and former GIC chief investment officer Ng Kok Song.
Both Goh and Ng have repeatedly played up the fact that unlike Tharman, they have no past affiliations with the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).
With his wife Jane Ittogi by his side, Tharman also introduced his slate of backers, comprising a proposer, seconder and eight assenters.
All of them have a “track record of leadership in their own walks of life”, including public service, the arts, business and community work, he said.
The panel each took turns sharing anecdotes of their various interactions with Tharman and how his positive attributes and capabilities have shone through those interactions, ranging from his work on the ground and his work on the international stage.
Lim Siong Guan, former group president of GIC and former head of civil service, spoke about Tharman’s “very sharp, very agile” mind and candidly shared how he had some concerns when the latter first forayed into politics.
“I had my doubts about whether he’ll be able to successfully make it because you know, there’s so many people who have such superior intellect that find enormous difficulty connecting with ordinary people,” said Lim, one of the eight assenters.
He added that as it turned out, the concerns were unfounded as “the honesty, the humanness” with which Tharman treated others have allowed him to easily connect with people on the ground, and he made things happen to tend to their needs.
Yesterday’s press conference was originally described as a “campaign launch” but the organisers later told the media that the event was held to launch Tharman’s “platform” and introduce his proposer, seconder and assenters as “the official electoral campaign does not start until after Nomination Day”.
Under Singapore’s electoral rules, the campaign period starts after nomination proceedings end on Nomination Day, the date for which has yet to be announced.
The following are some extracts of the responses by Tharman to questions at the press conference, edited for clarity and length:
Timing of campaign
Question: Why are you unveiling your campaign before the writ of election is issued? And secondly, while you’re no longer part of the service, with the recent spate of political events, do you think they will impact your campaign and possibly cause you to lose some votes?
Tharman: On timing, I haven’t started an electoral campaign of going around handing out leaflets or putting up posters or anything like that. There will be a time for that and everyone will be doing that after Nomination Day.
I want to make no secrets of why I’m standing for presidency and my whole purpose. And I want, in the context of the debate that’s already started, to shape that discussion.
I want to shape the discussion in the way I believe is right for Singapore and I have my foot forward on the battle.
View on other candidates
Question: You previously mentioned that you prefer to have a contest, but right now you’re the only one who automatically “qualifies”. What are your thoughts on a scenario where the others don’t qualify and it’s a walkover?
On the flipside, if the other two do qualify, some people are saying that Ng is a middle ground candidate, with some ties to the establishment but no party ties. What are your thoughts on that?
Tharman: Of course, I remain of the view that a contest will be healthy. I’ve always wanted it and I hope that you will have at least one candidate qualifying, if not more, but it’s not for me to say.
I believe, as I mentioned earlier, that this has to be a contest on the positive attributes that each candidate brings.
And I believe Singaporeans are able to judge on the basis of those positive attributes. And this will be a good contest. It’s not for me to say exactly who qualifies.
Independence of mind and ‘artificial distinctions’
Question: The two other presidential hopefuls have been saying they’re totally independent of the party (PAP). So I wonder what is Tharman’s response to that, especially in light of the scandals and sagas that have happened as well as questions over integrity as well as trust?
Tharman: Frankly, I don’t blame any other candidate for saying that independence from a political party should be an issue. I think they’re doing this to distinguish themselves, it’s understandable.
But I would take care with this issue. There is a difference between independence of any past affiliation with a political party and independence of mind, character and convictions.
There is a big difference.
Consider (former President) Mr Ong Teng Cheong. He was a minister for many years, Deputy Prime Minister and chairman of the PAP for 12 years, (before he) stepped down and stood shortly after in the Presidential Election. No one regards him as having been less independent because of his past association and leadership within the PAP.
It comes down to character. It comes down to being independent-minded. I would say, just like Mr Ong Teng Cheong, I am advantaged by having been in politics.
As I’ve explained, I’m greatly advantaged on having spent 22 years on the ground, developing real initiatives, understanding people’s aspirations, sharing their joys and sorrows, making life better on the ground, unifying people.
I’m advantaged by the political experience of having worked on policies and understood the complexities of running a government in Singapore and playing an international role for Singapore.
It’s my advantage and it was Mr Ong Teng Cheong’s advantage as well.
I would add as a more serious point, take care that we’re not weakening the system for the long term if we’re going to start judging the eligibility of candidates or their suitability according to whether they have a past relationship with the Government.
Think of all the top civil servants. Think of all the persons or under the Constitution eligible to be President under the public service track.
Do we think of them less independent simply because they hold senior positions of the public service on account of the Prime Minister or his Cabinet? Or on the advice of the Prime Minister? Surely not.
I have known so many good people in the service with that same integrity and independence of mind. You shouldn’t rule them out.
So let’s not draw these artificial distinctions based on the past affiliations. Let’s look at the positive attributes of each candidate.
In fact, two (other) candidates so far, in my opinion, are worthy candidates who bring positive attributes. That’s what we should judge them on.
‘Non-partisan’ by nature
Question: After being in politics for so many years, do you find it very challenging to detach yourself now from political parties to run for President with an emphasis on being independent from any political parties, affiliation and association, especially when you need to explain this to Singaporeans?
Tharman: So detaching myself from the political party is what I’ve done.
I think everyone knows me. The Opposition knows me as well. They know that I’m, by nature, non-partisan.
And I have no doubt at all that in my new role, I’ll be able to rise above politics, because that’s been my makeup all along. — TODAY
