TODAY: Ripples but Yaw retains post

TREVOR TAN
NEW CEC MEMBERS: (From left) Ms Lilian Lee, Mr Png Eng Huat and Mr Koh Choong Yong.

EVEN as discontent over his re-appointment surfaced online, Workers’ Party member Yaw Shin Leong retained his post last night as organising secretary in the party’s Central Executive Committee.

Mr Yaw, 32, who made headlines in May after blogging that he voted for People’s Action Party MP Teo Ho Pin in the last elections, was apparently at the centre of debate on Sunday, when cadre members voted at the CEC election.

But Mr Yaw does not think older members object to his reappointment.

“I don’t think they’re paying any attention to the so-called controversy. I merely made known to the Chinese-educated members the things that transpired so far … and my eventual introspection on the matter,” said Mr Yaw, who has since blogged that he would no longer vote for the ruling party.

He told reporters after a two-hour meeting last night that he would continue to contribute, as he remains “convicted about the cause”. Calling his role “a massive responsibility”, he vowed to “discharge (it) to the best of (his) ability”.

The CEC has also appointed another member as organising secretary: Ms Ng Swee Bee, 27, was previously the deputy treasurer.

Three new CEC members were also blooded into new roles. Mr Koh Choong Yong, who runs an IT consultancy, will assume the role of webmaster and will be assisted by businessman Png Eng Huat. Recruitment manager Lilian Lee, 29, is the new deputy treasurer.

Party chairman Sylvia Lim said, with the infusion of the three new CEC members, the party remains on track in its renewal process and would continue with its outreach efforts. - LEONG WEE KEAT AND ZUL OTHMAN

Straits Times: Under fire but WP leader re-elected

He retains post in CEC despite flak over his voting for PAP man in 2006 General Election

BY SUE-ANN CHIA & JEREMY AU YONG

WORKERS’ Party leader Yaw Shin Leong has retained his post in the Central Executive Committee (CEC) despitesome objections from within the party ranks.

According to party sources, Mr Yaw got a lot offlak during the CEC election on Sunday for making public in May that he had voted for the People’s Action Party (PAP) in the 2006 General Election.

Still, he garnered enough votes to stay on the CEC, the party’s decision-making body.

And, last night, when the leadership line-up for the next two years was finalised, Mr Yaw was named to his old post of organising secretary.

However, an extra organising-secretary post was added to the CEC, which now has 14 members. Holding the position is the former deputy treasurer, Ms Ng Swee Bee, 28.

Commenting on his re-appointment last night, Mr Yaw said: “This is a massive responsibility to discharge and I really respect the decision of the cadres.”

Earlier, on Monday, he downplayed the criticism, saying that some cadres just wanted him to explain his actions.

The 32-year-old businessman told The Straits Times: “Some cadres wanted to know exactly what transpired…So I gave them a brief summary of all that had happened and they accepted my explanation.”

He had revealed in his blog that he had voted for the PAP’s Dr Teo Ho Pin over the Singapore Democratic Party’s Mr Ling How Doong in the Bukit Panjang constituency, as he believed in voting for the better candidate.

The disclosure earned him criticism as well as praise.

However, he changed his mind last month. He saidthat his actions contradicted the efforts to urge voters to value the choice provided by opposition candidates.

When asked about the re-appointment, party chairman Sylvia Lim gave a non-committal reply: “Basically, he got re-elected by the cadres. I can’t tell you what was on the minds of the cadres at that time, but that was their decisionand that is how the party functions.”

The new CEC saw no changes at the top: Ms Lim, a Non-Constituency MP, remained chairman and Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang, the secretary-general.

Bank manager Eric Tan, 52, also kept the treasurer post.

However, Ms Lim said, the party was continuing its leadership renewal process and pointed to three new faces on the CEC.

But this was fewer than the seven introduced in July 2006, who replaced half the CEC.

The current newcomers are Mr Koh Choong Yong, 35, who runs an IT consultancy; businessman Png Eng Huat, 47; and human resource trainer Lilian Lee, 29.

Mr Koh is the webmaster, Mr Png, the deputy webmaster and Ms Lee, the deputy treasurer.

Said Mr Png:”As a CEC member, I hope to raise the party’s profile as a credible opposition.”

Meanwhile, the party has lost two young CEC members: senior sales coordinator Abdul Salim, 27, and editorial and translation executive Lee Wai Leng, 29.

Both were in the six-man team that contested Ang Mo Kio GRC in the 2006 polls.

sueann@sph.com.sg
jeremyau@sph.com.sg

TODAY: New blood in Workers’ Party

ZUL OTHMAN
zul@mediacorp.com.sg

THEY were the two youngest Workers’ Party candidates and stood against the Prime Minister’s team in the Ang Mo Kio Group Representation Constituency at the last General Election.

On Sunday, editorial and translation executive Lee Wai Leng, 28, and sales personnel Abdul Salim bin Harun, 26, were replaced in the WP leadership by newer but older members, who joined the party around or after the time of the polls.

With 11 WP Central Executive Committee members voted back to the fold - including secretary-general Low Thia Khiang, chairman Sylvia Lim and organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong - the injection of new blood came in the form of three new CEC members.

Mr Koh Choong Yong, 34, who runs his own IT consultancy, recruitment manager Lee Li Lian, 29, and businessman Png Eng Huat, 47, were voted in after a three-hour closed-door meeting at the party’s headquarters at Syed Alwi Road.

WP chairman Ms Lim declined to “speculate” about the reasons for the change, as “I am unable to tell you what was in each cadre member’s mind when he or she voted”, but the new faces have become well-known figures within the WP since they joined.

Mr Koh and Ms Lee are members of the WP Youth Wing Executive Committee while Mr Png is one of the grassroots members at the Hougang constituency.

When contacted about his election, Mr Png told Today: “Last time, I was just helping out; now I need to put in more effort because there is a lot of responsibility to institutionalise political diversity and to make Singapore aware that there are always two sides to a coin.”

Making a return to the CEC are Ms Glenda Han, 30, Ms Jane Leong, 45, Mr Mohd Rahizan bin Yaacob, 50, Ms Ng Swee Bee, 26, Dr Poh Lee Guan, 44, Mr Brandon Siow, 31, Mr Eric Tan, 50, Mr Perry Tong, 35 and Mr Yaw, 32.

The exacts posts of the 14 members - all of whom were present at Sunday’s meeting - will only be decided at a CEC meeting tonight.

Straits Times: 4 schools of opposition politics

Mr Low Thia Khiang succeeded Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam as Workers’ Party chief in 2001. Eight years earlier, Dr Chee Soon Juan took over the Singapore Democratic Party from Mr Chiam See Tong.

No transition was smooth.

In both style and substance, Mr Low and Dr Chee are hardly political heirs to the opposition veterans who once inspired and mentored them.

Instead, Mr Low seems to have taken a leaf out of Mr Chiam’s book, focusing on specific policy issues rather than condemning the system as a whole. In 2006, Mr Low succeeded Mr Chiam as unofficial leader of the opposition in Parliament.

Dr Chee, on the other hand, appears to have more in common with Mr Jeyaretnam. Both are strident in their criticisms against laws that, in their view, “disempower” people and “diminish” the electoral system. Over the years, the four opposition leaders have developed their own distinctive styles of politics. What best describes each approach? How have they succeeded, and where do they fall short?

Zakir Hussain finds out.

---

SLOW AND STEADY WINS THE RACE

LOW THIA KHIANG, 51

>> 1988 Tiong Bahru GRC 42.2%
>> 1991 Hougang 52.8%
>> 1997 Hougang 58%
>> 2001 Hougang 55%
>> 2006 Hougang 62.7%

>> Nurturing the ground

Mr Low has “focused a great deal on nurturing ties at the local level” even as he presents himself as a check on government, says academic Dr Gillian Koh.

The Hougang MP, who first entered Parliament in 1991, has meals in his constituency market, accepts wedding invitations and attends wakes.

His Hougang Constituency Committee organises celebrations at major festivals, parties for residents, and pulls together aid for needy residents. The focus on local needs saw him up his vote share by close to eight percentage points in the 2006 General Election.

>> Staying low-key

Mr Low has declined most media interviews in his 20 years as opposition MP.

In 1994, when then-senior minister Lee Kuan Yew singled him out as a “good MP” and “the only one worth listening to”, his only comment to the media was to thank Mr Lee, and say: “I think it is not for him to judge. It is for Singaporeans to judge, especially my constituents, whether I am good or worth listening to.”

The flip side of his low-key approach? Detractors say it has not dented the ruling PAP’s dominance.

>> Bread and butter rather than human rights

Since Mr Low took over the Workers’ Party in 2001, the WP has become more focused on bread and butter issues, rather than issues of freedom and democracy. In Parliament, issues he has raised include increases in the goods and services tax, the rising cost of living, and the Mas Selamat escape. He has been careful to get his facts right.

>> Building up the party

Mr Low has attracted more professionals to join the WP, like law lecturer Sylvia Lim.

“Together with Sylvia Lim, he appears to be very slowly but steadily building up a political party that is respected by Singaporeans, avoiding anything that could derail it,” says political blogger Gerald Giam.

Some WP members have left, unhappy with the pace of change and attempts to regulate members’ conduct online. But the party retains a solid team at its core.

>> Watchdog role

Mr Low sees his role as one to scrutinise government policies and Bills, and to reflect the views of the man in the street “in a rational and responsible manner”. As he put it: “I play the role of a watchdog to check whether the Government has delivered its promises or has short-changed the people.”

He is “sharp and quick in pouncing on loose statements from the front bench”, notes PAP MP Charles Chong.

---

WHAT NEXT?

CAN the mixed record of opposition politics over the past 40 years shed light on its future?

Observers note that where electoral results are concerned, the accommodative approach of Mr Chiam and Mr Low has held up better than the combative politics of Mr Jeyaretnam and Dr Chee.

But the various styles - and their results - are likely to remain for some time yet.

“So long as the Group Representation Constituency system is intact, and the PAP continues to believe Singapore would be better off without an institutionalised parliamentary opposition, realpolitik needs to be appreciated,” said Associate Professor Hussin Mutalib of the National University of Singapore’s political science department.

“Such a system favours opposition politicians and parties that ‘ride’ the mainstream political wave…rather than confront it head on.”

“This is not the ideal, but so long as voters cannot devise an ‘alternative politics’…they will have no other viable choice but to work within the status quo in the foreseeable future,” he said.

MP Charles Chong takes a different view, noting that voters here “appear put off by extremism”.

“Alternative views expressed in moderate and sensible ways seem to have greater appeal to an increasingly sophisticated electorate, compared to extreme positions and silly antics,” he said.

There will always be those against the establishment regardless of what it does, and there will always be those who are pro-establishment.

“The party that can win the broad middle ground will invariably do much better than those who can appeal only to the two extremities,” he added.

All four schools, however, share one common goal: Breaking the PAP monopoly and establishing a multi-party democracy.

Said Dr Russell Heng, associate senior fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies: “All four are people who dare to lose and, somehow, we have never celebrated that.

“They also have a certain doggedness which seems to be a rare thing among opposition figures, which is why the opposition is weak.

“These four have kept at it.”

Straits Times: WP leader now regrets voting for PAP candidate

Yaw Shin Leong says change of heart partly prompted by criticism against him

BY SUE-ANN CHIA

ONLINE STORM: Workers’ Party organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong (above) had voted for Dr Teo Ho Pin in the Bukit Panjang ward.

WORKERS’ Party (WP) leader Yaw Shin Leong, who won praise and criticism alike for disclosing that he had voted for the People’s Action Party (PAP) in the 2006 General Election, now regrets the decision.

The 32-year-old businessman said his change of heart came after “introspection and contemplation” as he prepared to mark eight years of activism with the WP on June 24.

“I have woken up from this matrix-like slumber. Voting for a candidate from the ruling regime based on my shallow personal liking and consideration had contravened the very ideals which I had originally entered opposition politics for,” he said in the latest posting on his blog.

“It also contradicted our efforts in urging voters to value the choice provided by opposition candidates.”

The Bukit Panjang resident said he would not vote for his MP, Dr Teo Ho Pin, at the next election, and urged Singaporeans to “vote in solidarity to deny the PAP”.

Mr Yaw, the WP’s organising secretary, was caught in the eye of an online storm last month after saying that he had voted for Dr Teo over the Singapore Democratic Party’s Mr Ling How Doong.

Dr Teo was the better candidate, he had said, adding: “There is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community.”

That disclosure sparked criticism from opposition supporters who attacked him for voting for the “other side”, and for sending conflicting signals.

He was, after all, head of the six-man WP team which stood against a PAP team led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in Ang Mo Kio GRC.

But others praised him for his political maturity.

Mr Yaw said, when contacted on Wednesday, that his change of heart was also prompted by the criticism he faced.

Friends scolded him for letting them down. And strangers called or told him during his walkabouts that he had disappointed them.

“I realised I had sent a confusing message to supporters,” he told The Straits Times. “Being an opposition member, I must put the need for pluralism as a higher priority than voting for a better municipal MP.”

While party leaders did not rap him, WP chief and Hougang MP Low Thia Khiang did tell Mr Yaw that in voting for the better candidate, he had fallen into “the propaganda trap of the PAP”.

Mr Yaw said in his blog that the main consideration for many who voted for the WP was “the need to have a balanced political system and a voice in Parliament…”

And he accepted criticism that had Ang Mo Kio voters adopted his “better candidate” argument, “my team would not even come close to securing 33.86 per cent of the votes”.

Despite what he said in his blog, Mr Yaw told The Straits Times that he did not want Singaporeans to vote for the opposition at all cost too.

He said: “I encourage Singaporeans to vote with their conscience. If they really feel that the opposition candidates are not deserving, don’t support them.”

Political observer Eugene Tan said Mr Yaw’s latest post showed he had decided to put on the hat of an opposition politician instead of being just a “responsible voter”.

sueann@sph.com.sg

New Paper: Opposition candidate stirs Net debate when he says he voted PAP. MP says: I knew because he told me

By Karen Wong

NEWS that Workers’ Party (WP) candidate Yaw Shin Leong voted for Dr Teo Ho Pin came as no surprise to the People’s Action Party (PAP) MP himself.

Dr Teo, Mayor of the North West district, had known that WP candidate Yaw Shin Leong was going to vote for him, even before Nomination Day in the 2006 General Election (GE).

When The New Paper called him yesterday to find out if he knew about Mr Yaw’s vote, Dr Teo replied matter-of-factly: “He told me himself, when I visited him at a block visit before the GE that he and his mother were going to vote for me.”

That was a couple of weeks before the nine-day campaigning started, recalled Dr Teo.

“That’s his choice. He has every right to decide who to vote for. I won’t say I was very surprised but I appreciate his gesture.”

Dr Teo said that after Mr Yaw told him that he will vote for him, he then passed him a copy of WP’s election manifesto.

“It was quite an interesting encounter,” he added.

Mr Yaw, who is organising secretary of WP, has found himself at the centre of a heated Internet debate, after he revealed that he had voted for Dr Teo in the 2006 GE in his blog.

Some of the accusations that the Internet community has flung at him include “contradictory” and “hypocritical”.

NO CONTRADICTION

But Mr Yaw himself does not see any contradiction in being an opposition member and voting for the ruling party.

In the 2006 GE, Dr Teo was the PAP candidate at single-seat ward Bukit Panjang. Running against him was Singapore Democratic Party’s Ling How Doong. In the end, Dr Teo, trumped his opponent, winning 77.2 per cent of the vote.

Mr Yaw himself had led the WP slate of candidates in Ang Mo Kio GRC - against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s team.

The heated Internet discussion began on local forum Sammyboy last week, which pointed to a screen shot of Mr Yaw’s blog where the latter had included a link to Dr Teo’s blog.

On that link, Mr Yaw added the postscript of Dr Teo: “Good MP. I voted for him in GE06.”

The person, who started the thread on 8 May, said:

“A leading opposition candidate from the Workers’ Party, who stood in the election against none other then PM Lee Hsien Loong, actually voted the PAP rather than… the opposition!”

The netizen also called Mr Yaw’s act “hypocritical” of an opposition member.

A couple of people also speculated that Mr Yaw was trying to “spite” SDP by “bragging” about his vote on his blog.

Mr Yaw told The New Paper: “It doesn’t mean that you’re at the forefront of the opposition means you have to vote for the opposition.

“It also doesn’t mean that just because you are in opposition politics, you must also oppose everything. I believe in voting for the deserving candidate regardless of the party.”

He pointed out that Dr Teo knows the ground well and works really hard for the people and that was why he voted for him.

When asked why he even revealed his vote on his blog, Mr Yaw said: “I was just stating my views. We should strive towards this level of transparency in political discourse.”

Of the attention he has been receiving in cyberspace, Mr Yaw said: “I’m pleasantly stunned. I read some really good comments, both opposing and supporting my view.”

WHAT POSSESSED HIM?

When approached for comments, WP’s chairman Sylvia Lim, a Non-Constituency MP, said: “We respect that our members have the right to decide how to exercise their vote.

“However, we would expect that if they live in a constituency which WP is contesting in, they would vote for the WP candidate(s).”

Political observer Gillian Koh’s first reaction to Mr Yaw’s revelation that he had voted for Dr Teo was: “What possessed him to reveal that?

“It was quite unnecessary and not in the least politically advantageous for him to do so. It would have been naive of him if he thought it was.”

On Mr Yaw’s view that he did not believe in opposing for the sake of it, Dr Koh, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, commented: “One thing that is a bit more subtle or too subtle, is that WP sees itself as an alternative political party and not an opposition party.

“So they always maintain that they do not oppose for the sake of opposing.

“They may also be persuaded to take the PAP line based on the merit of the case. That is the WP line.”

In view of the brickbats he has been getting, does Mr Yaw regret publicising his vote in the first place? “No regrets,” was his emphatic reply.

Straits Times: I voted for PAP in 2006 election: WP candidate

Opposition party leader Yaw Shin Leong draws online flak for revelation in his blog

BY SUE-ANN CHIA

HOW should an opposition leader vote in a general election (GE), especially one who is contesting the polls?

Workers’ Party leader Yaw Shin Leong voted for the ruling People’s Action Party candidate in the 2006 GE - and has now found himself in the eye of an online storm.

Mr Yaw, a Bukit Panjang resident, had revealed in his blog that he voted for the PAP’s Teo Ho Pin who was contesting the single-member constituency (SMC) against Singapore Democratic Party chairman and former opposition MP Ling How Doong.

The disclosure was just a one-liner: Teo Ho Pin (MP) - Good MP. I voted for him in GE06.

And it was hyperlinked to Dr Teo’s blog.

However, it soon appeared on a popular online forum and sparked a furore among netizens who registered more than 100 postings.

Many attacked him for voting for the other side and making public his vote. One posting called him a “political opportunist and hypocrite” for doing so.

They also criticised him for sending conflicting signals.

Mr Yaw, the WP’s organising secretary, had led a team in 2006 to contest against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his team of five in Ang Mo Kio GRC.

Said a netizen: “He was a candidate contesting against PAP and rallying for voters to vote against PAP in one constituency, but himself voting for PAP in another.”

But Mr Yaw, 33, in defending his actions, said he voted for the better candidate.

His latest blog entry, posted on Monday, said: “I do not believe in opposition for opposition’s sake.

“There is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community (Bukit Panjang SMC).”

He also said, in reply to comments made on his blog, that “in view of Mr Ling’s past performance and antics, I just could not bring myself to vote for him”.

When contacted yesterday, Dr Teo said he appreciated Mr Yaw’s support. “It is his personal choice,” he added.

Political observer and law lecturer Eugene Tan believed Mr Yaw did what was right.

“It is a responsible and principled approach to voting that entrenches democracy and ensures that Singapore will continue to have good leaders,” he said.

sueann@sph.com.sg

---

THE RIGHT TO DECIDE

“We respect that our members have the right to decide how to exercise their vote. However, we would expect that if they live in a constituency which WP is contesting, they would vote for the WP candidate.”

WP CHAIRMAN SYLVIA LIM, on Mr Yaw (above) voting for PAP’s Dr Teo rather than SDP’s Mr Ling

Weekend TODAY: WP: Only S’poreans work at Hougang Town Council

NEO CHAI CHIN
chaichin@mediacorp.com.sg

THE Workers’ Party has responded to Member of Parliament Seng Han Thong’s May Day challenge and has put on record that all its staff at the Hougang Town Council are Singaporeans.

At the same time, WP said it is not against the employment of foreigners; its concern is that the dignity and societal position of Singaporean workers be upheld.

The town council does not object to its contractors deploying foreign workers in the estate, for example, said the WP’s organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong (picture) in a press release.

The People’s Action Party’s Mr Seng, who is also assistant secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress, had asked WP to set a national example by hiring only Singaporeans at its town council.

The spirited exchange was triggered by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Lim Boon Heng’s remark that “a sweet, young beer girl from China” drew more patrons to her coffee shop, thus helping an older Singaporean to keep her job. WP pounced on the implication that Singaporeans are dependent on foreigners to keep their jobs.

In its release on Friday, WP said, “Mr Seng has conveniently forgotten to address WP’s questions about his ex-boss Minister Lim’s insensitive comments. Instead, he side-steps them by querying whether all employees of the Hougang Town Council are Singaporeans.”

Referring to its May Day message, the party said it had said: “The Government’s attitude should be to put Singaporeans first; secondly, we should resist any erosion of Singaporeans’ societal standing; and thirdly, it’s the Government’s responsibility to show compassion for the plight of the workers facing the pressure of high inflation.”

In reply to WP’s latest comments, Mr Seng said the opposition “has shifted its position on the issue on foreigners”.

“The WP has implied earlier that foreigners are breaking the rice bowl of Singaporean workers. If WP truly believes in helping Singaporeans, then it should offer all of its work to Singaporeans, and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners,” he said.

Mr Seng said an “inclusive approach” was preferred when it came to labour supply.

“The societal position of Singaporeans has never been in question. Nonetheless, we believe that all workers should be treated with dignity,” he said.

Weekend TODAY: What I meant by my silence: Low

LOH CHEE KONG
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg

SWITCHING effortlessly between Teochew and Mandarin, Opposition leader Low Thia Khiang laughed heartily, listened intently and spoke animatedly at his Hougang Meet-The-People session on Wednesday evening.

For close to three hours, Mr Low attended to his residents.

However, he switched instantly to battle mode when this reporter, who turned up uninvited, asked him about the debate with the Prime Minister in Parliament last month on Mas Selamat’s escape.

“The question by the Prime Minister is an unnecessary question. I have not called for the resignation of the minister. Is that not an obvious answer to you?” he told Weekend Today.

The Workers’ Party chief had said he could not reconcile the principle of pegging ministerial pay to that of the corporate sector when ministers are not held to the same accountability.

But when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong asked him pointedly if his deputy, Mr Wong Kan Seng, who is also the Home Affairs Minister, should resign over the Mas Selamat fiasco, Mr Low - in contrast to his usual combative style - kept silent.

Why didn’t he point out to Mr Lee then that he was not calling for Mr Wong to resign?

“I’ve answered that. I thought it was an unnecessary question (by Mr Lee),” was his reply.

In fact, it was Mr Lee who had failed to answer his question on “minister responsibility vis-a-vis ministerial pay”, he pointed out.

Mr Lee had said that even in the private sector, lapses have to be seen in perspective. He had also said Mr Low was attempting to cloud the issue since the Prime Minister was given “full opportunity” to establish whether Mr Wong was culpable for the mistake.

Insisting that his question “had nothing to do with” whether Mr Wong should resign, Mr Low was puzzled why Mr Lee linked his question to the calls for Mr Wong’s head to roll.

Said Mr Low: “The Government uses the same principle (as the private sector) but different standards. Is that a case of double standards? That was what I wanted him to clarify.”

Still, the exchange - or non-exchange - made it to the front page of The Straits Times. It was further dissected and scrutinised not just in coffeeshop discussions, but on blogs and Internet forums.

While some netizens felt the episode had been blown out of proportion, others criticised Mr Low - and the effectiveness of Opposition MPs - for failing to take the Government to task.

Postgraduate law student Dharmendra Yadav wrote in Weekend Today last week that Mr Low, as an Opposition leader, “owes Singaporeans an explanation as to why he chose to remain silent in the face of an opportunity to be decisive and to show what a leader can and should do”.

“Why, Mr Low? Why?” Mr Yadav had asked.

But an academic, who did not want to be named, said: “Why what? It seems as if suddenly, Mr Low has a duty in Parliament to endorse the desire of those Singaporeans who want to see heads roll.”

Throwing his arms up and shrugging his shoulders, Mr Low said: “A lot of people are jumping up and down but I really don’t understand why.”

So, does he think Mr Wong should quit?

Mr Low said: “Well, the fact is that I have not called for the resignation of Wong Kan Seng … That is enough for me to answer you.”

Straits Times: Workers’ Party and NTUC spar over foreign workers

BY SUE-ANN CHIA

THE Workers’ Party (WP) and the labour movement engaged in a battle of words over the issue of foreign workers yesterday.

The exchange had been sparked by labour MP Seng Han Thong’s criticism on Thursday of the opposition party’s May Day message.

It had questioned if Singaporeans “truly benefited” from the job boom, as six in 10 new jobs had gone to foreigners.

Mr Seng, assistant secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), said Singapore has to take a pragmatic approach to the issue.

He also challenged the WP to match its words with deeds, by ensuring the town council it runs in Hougang does not hire any foreigners.

Yesterday, the WP responded and said all the staff members in the town council are Singaporean.

However, it was quick to add that it recognises the contribution of foreign workers and is not against their employment.

For instance, Hougang Town Council does not object to its contractors deploying foreign workers in the estate, the WP said in a statement signed by its organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong.

It also reiterated its views on foreigners.

“The issue here is not of foreign workers’ employment per se but rather how the Singapore Government and the labour movement will ensure that the dignity and societal position of Singaporean workers are not compromised,” it said.

The Government’s attitude, it added, should be to put Singaporeans first and “resist any erosion of Singaporeans’ societal standing”.

“It is the Government’s responsibility to show compassion for the plight of workers facing the pressure of high inflation,” the WP said.

Later, Mr Seng retorted: “The Workers’ Party has shifted its position on the issue on foreigners. The WP had implied earlier that foreigners are breaking the rice bowls of Singaporean workers.

“If WP truly believes in helping Singaporeans, then it should offer all of its work to Singaporeans and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners.”

He also said that, as far as NTUC is concerned, “the societal position of Singaporeans has never been in question”.

“Nonetheless, we believe all workers should be treated with dignity. Hence, we believe in taking an inclusive approach that would make Singapore an inclusive society.”