Comments On Holland-Bukit Timah GRC

I refer to the ST insight article on Holland-Bukit Timah GRC (10th September 2010).

The ST contacted me for some comments, which were not published. For sharing purposes, below are the questions and my responses, to the best of my recollections:

ST: Will WP be contesting in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC?

Yaw: It is too early to say, as the electoral boundaries report is not out yet. Having said that, a couple of public outreaches there aside, WP does not have an extensive ground presence there. At present the WP is only active in the northern, northeastern & eastern parts of Singapore. In general to be able to contest effectively in any constituencies, extensive ground work that entrenches a political party presence must be carried out.

ST: As observed by Lim Swee Say (in GE2006) why western Singapore is not favored by opposition parties?

Yaw: From a base-camp perspective, it is only natural that expansion occurs outwards from existing opposition base-camps, such as Potong Pasir SMC (Central) & Hougang SMC (North-Eastern). Had Anson Constituency remained under WP’s administration, I will not be surprised with heightened opposition presence in the west. Then again, this may potentially set to change, now with the formation of new opposition parties such as RP, USD & SF.

ST: It is more difficult for opposition parties to contest in a constituency with more private estates (a feature of HBT GRC)?

Yaw: Operationally speaking, to conduct outreaches in condominiums/ apartments, political parties must write in to respective management committees for approval prior to conducting activities in the private estates. This process itself requires prior logistical coordination, unlike public housing estates whereby no writing in for prior approval is required. Having said that, if there is a political will there will always be a way and this is my encouragement to fellow activists in the opposition fraternity intending to work in the ground of HBT GRC.

ST: Will it be easier for the PAP to conduct outreaches in private estates?

Yaw: Of course being the ruling party, they will always have the advantages of incumbency. Then again I do expect the PAP to be subjected to the same processes, such as writing in to management committees etc. However if there are any exceptions to the norm, please let us know!

WP: Laissez Faire Approach on Members’ Canvassing of Support Online

I refer to my comments to LianHe WanBao dated 12th September 2010 (不会规定党员网上拉支持票，Page 9). Below is a raw translation of the report.

WP: Laissez faire approach on members’ canvassing of support online

The Workers’ Party is of the view that Facebook is an effective communication tool. However it will adopt a hands-off approach when it comes to members’ canvassing of support online.

WP’s Organising Secretary Yaw Shin Leong (Photo insert) is one of the active users of Facebook amongst the opposition camp. Regularly (via Twitter) he shares about his WP meetings with fellow activists, WP’s public outreaches and house-to-house visits.

Opposition Parities’ activities are seldom being reported in the mainstream media. As such political parties tapped upon the internet to ‘publicize’ its activities. Such online publicities give Netizens insight to the intense and broad ground work embarked by opposition parties.

Political observers are of the view that regardless of opposition parties or the incumbent. If any of them are able to use the Internet effectively, it will assist the political party to improve upon its branding and recognition.

However Yaw Shin Leong is of the view that the usage of Facebook should be primarily a communication tool that balances delicately between (that of private and public spheres), cultivating (authentic) friendships and political objectives. Therefore the usage of Facebook should not just be about political canvassing.

Having said that he acknowledges that in moments of need, social media platforms (such as Facebook) have the potential to galvanize supporters for political mobilization.