See also: PAP stirs debate from within

IF you were to offer S$1mil on the spot to any citizen here who can name Singapore’s 24 opposition parties, you will probably save your money. In fact, few of even the best informed Singaporeans know there are that many parties in their midst.

The average person can probably tell you the names of no more than three or four of them – and a handful of their leaders.

After 36 years of independence and 10 general elections, the state of the opposition is pathetic because of its own doing and partly because of some hefty obstacles placed in its path.

There’s also a third reason. By nature, materialistic Singaporeans have little interest in politics despite their Western education and inclination.

The minority is sceptical about how far it is allowed to oppose policies or even contribute to them.

Many opposition parties have been dormant for a long time. Some were registered years ago and forgotten. Others gathered cobwebs when their leaders lost interest after repeated electoral defeats.

Today, no more than half a dozen remain active.

Only two opposition members have made it to the 84-seat Parliament in last month’s general election.

These parties are small, weak and fractious. One party came into existence with two leaders standing as candidates, a father-and-son team.

The rest are still served by ageing, ill-equipped central executive committee (CEC) members more suitable for a squatter Singapore than a modern cosmopolitan and whom the leaders find hard to replace.

The ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) straddles like a giant across the broad middle ground of Singapore’s non-ideological politics.

Adding to the opposition’s woes is its readiness to use its power to place obstacles in its rivals’ path during and outside elections.

None of the opposition parties competes with the PAP on ideological ground. They can’t. Singapore is a middle-class society for which right or left-wing politics hold no attraction.

Since the end of the extreme left-wing Sosialis Front in the 60s, the opposition can only challenge the giant on individual policies that makes them look like nitpickers.

The left-of-centre Workers’ Party, one of the oldest opposition parties, started off fighting for the poor and blue-collar workers until this base began to diminish, forcing it to fight for the middle class.

In recent years, the opposition has succeeded in luring a handful of better-qualified politicians into its fold – but the process is painfully slow.

In general, these parties lack funds and are confronted by a great deal of legislative difficulty getting funds. The Political Donations Act prohibits anonymous contributions of more than S$5000 in any financial year.

Poor in resources and unable to rejuvenate themselves, they appear set to continue to play a minor role for a long time – unless the PAP itself provokes a voter rebellion.

Not all their troubles are self-induced. Some stem from election laws or government policies that weigh heavily against them.

One major obstacle is the government’s policy to refurbish the last opposition-held Housing Development (HDB) estates behind the PAP’s “all things being equal.”

To date, none of the two opposition MP’s estates have been upgraded.

An average upgraded flat costs S$45,000 to $50,000, of which three-quarters is paid for by the government.

This means that estates with opposition MPs have to pay a stiff price in upgraded home values.

Another hurdle is the PAP’s ability to redraw electoral boundaries of constituencies that showed strong opposition support. Some have disappeared, carved up to merge with other wards.

A third obstacle is its often-used power to increase the number of multiple-seat constituencies, called Group Representative Constituencies (GRC).

These team wards started with three or fours members each to ensure minority races were not under-represented. Since then they have snowballed to five, six or seven members in the last election.

Under the system, they stand – and win or lose – as a team, and so favours the strong against the weak parties.

What is the opposition’s future? In one word: bleak.

Its only chance lies in what opposition MP Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir) had tried – and largely failed: a grand merger.

His suggestion was for the weak, fractious opposition parties to become a big party. Only then, he believes, can they stand a chance.

Separately, they are too weak. Singapore cannot have more than one opposition party, given the circumstances.

Chiam, leader of the Singapore People’s Party, got four to merge into one last July and called it the Singapore Democratic Alliance.

Three smaller parties joined him and SDA was launched in July. They were the National Solidarity Party, Singapore Justice Party and the Malay-based PKMS (Singapore Malay National Organisation).

But two others – Workers’ Party and Singapore Democratic Party of Chee Soon Juan– spurned his call.

What is preventing the opposition from getting together is the inability of its leaders to work together.

Chiam, the most experienced opposition MP with 20 years on the job, is right. The opposition is too weak and fractious to pose any challenge to the PAP.

It seems that everyone wants to be the chief and few want to follow.

To make things worse, the government has increased the election deposits of candidates from S$8000 to S$13,000, which they will forfeit if they poll less than one-eighth of the votes.

These obstacles contributed to a 10 percent decline in the opposition’s popular vote in November’s election to just 24 percent.

It could only field candidates to contest in 29 of the 84 seats. The PAP got walkovers in the rest, not a good testimony to Singapore’s democratic institution.

Nevertheless, PAP leaders called the opposition “not serious people” – and questioned if Singapore really needed one. Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew returned to his theme that the republic would evolve its own form of democracy, different from Westminster’s.

Despite its overwhelming strength, government leaders feel that the next election in 2007 will be a tough fight.

In preparation, the PAP is setting up its own in-house “opposition,” with a team of 20 PAP MPs being allowed to criticise, offer alternative policies and vote against their party.

With that, it hopes to dampen young Singaporeans’ call for a stronger, real opposition to check the government.

It is unlikely to succeed.

Seah Chiang Nee is a veteran journalist and editor of the information website littlespeck.com

                                                            Home