S'poreans have limited understanding of Elected Presidency
-
SINGAPORE: A survey by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) found that Singaporeans appear to have a limited understanding of the Elected Presidency.
The survey was conducted within two months of the August election - Singapore's second since 1991 when the office was created. The first was in 1993, when former Accountant-General Chua Kim Yeow and former Deputy Prime Minister Ong Teng Cheong contested.
The IPS survey sought to understand the factors behind voters' choices.
The 2,025 respondents were asked which of 11 statements described the roles of the President.
Of these 11 statements, only five were aligned with the government's interpretation of the office.
Forty-two per cent got six or more correct and only one per cent was able to identify all "correct" and "incorrect" statements.
Representing Singapore in foreign relations was the most recognised role, with 94 per cent answering correctly, but respondents were unclear over whether the President is allowed to speak publicly on national issues.
Fifty-seven per cent agreed with the official view that the Elected President could not speak unless advised by the government.
Seventy-five per cent said yes when asked if the Elected President could speak on issues he thinks are important.
The survey found that among the top three roles that shaped a voter's choice, the top two did not fall within the official interpretation. These were, "to ensure that the government manages the economy wisely" and "to ensure that the government does what it promised in the general election".
The third most important role was the President's veto powers over the reserves.
This, IPS said, reflects the level of opinion and expectation the public has over the office.
Presenting the results on Tuesday, Dr Gillian Koh of the Institute of Policy Studies said the gap in understanding corresponded with statements made by candidates in the presidential election during the campaign.
The senior research fellow said more education is needed.
She said: "I think the level of opinion in our findings can be due to a couple of things. First, [that] the institution of the elected presidency is very young, is extremely complex. And second, it is put to the vote. So people feel that with a mandate that is from the ground, it should actually allow the President to do much more that what is actually stipulated."
As for characteristics of candidates, respondents valued honesty, fairness and the ability to represent the country well with a score of 4.5 and above out of five points.
Independence from political parties mattered less, scoring 3.5 points. The majority of those who said it was important were from low-income groups and the lower occupational classes. Respondents were also less concerned about picking a candidate whose views on national issues ran parallel to theirs.
The survey found that in general, the higher the income and education levels of respondents, the more knowledgeable they were.
This same group also tended to be more critical of the system, and more likely to support change. For instance, they were more likely to agree that political parties and social organisations and unions should not be allowed to endorse candidates.
As with the May general election, the internet played a significant role as a medium of communication, particularly among younger respondents earning higher incomes.
However, newspapers and television remained the top two sources of information across respondents and also had a bigger influence over voting decisions.
Among websites cited, Facebook was the most commonly-read while the Channel NewsAsia website was rated highest among respondents aged 21-29, those who were most highly educated and who were most knowledgeable about the Elected Presidency.
- CNA/fa/ac -
Next time, presidential hopefuls beside qualifying, must write an essay of not less than 500 words on why they want to be President.
If they make promises like a two bit politician, they will be rejected, and the Commissions' decision is final.
-
Siri, what is the role of the Singapore President?
-
Two fold.
1. Ceremonial functions.
2. Jaga the spare cash.
Their job is not to supplement the Prime Minister.
Government with all the ministeries and the OMO President to run the country?
Will be lop sided wouldn't it. One big organization, and one man.
-
Originally posted by FireIce:
Siri, what is the role of the Singapore President?
It would be interesting to see what Siri says.
Really.
-
Our President doesn't have any real political power to do anything despite having some legal powers as the case of Ong Teng Cheong shows.
Some of your colleagues did not think it was much fun when your only opponent, a former accountant-general, Chua Kim Yeoh, got so much support?
Yes, all of them were quite worried. Some ministers even called me to say: Oh, we are worried about the outcome. At first, we were quite confident about getting over 70 percent of the vote. But there was a swing of support over to my opponent's side, especially in the educated class -- civil servants and the Shenton Way group. The issue was whether they wanted a PAP man as president to check on a PAP government, or whether it would be better to have a neutral independent like Chua. That's why they voted against me because I had the PAP government support. I would have been happier without the PAP's open support. I think I would have been better off with just the unionists' support and the Chinese-educated heartlanders. Without them I would not have been elected.
But you did win and you had to figure out how to do this new job as Singapore's first elected president.
Yes. At the first opening of parliament after I was elected, I was given a speech prepared by the government. I read the speech carefully. Besides ceremonial functions, it said that I'm supposed to safeguard the reserves and to help society become more compassionate and gracious. So I decided that, well, if that is what is said in the speech, then that's going to be my job. And I am going to do it. That's what I tried to do. In fact, during the six years I was president, I was very busy.
Doing what?
Well, I got involved in a lot of things. The Istana presidential palace and other places had to be renovated. All this had to be planned and these places got ready one by one, so that ceremonial functions and other business could go on as usual. I had to press the government to finalize the procedures for the protection of the reserves. A lot of the teething problems and misunderstandings were because there was a lack of clearcut procedures ofwhat to do. Towards the end of my term, I pressed the prime minister for a White Paper to be tabled in parliament that would set out all the principles and procedures for the elected president. Then I will announce my decision to step down. I want to get the job done.
Initially, he did not want to do that?
It's not that he did not want to do that, but it had been dragging for a long time. They produced a White Paper eventually, tabled it in parliament last July, and that made the future president's job easier. We have already tested out many of the procedures during my term, except for asking the president to approve a draw on the past reserves during a deep economic crisis. That was never done. It's that part of procedure that was not tested. How to do it?
It was this issue that caused the dispute between you and the government?
Yes. But I don't want to go into details and upset everybody. The thing is that the elected president is supposed to protect the reserves, but he was not told what these are until five years later. From the day the Constitution was amended in 1991 to provide for an elected president, he was supposed to fulfil that role. My predecessor, Wee Kim Wee, although he was not elected, was supposed to play that role during the last two years of his term. But he did not actively check. So, when I came in in 1993, I asked for all this information about the reserves. It took them three years to give it to me.
The holdup was for administrative reasons?
Either that or they did not think there was any urgency. You see, if you ask me to protect the reserves, then you've got to tell me what I'm supposed to protect. So I had to ask.
Why did they not want to tell you?
I do not know. Don't ask me, because I don't have the answer. I've been asking them. In fact, in 1996, exactly halfway through my term, I wrote prime minister Goh a letter. At that time, everybody was expecting a general election in December or January. After the election, a new government would be sworn in. When that happens, all the reserves, whether past or current, become past reserves and are locked up on the changeover date. As president, I have to safeguard them and they can only be drawn upon with my permission. So I said to Mr Goh: It's already halfway through my term, but until today I still don't know all these figures about the reserves.
So the government had been stonewalling you, the president, for three years?
Yes. What happened actually was, as you know, in accounting, when you talk about reserves, it's either cash reserves or assets reserves. The cash side is straightforward: investment, how many million dollars here and there, how much comes from the investment boards and so on. That was straightforward -- but still we had to ask for it. For the assets, like properties and so on, normally you say it's worth $30 million or $100 million or whatever. But they said it would take 56-man years to produce a dollar-and-cents value of the immovable assets. So I discussed this with the accountant-general and the auditor-general and we came to a compromise. The government would not need to give me the dollar-and-cents value, just give me a listing of all the properties that the government owns.
They agreed?
Well, yes, they agreed, but they said there's not the time for it. It took them a few months to produce the list. But even when they gave me the list, it was not complete.
It seems the Singapore government does not know its own assets?
Yes. It's complicated. It's never been done before. And for the assets of land, I can understand why. Every piece of land, even a stretch of road, is probably subdivided into many lots. There are 50,000 to 60,000 lots and every one has a number. If you want to value them all, it would take a long time. In the past, they have just locked everything up and assumed it is all there. But if I am to protect it, at least I want to know the list.
When they eventually gave you the list -- the incomplete list, did you have enough staff to do the checking and other work?
No, I did not. I only had one administrative staffer and two part-timers from the auditor-general's office. For things like approving the budget of statutory boards, the auditor-general's office would normally go through that for me. They are very good. They check on everything. And they query and ask for information.
For government financial policy matters that you had a veto over, did you get all the details?
They finally came with an executive summary to say that they had checked through all this, and that this is what they have, this is how much they are going to spend, and that it won't need any draw from the reserves -- or that there's likely to be a draw. There never was a draw during my time, but there were instances where it was a bit dicey whether the budgets of one or two statutory boards would require a draw. But finally we resolved that.
Eventually then, with the list of properties and the executive summaries, you were kept informed?
I wouldn't be able to say that. Even in my last year as president, I was still not being informed about some ministerial procedures. For example, in April last year, the government said it would allow the sale of the Post Office Savings Bank POSB to DBS Bank.
In the past, when there was no elected president, they could just proceed with this kind of thing. But when there is an elected president you cannot, because the POSB is a statutory board whose reserves are to be protected by the president. You cannot just announce this without informing him. But I came to know of it from the newspaper. That is not quite right. Not only that, but they were even going to submit a bill to parliament for this sale and to dissolve the POSB without first informing me.
What did you do?
My office went to tell them that this was the wrong procedure. You've got to do this first, do that first, before you can do this. It was question of principle and procedure. We had to bring all this to their attention. That they cannot forget us. It's not that we are busybodies, but under the Constitution we have a role to play and a responsibility. Sometimes in the newspaper I came to know of things that I am responsible for, but if it had not been reported in the newspaper I would not know about it.
You must have been pretty angry that this was still happening in your last year as president?
Yes, I was a bit grumpy. And maybe not to the liking of the civil service. They did not like what I said. But I have to be a watchdog all the time, you see. So this is where they are supposed to help me to protect the reserves. And not for me to go and watch out when they do right or wrong.
Under the Constitution, you have the right to all the information available to the cabinet.
Yes. That's right. And I sourced much information from the cabinet papers. But they are not used to it. So I said: I understand, it's something new, and I know you don't like my interference and busybody checking up and so on. But under the Constitution it is my job to do that.
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000310a4.htm
-
1) Wave hands
2) Shake hands
3) Say something totally irrelavent like prata receipe cooking book
4) Jaga spare cash
-
No constitutional role ?
-
Originally posted by BadzMaro:
No constitutional role ?
My office went to tell them that this was the wrong procedure.
You've got to do this first, do that first, before you can do this. It was question of principle and procedure. We had to bring all this to their attention.
That they cannot forget us.
-
Originally posted by QX179R:
SINGAPORE: A survey by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) found that Singaporeans appear to have a limited understanding of the Elected Presidency.
The survey was conducted within two months of the August election - Singapore's second since 1991 when the office was created. The first was in 1993, when former Accountant-General Chua Kim Yeow and former Deputy Prime Minister Ong Teng Cheong contested.
The IPS survey sought to understand the factors behind voters' choices.
The 2,025 respondents were asked which of 11 statements described the roles of the President.
Of these 11 statements, only five were aligned with the government's interpretation of the office.
Forty-two per cent got six or more correct and only one per cent was able to identify all "correct" and "incorrect" statements.
Representing Singapore in foreign relations was the most recognised role, with 94 per cent answering correctly, but respondents were unclear over whether the President is allowed to speak publicly on national issues.
Fifty-seven per cent agreed with the official view that the Elected President could not speak unless advised by the government.
Seventy-five per cent said yes when asked if the Elected President could speak on issues he thinks are important.
The survey found that among the top three roles that shaped a voter's choice, the top two did not fall within the official interpretation. These were, "to ensure that the government manages the economy wisely" and "to ensure that the government does what it promised in the general election".
The third most important role was the President's veto powers over the reserves.
This, IPS said, reflects the level of opinion and expectation the public has over the office.
Presenting the results on Tuesday, Dr Gillian Koh of the Institute of Policy Studies said the gap in understanding corresponded with statements made by candidates in the presidential election during the campaign.
The senior research fellow said more education is needed.
She said: "I think the level of opinion in our findings can be due to a couple of things. First, [that] the institution of the elected presidency is very young, is extremely complex. And second, it is put to the vote. So people feel that with a mandate that is from the ground, it should actually allow the President to do much more that what is actually stipulated."
As for characteristics of candidates, respondents valued honesty, fairness and the ability to represent the country well with a score of 4.5 and above out of five points.
Independence from political parties mattered less, scoring 3.5 points. The majority of those who said it was important were from low-income groups and the lower occupational classes. Respondents were also less concerned about picking a candidate whose views on national issues ran parallel to theirs.
The survey found that in general, the higher the income and education levels of respondents, the more knowledgeable they were.
This same group also tended to be more critical of the system, and more likely to support change. For instance, they were more likely to agree that political parties and social organisations and unions should not be allowed to endorse candidates.
As with the May general election, the internet played a significant role as a medium of communication, particularly among younger respondents earning higher incomes.
However, newspapers and television remained the top two sources of information across respondents and also had a bigger influence over voting decisions.
Among websites cited, Facebook was the most commonly-read while the Channel NewsAsia website was rated highest among respondents aged 21-29, those who were most highly educated and who were most knowledgeable about the Elected Presidency.
- CNA/fa/acThey are too stupid to understand anything.
-
Originally posted by Bio-Hawk:
They are too stupid to understand anything.
The media in Singapore is not politicised. It is depoliticised.
The Media, Cultural Control and Government in Singapore
This book explores this inherent contradiction present in most facets of Singaporean media, cultural and political discourses, and identifies the key regulatory strategies and technologies that the ruling People Action Party (PAP) employs to regulate Singapore media and culture, and thus govern the thoughts and conduct of Singaporeans.
The Political Economy of Social Control in Singapore
-
only knows presidential palace is next to shopping malls in orchard road.went to the singapura plaza shopping place and discovers theres really nothing there.kind of cluttered stuff.one shop seems to be selling same stuff as the next shop.
best would be the daiso japanese shop.
-
Originally posted by Hitman Factory 1:
only knows presidential palace is next to shopping malls in orchard road.went to the singapura plaza shopping place and discovers theres really nothing there.kind of cluttered stuff.one shop seems to be selling same stuff as the next shop.
best would be the daiso japanese shop.
Huh?