My interview with Mr Gilbert Goh,
CEO Transitioning.org NGO
Date: 7 July 2016 @ Block 808,
Kitchener Complex, Singapore
Kieran
James: Hi Gilbert, please give us some background about your own political activism
and your NGO.
Gilbert
Goh: We started off helping those unemployed; we also got involved in some
activism four to five years ago about the population growth. Lately the
political activism side has slackened or died down. By profession I’m a
counsellor; I have done this for six or seven years. We are an NGO but because
we got involved in activism we got called up [by the authorities]. I first went
to the election in 2011 with NSP [National Solidarity Party] in Tampines GRC
and the latest was last year 2015 in Ang Mo Kio GRC.
KJ:
What is your comment about the contest in Tampines in 2011 looking back now in
hindsight?
GG:
We always thought that we would win. I think we had a good result, 42-43% [KJ
note: actually 42.78%]. Mah Bow Tan was unpopular with his housing policy. We
were all brand new and we got 42-43%. If WP [Workers’ Party] had put in a
strong team they would have got a good result.
KJ:
What was it like working with Goh Meng Seng in Tampines?
GG:
He is a nice guy, very humble, very intellectual. I think he has to learn how
to be diplomatic. He cut off a lot of supporters.
KJ:
How are you feeling now about the 2015 election results?
GG:
I have a little bit of resignation with the election results; it makes us think
is it worth it the effort we put in; it makes us wonder if we should do it. We look
at the election results as a yardstick. A lot of activists have given up such
as Andrew Loh. As activists should we [still] voice out? Should we care about
the result or no?
KJ:
How was the ground sentiment this time compared to 2011?
GG:
I think this time around the ground was a bit harder caused by the LKY [Lee
Kuan Yew] death and the 50 years celebrations. This turned the tide back to
PAP. The government gave the Pioneer Generation some tips and they tried to
manage the unemployment. The opposition is quite disunited; we shoot ourselves
in the feet; there are a lot of cons against the opposition. The PAP got into
social media quite well; they have a team of IBs who really know how to stir
trouble up. The whole IB team has dismantled now; they are not so active now.
They really created a lot of havoc and distrust. The social media is the
hallmark of opposition but they did a good job to smash us.
KJ:
Do you feel opposition people are disenchanted now?
GG:
Yes, they are discouraged. Dr Chee is someone who does not give up; they will
push on. Tan Jee Say is very quiet.
KJ:
Why did you leave NSP after the 2011 GE?
GG:
We just joined for the election. People say it is a mole party; these are
rumours.
KJ:
What are some reasons for the 2015 GE result in your opinion?
GG:
The LKY death had a big impact for the fence-sitters. In the last five years
they converted some 80,000 – 90,000 new citizens and I think a large percentage
would vote for PAP (80-90%).
KJ:
The opposition has not reached out to the new citizens well?
GG:
That is true. New citizens might think the opposition are all against them and
they vote out of loyalty to PAP at least for the first election.
KJ:
Do you think the election result is a one-off or a long-term trend?
GG:
It is hard to say. We thought immigration and the cost of living would help
with votes but they didn’t. Chee Soon Juan’s loss [Bukit Batok SMC 2016
by-election] was a setback; he only got around 39%. He is a good leader but he
could not make the 40% mark. I don’t think we can go back to 60-40 the way
things are. The 10-15% are fence-sitters. The next election may be 65-35, I
hope I’m wrong. Aljunied GRC may be lost in the next election; they [PAP] just
lost by 1,000 votes.
KJ:
Aljunied was a symbol …
GG:
PAP is winning over the youth. The PM is not sentimental; you have to salute
him; he pushed out Lui Tuck Yew, the Transport Minister [2011-2015], just
before the election; he did not know what was coming. The voters have
confidence he will push out the underperformers. I don’t know who will be the
next PM. A lot of us are looking for Tharman; I don’t know whether they will
accept an Indian. If he is up there he will bring all the votes back to PAP. If
there is a Chinese guy who is not so good it will be better for the opposition.
KJ:
Do you think the pressure on WP about the town council accounts was fatal?
GG:
They were successful in painting them as black as they could. They have control
of the media and they used the town council issue to good effect in the last
two years.
KJ:
And I think one unspoken factor was the loss of Yaw Shin Leong who had been
appointed the designated successor to Low Thia Khiang…
GG:
I think Yaw Shin Leong was a big loss to WP; it shook the party up. He was
voted the MP, one camp said. The other camp said he had to go. I think YSL’s
departure has weakened the party. We expect so much from CSM [Chen Show Mao]
but he is so quiet in Parliament; it’s quite sad [laughs]. Should we get
involved? Is it a waste of time? There is a place for activism and we hope they
can work together with the politicians but the activists do not trust the
politicians. I think they [PAP government] will be around for a long time.
Something might change I hope after LHL [Lee Hsien Loong] goes.
KJ:
Tell me about your charity NGO Transitioning.org.
GG:
We did quite a big switch from activism to charity. We say activism will be
only 20% of our work. We want to help the elderly who can’t afford food and
help children not well off to buy school books. We have a donor scheme; donors
pay S$50 for 12 months to the child directly. I still have problems with the
police about this. I have to be more careful about collecting money. I thought
it would save us trouble if donors paid directly to children but the problem
does not go away. We may stay involved in activism if there is a need. We will
do it as it comes. I run the charity with a team of volunteers including
drivers, housewives, and civil servants. They know my profile and are willing
to help as it is a charity. I’m fine if they want to be anonymous.
KJ:
Does the government perceive your charity as political?
GG:
I hope not [laughs] but they are suspicious. Do I have that intention? I don’t
think so. We don’t carry banners; we are not party-affiliated; we hope the
government will give us some breathing space.
KJ:
Do you think that you do work which a government should do?
GG:
I think so; they can do it better as they have the funds. We are more liberal
and lax; we give one or two times; the government will continually check and
there are delays. We check a little but people are happier coming to us. If you
want S$100-200 urgently we can give it to you but normally as a one-off.
KJ:
Do you think SDP [Singapore Democratic Party] have again taken up the position
as the number two opposition party?
GG:
SDP are the number two party after the WP. I think it is good; they need some
new people to beef them up again; they need people like Dr Paul [Tambyah].
KJ:
Tell me more about the Bukit Batok SMC 2016 by-election.
GG:
I stay in Bukit Batok. There is a lot of PAP grassroots; there are many
elderlies. There are very developed facilities for the elderly; they don’t
change their minds so easily. There is a huge influx of foreigners into
Singapore. We expected 42-43% but it was disappointing.
KJ:
In the east could SDP have won?
GG:
I think the east is more educated and affluent. You have more people who want
change. In the west the elderly are scared as they do not want change. The PAP
was daring to put in an unknown Indian candidate; they had a lot of confidence.
80% of Bukit Batok is Chinese. PAP was very confident to put in an Indian. The
by-election proved people don’t really look at the colour; they vote because of
the party backing.
KJ:
When I talked with Yaw Shin Leong in October 2011 he said that WP had a
strategic plan to contest in the east and ignore the west completely; what do
you think about this?
GG:
WP has a good plan to focus on the east and the north. Maybe the west should be
let go? Maybe opposition should not contest in the west. It is a waste of
resources and volunteers. We hope that there are two or three bigger parties.
Opposition party candidates mostly just come out for elections. That is what
some people say.
KJ:
What is your comment about Goh Meng Seng being ousted from NSP straight after
the 2011 GE?
GG:
I think GMS was a brilliant strategist; he knows what to do but probably he is
a bit too blunt when he talks to people. There was a meeting where we had to
vote for CEC. When he was there party members ignored him and talked among
themselves in a corner. I could tell he was gone and a day or two later he was
out. There was a contract (probably informal) that he had to win a GRC. Maybe
he did too well! If he had another term NSP would have done well.
KJ:
How did you join Reform Party in the lead up to the 2015 GE?
GG:
It’s a long story. Roy Ngerng and M. Ravi were thinking of contesting but they
didn’t have enough candidates. We decided to form an activist group of me,
Ravi, and Roy. We met with KJ [Kenneth Jeyaretnam] and the group was formed.
M. Ravi had a little meltdown during the campaign period. We did not know each
other well. We pulled though la!
KJ: Did
you make a mistake as RP just does not get the votes?
GG: We
stood in Ang Mo Kio GRC to be a voice and not just to win. It’s a difficult
place. We were there to be heard and not to win. We got 21%. It was scary. We
saw the vote piles for PAP were so high; in some voting stations we got 17% or
19%. We were afraid we would lose our deposit.
KJ: What
do you think about Roy’s case?
GG: He is
effective; he can analyse well; he can speak and write well. All of these
things make the PAP quite wary; his stuff is well-researched and solid; he has
the data; it is not just an opinion piece. Apart from Alex Au, Roy is the next
best writer. That puts him up as a marksman. Now I think he is in trouble
again. He has to learn to lie low. It is like Dr Chee when he was young; he had
a six to seven years’ cooling-off period before he could stand for election.
KJ: Do
you think it might be better in the Singapore climate to be an anonymous
activist and refuse to be photographed?
GG: I
don’t know whether he should be anonymous like in China. We activists are proud
of what we do and we like to be seen. But you made a good point. It may be
better to be anonymous but they can track you if they want as the Real
Singapore case proved. They [PAP government] were quite strict in the last two
years; they want to put people down before they rise up.
KJ: Is
there a psychological factor behind the 2015 GE result? My theory is that
because it was the 50th anniversary people voted PAP because to vote
opposition would mean having to answer the question: “well why did you vote for
PAP these past 50 years?” and some people might want to avoid hearing that
question at all costs, even just within their own minds.
GG: Some
think that by not giving LKY, founding father, the vote it is not giving him
the respect he deserves. I hope that the 2015 election will be the worst for a
long time. I think the SG50 brought back the romance [of PAP ideology] which
had been lost for a while. In the street people lined up in the rain to pay
respect. Even a diehard opposition supporter might swing their vote back to
PAP. It was impressive enough on the TV; how much more impressive would it have
been if you were there?
KJ: Are
there any voters the opposition should target?
GG: The
youth; the young adults. Some group did a data analysis and found a lot of
young people voted for PAP. We thought the young wanted change but it seems
that they do not. If the opposition cannot win over the younger people they
have no chance. For people my age 40-50 if we are unemployed or struggle to put
food on the table we may switch our votes [to opposition]. PAP has put some
money and effort into skills upgrading and this may have done some patching up.
They succeeded in winning back those people. For those doing a course they are
thankful and they have hope again; they even get paid an allowance.
KJ: Is
there any case of your charity helping someone that you would like to share?
GG: There
is this granny, age 78, in a wheelchair; she is a Muslim and the family can
only break their fast with chicken and egg. She had the simple wish to break
her fast with Malay roasted chicken rice (nasi
ayam penyet). We realized that there is a segment of population which is
needy but they don’t know where to seek help. Two of her sons are in prison due
to drugs; one daughter has died. Whenever anyone visits her she will cry
throughout the visit; she is touched; it’s a good story of love, compassion,
and reaching out. Singapore has the highest wage differential; so far I hope
the rich will help the poor. However, I don’t see the super-rich helping out.
Mostly it is the lower- and middle-income who help as donors. We have broken
down the race barrier; now Chinese help Malays and Indians help Chinese. I’m
glad we have created something like that. This case happened only last week,
before the Ramadan was over. I visited her in York Hill; it is off Chinatown.
There are five or six blocks of rental flats where the poorest people live
secluded from the eye of the public; no-one knows that they are there. These
are mostly one-room rental flats. It is eye-opening; I don’t know how people
[can] stay there really…
KJ: Will
the government finally bring in unemployment benefits?
GG: No, I
don’t think so but they are looking at minimum wage. It’s very slow but they do
try to improve contracts. The minimum wage is the most important thing. We are
the most expensive country in the world but there is no minimum wage. But what
can we do [laughs]? It goes back to the votes. We have accepted it. It is like
putting the frog into water and slowly boiling. It’s a sad country where we
have accepted the loss of certain freedoms.
KJ: What
is the prospect of a hung parliament in Singapore like in Australia?
GG: I
don’t see that coming; that would be a miracle. The hardest thing will be
getting people involved in politics. People avoid talking about politics. I
think this is a pressing problem; people are scared or not interested. Politics
means trouble; they would rather stay out of it. Some people may quit such as
Tan Jee Say. They [Singaporeans First Party] contested in two GRCs and only got
21-22%. He might realize it is a waste of resources. At his age he might retire
or focus on presidential elections. Chiam See Tong may be gone and SPP as well.
GMS will still be around; politics is in his blood; he will be there la to say
his piece. I think Chiam and Jee Say maybe will be gone. For the new election
they should unite or just phase out. Reform Party is one which perhaps should
give up. You should know when to quit or at least pass the baton to someone
else. It is not in the country’s interests for these small parties to keep
contesting.
KJ: Can
Workers’ Party recover from the bad press it has received (such as Yaw Shin
Leong case; town council accounts)?
GG: I
hope so; it casts a huge cloud over them; it is why they lost so badly. They
are like the flagship of the opposition camp. The bad press stopped after the
election but they might spring it up again once in a while.
KJ: How
about the young voters? We used to think they are more likely to be
pro-opposition but it seems that since the last GE the PAP has been very
effective in winning over or winning back the youth…
GG: We
are concerned that the young ones are not too concerned about politics. They
just want to get a good job. If you go to political party meetings most people
are aged 40+. You see very few in their 30s and 20s. The young are just not
very politically active. They don’t want to talk about it with their friends or
maybe they talk about it secretly. The world belongs to the young so I think it
is a very pressing concern.
KJ: How
do you find the mood different now compared to four or five years ago when I
began my research on Singapore opposition?
GG: I
think four or five years ago we were more outspoken. Now no-one is talking.
Friends have been talked to by police just for posting things on Facebook; the
word spreads. The targeting of activists has made people scared and people
decide not to talk anymore [and here the interview ends]
END OF
INTERVIEW **************
No comments:
Post a Comment