WP proposes elected Senate to replace Elected Presidency, calls for national referendum

SINGAPORE — The Workers’ Party (WP), which has long opposed the Elected Presidency (EP), on Tuesday (Nov 8) offered an alternative plan for an eight-member elected Senate with custodial powers over Singapore’s reserves.

Its proposal, which was outlined in an eight-page position paper dated Monday, ignited a spirited debate in Parliament over its lack of details, such as the criteria for the Senate members.

The WP also came under fire from the ruling party’s political office holders and backbenchers for airing its proposal “at the last minute”, when it had ample opportunities to do so earlier.

In response, WP chief Low Thia Khiang accused the People’s Action Party Members of Parliament of being overly fixated with details — which he said could be worked out in due course — when they should be discussing whether the idea is a better alternative to the EP scheme.

Opposing the consititional amendment Bill — which was being debated for the second day — the WP also called for a national referendum to allow Singaporeans to choose between WP’s proposals and those put by the PAP to refine the EP scheme.

WP’s proposed Senate would replace the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) and it would be headed by a President, appointed by Parliament which would “factor in multiracial representation when making the appointment”. Parliament would be allowed to overrule the Senate’s veto powers with a three-quarter majority.

Speaking in Parliament, WP chairman Sylvia Lim said the non-partisan eight-member Senate would be established within the legislature as an Upper House. Its primary role to perform the custodial functions currently exercised by the Elected President, she said.

A Senate Elections Committee would shortlist 16 candidates to stand for a national election and the top 8 candidates, in terms of the percentage of votes they received, would be elected to the Senate.

Ms Lim reiterated that the President’s custodial and symbolic roles present an “inherent tension” that politicises the office – a point that was also raised by the Constitutional Commission tasked to review the EP, she noted.

“We disagree that the President should be an elected office, and should be tasked to safeguard the past reserves and the integrity of the public service. We thus oppose the Bill,” said Ms Lim.

Calling for the referendum, Mr Low said it was overdue given that Singapore’s political model has drastically shifted from a purely democratic parliamentary system to one where Parliament’s powers are curtailed by the EP scheme, which was created in 1991. “There will be deep implication in the future,” he said.

Ms Lim and Mr Low were among the first MPs to speak on Tuesday. Soon after they brought up WP’s proposals. several PAP MPs — including Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam, Education Minister (Higher Education and Skills) Ong Ye Kung and Minister of State (Communications and Information and Education) Janil Puthucheary — probed the opposition party for details of their idea.

Dr Puthucheary, for example, pressed WP Aljunied GRC MP Pritam Singh on the criteria used to shortlist the candidates for the Senate election, which were not specified in the WP’s position paper. Mr Singh replied that the Senate Elections Committee would rely on a comparable set of critieria used to determine the eligibility of an Elected President.

However, Dr Puthucheary pointed out that under the EP scheme, there is no limit on the number of individuals who can stand in a Presidential Election — compared to the WP’s idea of having a Senate Elections Committee shortlist 16 candidates.

The Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC MP continued to probe, prompting Mr Low to interject and concede that the WP’s proposed system was “by no means perfect”. Arguing that the PAP MPs should not be “bogged down” by details, Mr Low said “I know you are good with details. But you end up debating the details rather than the main substantive proposal. So, let’s focus on what is the fundamental and whether the idea sounds logical and whether it’s a better system. Details, yes, we can work them out.”

Mr Shanmugam kept up the questioning on the criteria, pressing WP Non-Constituency MP Dennis Tan on whether there were any difference between the criteria for the Senate members and the existing qualifying criteria for EP hopefuls.

Mr Tan was unable to provide a satisfactory answer, prompting his WP colleague, Mr Leon Perera, to intervene several times to answer the question on Mr Tan’s behalf. In the end, Mr Low stepped in again, to reiterate the details of WP’s proposals need to be fine-tuned. 

Separately, Mr Ong and Ms Lim also crossed swords, with the former arguing that the WP had changed its position on the EP scheme with its latest proposals.

Disagreeing, Ms Lim said her party’s fundamental beliefs that the EP should be abolished and that it is Parliament’s role to safeguard the country’s reserves have not changed. “It’s just that we have taken into account the Commission’s work and we believe that it is prudent and wise to refine our position in keeping with public’s expectations that there should be some oversight over some of these matters,” she said.

Dr Puthucheary also criticised the WP for putting up proposals lacking in details at this late stage, when there has already been an extended period of public scrutiny on the Elected Presidency.

WP’s latest proposals were not included in its earlier submissions to the Commission, he noted. “This is meant to be the final lap of an extensive consultative process, an extensive engagement process. And at the eleventh hour, you throw this in here and you expect that it is done seriously and taken seriously by members of this house and the public… You’ve kept silent, you’ve kept quiet, you’ve kept your cards in reserve. You played politics with this issue,” said Dr Puthucheary.