NMP urges MPs not to make parliamentary proceedings look like 'reality TV', as seen in other countries

SINGAPORE — A Nominated Member of Parliament on Monday (March 6) told fellow lawmakers not to emulate foreign politicians whose antics make their parliamentary proceedings look like "reality TV".

Parliamentarians should also maintain respectable proceedings in the House by making sure to only say things that are factually accurate and avoid polarising comments, said Mr Cheng Hsing Yao. 

He was speaking in Parliament at the end of a nine-day debate on the Budget.

Mr Cheng's remarks were supported by Leader of the House Indranee Rajah, who added that Members of Parliament (MPs) should consistently “do what is right and avoid a descent into populism”.

In his round-up speech, Speaker of Parliament Tan Chuan-Jin noted that compared to previous years’ proceedings, this year’s were more “genteel and civil”, and that there was more alignment and agreement among MPs.

FOUR PRINCIPLES FOR EFFECTIVE PARLIAMENT: NMP

In his speech, Mr Cheng pointed to the amount of “half-truth rhetoric” that was promulgated inside and outside of the parliaments in other places. 

“Some of these ideas even garner enough support from their people to change the course of their country, often for the worse,” he said.

Though a small number of Singaporeans are cynical and view the world in extremes, the “precious” majority are reasonable and “still exhibit a high level of trust”, said Mr Cheng, who is also chief executive of listed property developer GuocoLand and a former civil servant.

He cautioned that in dealing with divisive issues, care must be taken lest “we may unwittingly cause fissures, as well as erode trust and cohesion in our society”.

He added that rigorous debates and presenting differing viewpoints, though critical, must be done constructively in order to avoid promoting cynicism.

The NMP thus proposed “four principles” to guide how issues should be debated in Parliament, namely by being factually accurate, highlighting both benefits and trade-offs, being constructive and avoiding creating polarisation.

AVOID POPULISM 

Agreeing with Mr Cheng, Ms Indranee added that what is said and done in Parliament “has a profound impact on the lives of Singaporeans and the future of Singapore”.

She noted how in some other countries, the people pay the price when “their parliaments are gridlocked, hamstrung, or so hopelessly at loggerheads” — a path which Singapore must avoid.

Building on each principle raised by Mr Cheng in turn, Ms Indranee said that beyond factual accuracy lies the deeper underlying principle of honesty and integrity.

“What is less obvious (than lies), but equally dangerous, and which we must also guard against, are half-truths, misleading statements, and innuendos which suggest false things without actually saying so,” she said.

On highlighting benefits and trade-offs, she said that advocating a position without stating the downside does Singaporeans a disservice.

“Seeking easy options, such as using up the reserves without good justification, rather than creating sustainable revenue streams, undercuts our resilience and chips away at the fundamental principles of prudence and responsibility,” she added.

Disagreements over taxation approaches and tapping the national reserves were frequent themes that cropped up in debates between parliamentarians on opposing sides of the aisle.

On being constructive and avoiding polarisation, Ms Indranee said MPs must have “the same overriding objective” of improving the lives of Singaporeans and helping the nation prosper.

And while it is part of an MP's duty to reflect genuine ground concerns, there is a line to be crossed between that and stoking anger or intensifying divides, which is “not only wrong, but dangerous”.

“We must always strive to bring people forward in unity, even with diversity,” she said.

Ms Indranee added a fifth point: That MPs should avoid populism.

Instead, they should exercise judgement on issues and speak up for what they believe in even if it is contrary to popular views, “to persuade our fellow MPs and the public at large as to what is the best solution to a difficult problem”.

“Parliament's deliberations should shape the public discourse and set the direction for the country,” she said.

BUDGET A 'FOUNDATIONAL PIECE' FOR BETTER YEARS AHEAD

Mr Tan began his round-up speech by drawing attention to the people who ensure that policies set out in Parliament are carried through.

“This is a significant strength of ours here in Singapore that we must never take for granted,” he said, adding that this may not be the case in many places elsewhere.

“So thank you to all who play an important role,” he said.

He said that the debates this year were “relatively genteel and civilised”, and that there was more agreement and alignment than not.

He acknowledged that it is naturally impossible to achieve complete agreement in any given body, including in Parliament.

“But when the dust is settled, I think it's important for us to agree to disagree in areas that we don't find agreement on, but also come together, unite and support the shared agenda so that we can move forward decisively together,” he said.

Wrapping up his speech, he said that although Singapore, too, faces the same pressures faced by many other societies, and though there are many areas in which the country can do better, “we’re in a decent place”.

“In fact, more than a decent place,” he said.

“When I work with foreign counterparts, as many of you do; when we meet Singaporeans living abroad, it is clear that we have a strong reputation and standing and, if anything, it has grown stronger after the whole Covid situation.”

Mr Tan said that this did not happen by chance, and Singapore can achieve more if it seeks to develop better leaders at all levels.

“We have an incredible base to build on,” Mr Tan added.

“This year's Budget is yet another foundational piece to stage us for the better years ahead.”