SINGAPORE: The Workers’ Party (WP) on Tuesday (8 Nov) proposed a national referendum on the Elected Presidency and a Senate to absorb the custodial role of the President.
Outlining her party’s position in Parliament, WP chairman Sylvia Lim called on the Government to allow Singaporeans to make a decision on the nature of the Presidency, and how the country’s assets should be safeguarded.
“We do not believe Parliament should arrogate to itself the right to decide such fundamental matters concerning the political system and state power … or as the Prime Minister put it, provisions which determine the direction of the country,” she said.
She highlighted two possible options that could be put to the people in a national referendum:
Option A – a model preferred by the PAP Government, Ms Lim said – where the President is elected and plays dual roles.
Option B – mooted by the WP – the where the President is appointed and does not have a custodial role, which would now be vested in an elected Senate.
ELECTED SENATE TO SAFEGUARD RESERVES
The Senate’s primary role would be to safeguard the country’s past reserves, Ms Lim said.
Expanding on this, WP chief Low Thia Khiang took issue with the system where the Elected President is obliged to consult the Council of Presidential Advisers on financial matters and appointments of key public servants.
Said Mr Low: “Members of the CPA are appointed and not elected by the people. Yet, not only does the President have to consult them, even the Parliament – formed by the members elected by the people – has no right to overrule the joint decision by them and the President. Their power is greater than the Elected President and the Parliament elected by the people – this is certainly not in compliance with the principles of parliamentary democracy.”
The WP also published a position paper, detailing how the eight-member Senate will be elected and act as a second chamber, or Upper House in the legislature. It would be up to a Senate Elections Committee to select 16 most suitable candidates and the final Senate members would have to be popularly elected, it said. These candidates would have to be non-partisan and would have to fit qualifying criteria it said.
“A Senate veto will return relevant Bills to Parliament for debate which Parliament can veto with three-quarters majority. As part of the legislative arm of the state and not the executive arm, and mandated to fulfill a limited custodial role, Senators would be under no illusion of having any executive or policymaking function,” the WP stated.
Pressed to detail how the Senate would be chosen, Mr Low said they should not get “bogged down by details” but focus on whether the idea sounded logical.
The WP has previously stated that Parliament is a sufficient safeguard on the country’s reserves and the Elected Presidency is not the right mechanism to do so. “WP is open to the idea of enacting additional parliamentary mechanisms to safeguard the reserves,” it had said.
Ms Lim said the fundamentals of the party’s stance have not changed, but that it has “refined its position” in keeping with public expectations for the need for oversight on matters of national importance.
PRESIDENT SHOULD BE APPOINTED: WP
The WP chairman noted the past system of having appointed presidents has produced presidents who are generally held in very high esteem and greatly respected by the people. “The fact that the President did not campaign and go through elections in fact elevated the office to being above politics,” she said. “His focus on being Head of State was of universal appeal and in no way diminished his stature compared to the Elected Presidents.”
“To revert to such a system is not regressive and would naturally take care of any concerns that the minority communities would not be represented in the office, as this would automatically be resolved by a system of rotational appointments,” she added.
Ms Lim also said that the dual role of the President as a Head of State, while also safeguarding the reserves and public service, has an “inherent tension that politicises the office of the President”.
She highlighted that the Constitutional Commission tasked to review specific aspects of the EP also recognised this fact, and it had noted that “being a Head of State was a unifying role, while being a custodian was a confrontational role”.
“The Commission asked the Government to consider unbundling the two roles, so that the President could concentrate on his role as the Head of State while the custodial role be given to another body of persons,” she said.
“We respectfully agree with the Commission’s observations.”
