'Incredible double standard': Jamus Lim rebuts PM Wong's criticism of WP policy positions; PAP's Petir says coherence matters“令人难以置信的双重标准”：林志蔚反驳黄循财总理对工人党政策立场的批评；人民行动党的佩蒂尔表示，政策一致性至关重要。
Workers' Party (WP) MP Jamus Lim believes political parties should be open to adjusting their policy positions when justified, and rejected suggestions that doing so amounted to "opportunism".Associate Professor Lim was responding to Prime Minister Lawrence Wong's speech at the People's Action Party (PAP) Awards and Conference held at the Singapore Expo on Sunday (Oct 25) morning.PM Wong, who is...
Workers' Party (WP) MP Jamus Lim believes political parties should be open to adjusting their policy positions when justified, and rejected suggestions that doing so amounted to "opportunism".
Associate Professor Lim was responding to Prime Minister Lawrence Wong's speech at the People's Action Party (PAP) Awards and Conference held at the Singapore Expo on Sunday (Oct 25) morning.
PM Wong, who is PAP secretary-general, had spoken about how the opposition took different policy stances at different times and said WP's position "seems to shift with the political winds".
Later that afternoon, Assoc Prof Lim said in a Facebook post that PM Wong is "entitled to his views".
The Sengkang GRC MP wrote: "Personally, however, I found the claims to be an incredible double standard. After all, the PAP is known for massive U-turns in policy, some lasting barely one season."
He cited examples of these alleged "U-turns", including the 'Stop at Two' population policy, a redundancy insurance scheme, minimum wages for locals, and Section 377A.
The PAP's criticism of WP's housing and manpower positions "betrays a lack of nuance, either inadvertent or intentional", Assoc Prof Lim stated.
"When the WP spoke about managing HDB supply, it was in the context of lease decay-a looming policy problem that will unfold over the next two decades-not the short-term construction blips due to the pandemic.
"Similarly, we've been clear that the presence of a foreign workforce is not a fundamental issue, for a nation of immigrants. But moderating the speed of inflows, and the impact of related stresses on our existing infrastructure (both physical and institutional), is a legitimate contention."
More importantly, Assoc Prof Lim said it is "a mark of wisdom and maturity" when political parties review and adjust their stance when needed.
"This is precisely how democracy, at its best, is supposed to work: to be open to feedback, so that collective knowledge is harnessed," he added.
"It is this sort of back-and-forth debate that refines policy and keeps it relevant. Sure, we don't want to sacrifice some key principles, but we shouldn't stubbornly cling to outdated and outmoded policy ideas, either."
'Coherence matters': PAP's Petir
On Sunday evening, the Facebook page of PAP's newsletter Petir published a reply to Assoc Prof Lim's post.
"Changing policies is not the issue. How you do it matters. Coherence matters," read the title of Petir's post, stating that "there should be no disagreement" on political parties adjusting their positions according to circumstances.
It said an important part of PM Wong's speech had been "overlooked", namely that he had highlighted the need to listen to Singaporeans and be prepared to change when policies do not work as intended.
"So the issue is not whether policies should change. It is whether the different positions taken by a political party add up to a coherent approach, and whether the party is prepared to confront the trade-offs and consequences," Petir wrote.
The post reiterated that PM Wong's argument that WP's position on housing and foreign manpower are not always consistent or coherent.
"To be clear, changes in policy can reflect new evidence, changing circumstances or lessons learnt. But such changes must be grounded in a clear rationale, with the trade-offs and wider consequences properly considered and explained. That is what responsible policymaking requires," Petir said.
"That was PM Wong's central point.
"Judging from Mr Lim's reply, it seems the WP has yet to fully appreciate this distinction."
lim.kewei@asiaone.com
工人党议员林志蔚认为，政党在合理的情况下应该对调整政策立场持开放态度，并驳斥了这样做等同于“机会主义”的说法。
林副教授是在回应总理黄循财周日（10月25日）上午在新加坡博览中心举行的人民行动党（PAP）颁奖典礼暨大会上的讲话。
身为人民行动党秘书长的总理黄英贤曾谈到反对党在不同时期采取不同的政策立场，并表示工人党的立场“似乎会随着政治风向而改变”。
当天下午晚些时候，林副教授在脸书上发帖称，黄英贤总理“有权发表自己的观点”。
盛港集选区议员写道：“然而，就我个人而言，我认为这些说法是令人难以置信的双重标准。毕竟，人民行动党以政策上的大转弯而闻名，有些政策甚至不到一个季度就结束了。”
他列举了这些所谓的“政策大转弯”的例子，包括“人口上限为二”的人口政策、裁员保险计划、当地居民的最低工资以及第 377A 条款。
林副教授表示，人民行动党对工人党住房和人力资源立场的批评“暴露出缺乏细致入微的判断，无论是无意的还是故意的”。
“工人党谈到管理组屋供应时，指的是租赁期延长——一个将在未来二十年内逐步显现的迫在眉睫的政策问题——而不是由于疫情造成的短期建设波动。
“同样，我们已经明确表示，对于一个移民国家来说，外籍劳动力的存在并非根本问题。但是，减缓移民流入的速度，以及由此带来的压力对我们现有基础设施（包括物质基础设施和制度基础设施）的影响，是一个合理的诉求。”
更重要的是，林副教授表示，政党在必要时审查和调整其立场是“智慧和成熟的标志”。
“这正是民主制度在最佳状态下应该运作的方式：乐于接受反馈，从而利用集体智慧，”他补充道。
“正是这种来回的辩论才能完善政策并使其保持与时俱进。当然，我们不想牺牲一些关键原则，但我们也不应该固执地坚持过时的政策理念。”
“连贯性很重要”：人民行动党的佩蒂尔
周日晚上，人民行动党通讯《Petir》的Facebook页面发布了对林副教授帖子的回应。
“改变政策不是问题，关键在于如何改变，保持一致性很重要。”佩蒂尔的帖子标题写道，并指出政党根据形势调整立场“不应该有任何异议”。
声明称，黄循财总理讲话中的一个重要部分被“忽略”了，即他强调了倾听新加坡人民意见的必要性，以及在政策没有按预期发挥作用时做好改变的准备。
“因此，问题不在于政策是否应该改变，而在于一个政党采取的不同立场是否能构成一个连贯的方针，以及该政党是否准备好面对权衡取舍和后果，”佩蒂尔写道。
该帖子重申了黄循财总理的论点，即工人党在住房和外籍劳工问题上的立场并不总是前后一致或连贯的。
“需要明确的是，政策变化可以反映新的证据、不断变化的情况或吸取的教训。但此类变化必须基于清晰的逻辑，并且要充分考虑和解释其利弊权衡和更广泛的后果。这才是负责任的政策制定所要求的，”佩蒂尔说。
“那是黄循财总理的核心观点。”
“从林先生的回复来看，工人党似乎还没有充分理解这一区别。”
lim.kewei@asiaone.com