1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:01,180 Speaker 1: This is a C. 2 00:00:01,180 --> 00:00:02,259 Speaker 2: N. A podcast. 3 00:00:04,740 --> 00:00:05,360 Speaker 1: The 4 00:00:05,360 --> 00:00:09,350 Speaker 2: Workers Party make a breakthrough at the 2020 Singapore general elections. 5 00:00:09,360 --> 00:00:12,230 Speaker 2: They want one more GRC Sing kong they earned a 6 00:00:12,230 --> 00:00:15,760 Speaker 2: higher proportion of votes in places they contested in. And 7 00:00:15,760 --> 00:00:18,790 Speaker 2: Workers Party Secretary General Pritam Singh was made leader of 8 00:00:18,790 --> 00:00:19,560 Speaker 2: the opposition 9 00:00:20,140 --> 00:00:22,979 Speaker 2: now, barely two years in the party which has cast 10 00:00:22,980 --> 00:00:25,320 Speaker 2: itself as a check on the ruling government, is now 11 00:00:25,320 --> 00:00:29,120 Speaker 2: facing its toughest political tests. Yet we've all been following 12 00:00:29,120 --> 00:00:31,330 Speaker 2: the story and know it well by now. It started 13 00:00:31,330 --> 00:00:34,080 Speaker 2: with a lie told in parliament by its youngest member 14 00:00:34,080 --> 00:00:38,300 Speaker 2: of parliament con in august last year and has snowballed 15 00:00:38,300 --> 00:00:39,410 Speaker 2: into something much 16 00:00:39,409 --> 00:00:39,959 Speaker 1: bigger. 17 00:00:40,340 --> 00:00:45,839 Speaker 2: On Tuesday February 15, Parliament passed two motions for to 18 00:00:45,840 --> 00:00:49,080 Speaker 2: be referred to the public prosecutor and for who has 19 00:00:49,080 --> 00:00:53,660 Speaker 2: since resigned from Parliament and the party to be fined $35,000. 20 00:00:54,140 --> 00:00:57,010 Speaker 2: Today we want to unpack some of the swirling issues. 21 00:00:57,020 --> 00:01:00,270 Speaker 2: Is this different from past challenges the Workers Party has 22 00:01:00,280 --> 00:01:03,760 Speaker 2: faced and will damage the party brand its future prospects. 23 00:01:04,140 --> 00:01:06,550 Speaker 2: Could it precipitate a shake up in the ranks if 24 00:01:06,550 --> 00:01:10,970 Speaker 2: predetermined faisal have to see their parliamentary seats? And could 25 00:01:10,970 --> 00:01:14,460 Speaker 2: that mean the curtain coming down on Mr Singh's political career. 26 00:01:15,040 --> 00:01:15,800 Speaker 1: It's 27 00:01:15,800 --> 00:01:19,070 Speaker 2: Wednesday february 16 4 30 pm. And joining me in 28 00:01:19,069 --> 00:01:21,970 Speaker 2: the studio to unpack all these issues are dr Gillian, 29 00:01:21,970 --> 00:01:24,720 Speaker 2: co Deputy Director of Research at the Institute of Policy 30 00:01:24,720 --> 00:01:28,710 Speaker 2: Studies High and dr Eugene Tan, associate professor of law 31 00:01:28,709 --> 00:01:31,880 Speaker 2: at the Singapore Management University and a former nominated member 32 00:01:31,880 --> 00:01:32,640 Speaker 2: of parliament. 33 00:01:32,650 --> 00:01:34,130 Speaker 1: Thanks. Thanks for having me here. 34 00:01:34,140 --> 00:01:35,760 Speaker 2: So let's start at the beginning, 35 00:01:35,840 --> 00:01:39,649 Speaker 2: long day in Parliament somewhat. And when it ended, what 36 00:01:39,650 --> 00:01:41,730 Speaker 2: was your sense of how it went down? What was 37 00:01:41,730 --> 00:01:46,640 Speaker 2: your immediate reaction first? I thought that with all of 38 00:01:46,640 --> 00:01:51,410 Speaker 2: us tuning in to listen to the WP leaders respond 39 00:01:51,420 --> 00:01:54,350 Speaker 2: to the report and the recommendations, 40 00:01:54,740 --> 00:01:58,340 Speaker 2: I was a little disappointed that the leader of the 41 00:01:58,340 --> 00:02:02,500 Speaker 2: opposition Mr Singh's statement was so brief. Of course, he 42 00:02:02,500 --> 00:02:07,810 Speaker 2: explained that with the possibility that the whole situation would 43 00:02:07,810 --> 00:02:11,340 Speaker 2: be brought to public prosecutor to see if he is 44 00:02:11,340 --> 00:02:12,459 Speaker 2: guilty of perjury, 45 00:02:12,740 --> 00:02:16,669 Speaker 2: that would explain the statement. But I would have thought 46 00:02:16,680 --> 00:02:19,910 Speaker 2: that he would take the opportunity to say much more 47 00:02:19,910 --> 00:02:23,600 Speaker 2: about the substantive issues that were brought up. What substantive 48 00:02:23,600 --> 00:02:27,850 Speaker 2: issues were you referring to? Well, whether he had to 49 00:02:27,850 --> 00:02:33,320 Speaker 2: robustly set out again how he would have directed Mishcon 50 00:02:33,330 --> 00:02:35,150 Speaker 2: in what eventually 51 00:02:35,340 --> 00:02:36,149 Speaker 2: cleared out. 52 00:02:36,440 --> 00:02:38,510 Speaker 2: Is that your sense also Eugene, what were your top 53 00:02:38,510 --> 00:02:39,560 Speaker 2: line reactions? 54 00:02:40,040 --> 00:02:43,540 Speaker 1: Yes, I felt that it was not a very substantive debate. 55 00:02:43,550 --> 00:02:45,049 Speaker 1: In the end, it had that 56 00:02:45,540 --> 00:02:48,490 Speaker 1: air of formality, you know, that this was something Parliament 57 00:02:48,490 --> 00:02:50,970 Speaker 1: had to get through and there was a sense that 58 00:02:50,970 --> 00:02:55,260 Speaker 1: perhaps we will leave it to what happens after Parliament 59 00:02:55,260 --> 00:02:58,990 Speaker 1: decides today, right as in yesterday. So, I think in 60 00:02:58,990 --> 00:03:01,340 Speaker 1: the end, there wasn't really the engagement of the key 61 00:03:01,340 --> 00:03:02,060 Speaker 1: issues 62 00:03:02,340 --> 00:03:06,660 Speaker 1: the Workers Party, they didn't want to get into the 63 00:03:06,840 --> 00:03:11,060 Speaker 1: the substantive bits, for example, they weren't really prepared to 64 00:03:11,440 --> 00:03:12,160 Speaker 1: rebut 65 00:03:12,540 --> 00:03:15,860 Speaker 1: some of the key findings, they were content with nit 66 00:03:15,860 --> 00:03:20,210 Speaker 1: picking making assertions, but never really backing it up with evidence, 67 00:03:20,210 --> 00:03:22,600 Speaker 1: you know? So, in many respects, I felt it was 68 00:03:22,610 --> 00:03:27,020 Speaker 1: rather anticlimatic in the sense that I don't think someone 69 00:03:27,030 --> 00:03:29,059 Speaker 1: keen to find out about 70 00:03:29,139 --> 00:03:33,010 Speaker 1: the issues, particularly from the Workers Party's perspective, right? Because 71 00:03:33,010 --> 00:03:34,359 Speaker 1: we had that massive 72 00:03:34,840 --> 00:03:38,540 Speaker 1: report from the Committee of Privileges, if someone thought that 73 00:03:38,540 --> 00:03:41,630 Speaker 1: we could have an inkling as to how the Workers 74 00:03:41,630 --> 00:03:45,330 Speaker 1: party was going to rebut their findings in the report, 75 00:03:45,340 --> 00:03:49,000 Speaker 1: I think we were all somewhat disappointed, because we never 76 00:03:49,000 --> 00:03:51,160 Speaker 1: really got that far. In the end. It was 77 00:03:51,440 --> 00:03:54,120 Speaker 1: it was really just about indicating that they didn't agree 78 00:03:54,120 --> 00:03:55,160 Speaker 1: with the findings. 79 00:03:55,340 --> 00:03:59,750 Speaker 1: Happy to, you know, let the public prosecutor pursue the matter. 80 00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:03,470 Speaker 2: What's your sense on whether this issue has divided the 81 00:04:03,470 --> 00:04:08,150 Speaker 2: Workers Party and even support within their base their supporters. 82 00:04:08,160 --> 00:04:11,520 Speaker 2: When you look at the various speeches from the Workers Party, 83 00:04:11,530 --> 00:04:14,410 Speaker 2: do you think they've closed ranks behind what has transpired 84 00:04:14,420 --> 00:04:16,919 Speaker 2: and behind the entire issue cp findings, 85 00:04:16,920 --> 00:04:19,940 Speaker 1: given that, you know, the three leaders, Mr Pritam saying 86 00:04:19,940 --> 00:04:24,020 Speaker 1: Mr and mr was the only Workers Party mps that 87 00:04:24,020 --> 00:04:25,360 Speaker 1: spoke yesterday, 88 00:04:25,640 --> 00:04:29,370 Speaker 1: and the fact that the other seven Workers Party mps 89 00:04:29,370 --> 00:04:32,469 Speaker 1: did not join the debate, does suggest that at least 90 00:04:32,470 --> 00:04:36,719 Speaker 1: within the 10 Workers Party mps, You know, they have 91 00:04:36,730 --> 00:04:41,080 Speaker 1: closed ranks, at least publicly. But given that the party 92 00:04:41,080 --> 00:04:43,320 Speaker 1: is in a crisis, and if they don't regard this 93 00:04:43,320 --> 00:04:44,560 Speaker 1: as a crisis then I think 94 00:04:44,790 --> 00:04:46,490 Speaker 1: they are detached from reality, 95 00:04:46,740 --> 00:04:49,219 Speaker 1: We shouldn't be surprised if in private that there would 96 00:04:49,220 --> 00:04:53,350 Speaker 1: be some misgivings, there would be some internal dissent. And 97 00:04:53,350 --> 00:04:57,490 Speaker 1: the question now is whether some of these unhappiness is 98 00:04:57,490 --> 00:04:59,950 Speaker 1: going to boil over, whether that will prompt some of 99 00:04:59,950 --> 00:05:04,240 Speaker 1: the cadres or even the mps or even former mps 100 00:05:04,250 --> 00:05:07,359 Speaker 1: of the Workers Party, whether they are going to try 101 00:05:07,360 --> 00:05:08,960 Speaker 1: to steer the ship, 102 00:05:09,040 --> 00:05:11,320 Speaker 1: You know, so to speak in the right direction. Because 103 00:05:11,320 --> 00:05:14,410 Speaker 1: I would be surprised if this was a matter that 104 00:05:14,420 --> 00:05:19,050 Speaker 1: everyone is 100% solidly behind the three party leaders because 105 00:05:19,050 --> 00:05:21,589 Speaker 1: I think there is that element of doubt has been 106 00:05:21,589 --> 00:05:25,560 Speaker 1: cast on the leadership integrity through the 107 00:05:25,839 --> 00:05:28,950 Speaker 1: committee of privileges report and the party must respond and 108 00:05:28,950 --> 00:05:29,860 Speaker 1: I don't think just 109 00:05:30,040 --> 00:05:33,370 Speaker 1: closing ranks and just saying that this is a political 110 00:05:33,370 --> 00:05:36,220 Speaker 1: witch hunt is going to do enough for the party, 111 00:05:36,230 --> 00:05:38,659 Speaker 2: but this isn't the Workers party first rodeo. If you 112 00:05:38,660 --> 00:05:42,020 Speaker 2: think back to two H. T. C. The courts handed 113 00:05:42,020 --> 00:05:45,000 Speaker 2: a pretty damaging verdict. They had damaging words as well. 114 00:05:45,000 --> 00:05:47,630 Speaker 2: And the party shrugged the challenge of the even one 115 00:05:47,630 --> 00:05:50,050 Speaker 2: quite big at G 2020 116 00:05:50,240 --> 00:05:54,620 Speaker 2: has this issue really driven a wedge within the Workers party? 117 00:05:54,630 --> 00:05:57,330 Speaker 2: You think Jillian, I think the challenge you referred to 118 00:05:57,330 --> 00:06:01,800 Speaker 2: with HTC was a time when mr the former Secretary 119 00:06:01,800 --> 00:06:03,159 Speaker 2: general was in charge. 120 00:06:03,440 --> 00:06:05,820 Speaker 2: He had taken quite a lot of time to build 121 00:06:05,820 --> 00:06:10,419 Speaker 2: up the party. He sort of personally interviewed and selected 122 00:06:10,430 --> 00:06:14,390 Speaker 2: whoever was in the central executive committee, whoever was eventually 123 00:06:14,390 --> 00:06:17,960 Speaker 2: fielded to be Mps, so that there would be quite 124 00:06:17,960 --> 00:06:20,260 Speaker 2: a lot of unity behind him. 125 00:06:20,540 --> 00:06:24,860 Speaker 2: He of course, ostensibly transferred that authority to Mr Singh. 126 00:06:25,140 --> 00:06:28,010 Speaker 2: I think in the course of the hearings of the 127 00:06:28,010 --> 00:06:31,690 Speaker 2: committee of Privileges, just as an observer, I was really 128 00:06:31,690 --> 00:06:35,800 Speaker 2: actually surprised by how just between Mr Singh and MS lim, 129 00:06:35,800 --> 00:06:39,719 Speaker 2: that didn't seem to be clear understanding of how they 130 00:06:39,720 --> 00:06:41,849 Speaker 2: would present things, especially 131 00:06:42,040 --> 00:06:45,110 Speaker 2: when it came to a discussion of what it meant 132 00:06:45,120 --> 00:06:48,730 Speaker 2: to give MS khan the room to make her call. 133 00:06:48,740 --> 00:06:52,089 Speaker 2: It seemed to suggest that they didn't have their ducks 134 00:06:52,089 --> 00:06:56,370 Speaker 2: in a row. But yesterday at the debate, you saw 135 00:06:56,370 --> 00:06:59,460 Speaker 2: Sylvia lim then come out quite forcefully to say that 136 00:06:59,839 --> 00:07:06,650 Speaker 2: the report in presenting miss limbs actual written notes about 137 00:07:06,660 --> 00:07:11,670 Speaker 2: what transpired in the disciplinary tribunal as something that had 138 00:07:11,670 --> 00:07:16,520 Speaker 2: been helpful and actually something that was against the interest 139 00:07:16,520 --> 00:07:18,650 Speaker 2: of her party boss. Mr Singh, 140 00:07:19,040 --> 00:07:21,239 Speaker 2: She actually said, no, you have to read the whole 141 00:07:21,240 --> 00:07:24,620 Speaker 2: thing in context. And I was actually saying that he 142 00:07:24,620 --> 00:07:28,750 Speaker 2: does end that bit of the conversation by saying, you 143 00:07:28,750 --> 00:07:31,730 Speaker 2: can't lie. Right. So, I think, you know, she was 144 00:07:31,730 --> 00:07:34,870 Speaker 2: trying to signal that there is no disunity, they're not 145 00:07:34,870 --> 00:07:38,060 Speaker 2: against each other, they are aligned. It's just how 146 00:07:38,240 --> 00:07:40,850 Speaker 2: the community has decided to present things 147 00:07:40,940 --> 00:07:44,600 Speaker 2: and we could say, as not interested parties, it sounded 148 00:07:44,600 --> 00:07:48,280 Speaker 2: like somebody was trying to divide the camp? I'm sure 149 00:07:48,290 --> 00:07:52,590 Speaker 2: there's both sides, there's disquiet within the party about the 150 00:07:52,590 --> 00:07:55,960 Speaker 2: selection of MS khan, and how MS khan has now 151 00:07:55,960 --> 00:07:57,050 Speaker 2: conducted itself, 152 00:07:57,140 --> 00:08:01,950 Speaker 2: which may be a reflection of Mr Singh's judgment. And 153 00:08:01,950 --> 00:08:04,160 Speaker 2: I think that would explain why 154 00:08:04,440 --> 00:08:07,710 Speaker 2: he mentioned the issue of selection of candidates for Mps, 155 00:08:07,710 --> 00:08:10,560 Speaker 2: which is not germane to the debate, not something you 156 00:08:10,560 --> 00:08:13,230 Speaker 2: need to bring to Parliament to explain how you run 157 00:08:13,230 --> 00:08:16,630 Speaker 2: the party. But he was addressing what is in people's 158 00:08:16,630 --> 00:08:19,880 Speaker 2: minds and probably what is in the minds of people 159 00:08:19,880 --> 00:08:23,670 Speaker 2: who may be wondering about the force of and the 160 00:08:23,680 --> 00:08:26,460 Speaker 2: confidence that they can have in him as a leader. 161 00:08:26,640 --> 00:08:29,960 Speaker 2: And I think that just sort of, shows you how 162 00:08:29,960 --> 00:08:34,500 Speaker 2: it's not an easy situation, probably within WP at the moment. 163 00:08:34,510 --> 00:08:38,209 Speaker 2: But you'll see that Mr lau, the former S G 164 00:08:38,210 --> 00:08:41,430 Speaker 2: when I referred to earlier, has addressed that issue as well, 165 00:08:41,429 --> 00:08:42,660 Speaker 2: has been asked, and he said, 166 00:08:42,940 --> 00:08:45,620 Speaker 2: yeah, people want me back. I certainly talked to them 167 00:08:45,620 --> 00:08:47,350 Speaker 2: about it, but we have a lot of talent 168 00:08:47,440 --> 00:08:50,240 Speaker 2: and he knows that it's a reflection of his legacy 169 00:08:50,240 --> 00:08:54,240 Speaker 2: in the party. Mr Singh's position, Miss limbs position as 170 00:08:54,240 --> 00:08:57,890 Speaker 2: well as the future of the WP going forward, as 171 00:08:57,890 --> 00:09:01,119 Speaker 2: he tried to respond to this crisis. Just put a 172 00:09:01,120 --> 00:09:03,310 Speaker 2: pin in that, about the future of the Workers Party, 173 00:09:03,309 --> 00:09:06,059 Speaker 2: because we definitely get into that. But just staying on 174 00:09:06,059 --> 00:09:07,150 Speaker 2: this whole idea that 175 00:09:07,340 --> 00:09:10,689 Speaker 2: perhaps this case is more damaging than HTC, Is that 176 00:09:10,700 --> 00:09:12,349 Speaker 2: also your sense, Eugene, and 177 00:09:12,640 --> 00:09:14,270 Speaker 2: what do you think is the damage you see being 178 00:09:14,270 --> 00:09:15,760 Speaker 2: caused to the Workers Party here. 179 00:09:15,770 --> 00:09:18,189 Speaker 1: Let me build on what Jillian had mentioned, and I 180 00:09:18,190 --> 00:09:23,200 Speaker 1: think it's very useful that Jillian flag the reputational capital 181 00:09:23,210 --> 00:09:26,110 Speaker 1: that the Workers Party have. This is a reputation has 182 00:09:26,110 --> 00:09:29,410 Speaker 1: been built up since Mr lau took over as a 183 00:09:29,410 --> 00:09:32,050 Speaker 1: party leader in the early two thousand's. 184 00:09:32,240 --> 00:09:33,920 Speaker 1: And I think, you know, there is a sense that 185 00:09:33,929 --> 00:09:36,350 Speaker 1: they are the leading opposition party. 186 00:09:36,540 --> 00:09:40,110 Speaker 1: They have performed well in Parliament, you know, and so that, 187 00:09:40,120 --> 00:09:43,110 Speaker 1: you know, the sense of as PM alluded to, or 188 00:09:43,110 --> 00:09:45,910 Speaker 1: rather referred very directly to, you know, that Singaporeans, one 189 00:09:45,910 --> 00:09:51,000 Speaker 1: more political contestation and diversity could mean that WP in 190 00:09:51,000 --> 00:09:55,260 Speaker 1: the meantime, can draw down on some of these reputational 191 00:09:55,260 --> 00:09:56,059 Speaker 1: capital 192 00:09:56,340 --> 00:09:58,760 Speaker 1: to say that this whole saga 193 00:09:59,040 --> 00:10:01,510 Speaker 1: would not have affected a party at all. I think 194 00:10:01,510 --> 00:10:03,910 Speaker 1: that would be putting it too lightly. I think it's 195 00:10:03,910 --> 00:10:06,830 Speaker 1: still early days, I would be surprised. It doesn't cause 196 00:10:06,840 --> 00:10:07,949 Speaker 1: soul searching 197 00:10:08,440 --> 00:10:12,380 Speaker 1: within the party. I'm quite sure, you know, cadres members 198 00:10:12,380 --> 00:10:16,480 Speaker 1: as well as volunteers are watching what the party is doing. 199 00:10:16,480 --> 00:10:18,540 Speaker 1: You know, they would have watched what events unfold over 200 00:10:18,540 --> 00:10:20,950 Speaker 1: the last few months. There are 201 00:10:21,540 --> 00:10:25,510 Speaker 1: people who should be rightfully concerned about the direction that 202 00:10:25,510 --> 00:10:29,550 Speaker 1: the party is going and what transpired in Parliament yesterday, 203 00:10:29,559 --> 00:10:31,890 Speaker 1: I think would give some of them, you know, great 204 00:10:31,890 --> 00:10:34,850 Speaker 1: cause for worry, you know, whether the party is able 205 00:10:34,850 --> 00:10:39,320 Speaker 1: to recognize that being detached from reality is not really 206 00:10:39,320 --> 00:10:40,860 Speaker 1: going to help them. And to just 207 00:10:40,940 --> 00:10:42,459 Speaker 1: pointed to as a 208 00:10:42,640 --> 00:10:46,730 Speaker 1: political persecution. I think it's just trying to target heart strings, 209 00:10:46,740 --> 00:10:49,360 Speaker 1: you know, rather than trying to deal with some of 210 00:10:49,360 --> 00:10:51,720 Speaker 1: the findings in the Committee of Privileges 211 00:10:51,720 --> 00:10:54,479 Speaker 2: report. Let me rip off what you said just now. 212 00:10:54,480 --> 00:10:57,400 Speaker 2: Also Eugene, in noting that it was only the three 213 00:10:57,400 --> 00:11:00,360 Speaker 2: leaders that spoke and not other WP mps. 214 00:11:00,640 --> 00:11:03,370 Speaker 2: This is not a new issue. This has been 215 00:11:03,540 --> 00:11:09,030 Speaker 2: and boil since razor in november. There's been at least 216 00:11:09,030 --> 00:11:11,460 Speaker 2: some sort of thought and strategizing 217 00:11:11,840 --> 00:11:15,770 Speaker 2: to make sure that the other W Mps are not 218 00:11:15,780 --> 00:11:20,690 Speaker 2: too much involved in responding to this issue. Of course 219 00:11:20,690 --> 00:11:23,030 Speaker 2: James lim was there and he was saying he knew 220 00:11:23,030 --> 00:11:26,660 Speaker 2: nothing about anything right, that just sort of is a 221 00:11:26,660 --> 00:11:31,250 Speaker 2: way to firewall, so to speak. The other mps from this, 222 00:11:31,420 --> 00:11:34,059 Speaker 2: so that if the decision is made, 223 00:11:34,340 --> 00:11:37,130 Speaker 2: then it would be a way in which you can 224 00:11:37,140 --> 00:11:40,910 Speaker 2: have a fresh set of leaders really become to hold 225 00:11:40,910 --> 00:11:43,859 Speaker 2: up the brand and to reflect a sort of a 226 00:11:43,860 --> 00:11:48,880 Speaker 2: new wave of activism by the party that doesn't have 227 00:11:48,890 --> 00:11:51,950 Speaker 2: suddenly mr lau who has moved out already didn't contest, 228 00:11:52,040 --> 00:11:54,460 Speaker 2: but it doesn't have MS lim there 229 00:11:54,540 --> 00:11:57,750 Speaker 2: and not so much Mr Singh as well. 230 00:11:58,140 --> 00:12:00,850 Speaker 2: Of course, he has a formal position and he's also 231 00:12:00,850 --> 00:12:04,580 Speaker 2: the leader of the opposition until something happens of consequence 232 00:12:04,580 --> 00:12:08,460 Speaker 2: with the public prosecutor. But I bet that the strategy 233 00:12:08,470 --> 00:12:12,250 Speaker 2: is to now go forward and profile the other mps 234 00:12:12,250 --> 00:12:16,179 Speaker 2: much more and get them to carry platform far more 235 00:12:16,190 --> 00:12:17,760 Speaker 2: than we see at the moment. 236 00:12:17,770 --> 00:12:19,650 Speaker 1: And certainly to keep the whole 237 00:12:20,490 --> 00:12:24,429 Speaker 1: con saga very much to just these three leaders 238 00:12:24,440 --> 00:12:25,680 Speaker 2: and Mishcon herself 239 00:12:25,690 --> 00:12:29,080 Speaker 1: so that it doesn't, in a way tamed the other 240 00:12:29,080 --> 00:12:33,569 Speaker 1: talents as mr put it within the party. So they 241 00:12:33,580 --> 00:12:36,800 Speaker 1: could if there's a need to easily transition to these 242 00:12:36,800 --> 00:12:37,559 Speaker 1: other 243 00:12:37,740 --> 00:12:38,810 Speaker 1: mps, I 244 00:12:38,809 --> 00:12:41,760 Speaker 2: think on social media, you know, they're already 245 00:12:41,940 --> 00:12:46,520 Speaker 2: just netizens putting forward who they'd prefer, right, if there 246 00:12:46,520 --> 00:12:50,960 Speaker 2: were a transition. Yeah, okay. But questions and comments about 247 00:12:50,960 --> 00:12:54,329 Speaker 2: transition first, but I think we're cutting to why it 248 00:12:54,330 --> 00:12:57,940 Speaker 2: was that the other WP mps were silent, was it 249 00:12:57,940 --> 00:13:00,189 Speaker 2: because they were not loyal? Was was it because they're 250 00:13:00,190 --> 00:13:03,480 Speaker 2: not behind the leaders or because there's a clear strategy 251 00:13:03,490 --> 00:13:04,760 Speaker 2: to make sure 252 00:13:04,840 --> 00:13:08,939 Speaker 2: that they are kept aside and apart for a time, 253 00:13:08,940 --> 00:13:12,900 Speaker 2: such as when they need to profile a clean slate 254 00:13:12,910 --> 00:13:16,060 Speaker 2: from this can saga. 255 00:13:16,740 --> 00:13:23,440 Speaker 2: It does sound like you're saying that the leaders who 256 00:13:23,440 --> 00:13:27,690 Speaker 2: spoke from the Workers Party in Parliament yesterday, we're trying 257 00:13:27,690 --> 00:13:31,050 Speaker 2: to be the lightning rod and, you know, looking at 258 00:13:31,050 --> 00:13:32,060 Speaker 2: Pritam Singh, 259 00:13:32,140 --> 00:13:36,030 Speaker 2: he was the first leader of the opposition. He exercised 260 00:13:36,040 --> 00:13:38,650 Speaker 2: judgment when it came to raise a con 261 00:13:38,740 --> 00:13:42,750 Speaker 2: And her accusations against her the last general election. Right? 262 00:13:42,750 --> 00:13:45,330 Speaker 2: Ben mine, it was found that he was the only 263 00:13:45,330 --> 00:13:48,790 Speaker 2: leader who spoke to her on three October. So, do 264 00:13:48,790 --> 00:13:51,410 Speaker 2: you think this has cast a different light over now? 265 00:13:51,410 --> 00:13:53,850 Speaker 2: Does he still have that reputational capital that he can 266 00:13:53,850 --> 00:13:54,660 Speaker 2: draw from? 267 00:13:54,940 --> 00:13:55,310 Speaker 2: I think, 268 00:13:55,309 --> 00:13:58,729 Speaker 1: given that, you know, he is clearly the protagonist other 269 00:13:58,730 --> 00:14:02,540 Speaker 1: than MS Raisa khan, that his leadership would would come 270 00:14:02,540 --> 00:14:06,319 Speaker 1: under much scrutiny within and without the party. I think 271 00:14:06,320 --> 00:14:08,550 Speaker 1: there is a sense that the questions of whether he 272 00:14:08,550 --> 00:14:11,670 Speaker 1: could have handled the matter in a far better way, 273 00:14:11,670 --> 00:14:15,180 Speaker 1: you know, rather than subjecting the party to this very 274 00:14:15,179 --> 00:14:17,260 Speaker 1: negative publicity, 275 00:14:17,440 --> 00:14:20,340 Speaker 1: it will be a test office leadership be a question 276 00:14:20,340 --> 00:14:21,060 Speaker 1: of whether, 277 00:14:21,240 --> 00:14:24,750 Speaker 1: you know, he can still command the confidence of his 278 00:14:24,760 --> 00:14:27,410 Speaker 1: party colleagues, but for now, you know, I think it 279 00:14:27,410 --> 00:14:29,940 Speaker 1: is clear the party has closed ranks, you know, I 280 00:14:29,940 --> 00:14:33,170 Speaker 1: think that there is the determination to put forth the 281 00:14:33,170 --> 00:14:35,560 Speaker 1: narrative that people are still behind them, you know? So, 282 00:14:35,560 --> 00:14:36,960 Speaker 1: this facebook post 283 00:14:37,140 --> 00:14:40,190 Speaker 1: last friday of a postcard, you know, from a party 284 00:14:40,190 --> 00:14:41,359 Speaker 1: supporter and all 285 00:14:41,440 --> 00:14:44,580 Speaker 1: these are all just attempts, you know, to allay concerns, 286 00:14:44,590 --> 00:14:48,020 Speaker 1: you know, within the party as well as among Singaporeans, 287 00:14:48,020 --> 00:14:50,290 Speaker 1: you know, that the party is not going to fragment 288 00:14:50,300 --> 00:14:53,160 Speaker 1: as a result of this particular debacle. 289 00:14:53,640 --> 00:14:56,860 Speaker 2: And what do you make of g E they seem 290 00:14:56,860 --> 00:15:00,290 Speaker 2: to run a tight ship. They responded very quickly Again, 291 00:15:00,300 --> 00:15:01,760 Speaker 2: the incident 292 00:15:02,140 --> 00:15:05,420 Speaker 2: did that surprise you this time around that it took 293 00:15:05,420 --> 00:15:06,710 Speaker 2: them so long to come 294 00:15:06,710 --> 00:15:09,979 Speaker 1: clean. It's baffling from my own time as as a 295 00:15:09,980 --> 00:15:12,790 Speaker 1: nominated member of parliament, one could tell, you know, the 296 00:15:12,790 --> 00:15:15,770 Speaker 1: WP runs a very tight ship that if you would 297 00:15:15,770 --> 00:15:17,950 Speaker 1: talk about the party building party discipline, 298 00:15:18,140 --> 00:15:20,670 Speaker 1: it's even more so, you know, than the ruling party. 299 00:15:20,670 --> 00:15:22,880 Speaker 1: I mean, you know, their speeches are read by the 300 00:15:22,880 --> 00:15:25,450 Speaker 1: other mps. They would never share their speeches in advance, 301 00:15:25,450 --> 00:15:27,560 Speaker 1: you know, with Parliament, you know, for the ease of 302 00:15:27,560 --> 00:15:28,460 Speaker 1: translation 303 00:15:28,640 --> 00:15:31,090 Speaker 1: because they really want to play their cards very close, 304 00:15:31,090 --> 00:15:33,970 Speaker 1: you know. And so the fact that this matter dragged 305 00:15:33,970 --> 00:15:37,880 Speaker 1: on for so long, especially when Mr Pritam Singh started off, 306 00:15:37,880 --> 00:15:41,430 Speaker 1: well it is corroborated that he told MS con you 307 00:15:41,430 --> 00:15:43,740 Speaker 1: know that this is a matter that is very serious 308 00:15:43,740 --> 00:15:46,090 Speaker 1: and that she needs to come clean and that this 309 00:15:46,090 --> 00:15:48,460 Speaker 1: matter is going to be referred to the committee of privileges, 310 00:15:48,540 --> 00:15:50,570 Speaker 1: right? And then within a couple of days, you know, 311 00:15:50,580 --> 00:15:54,110 Speaker 1: it became as though this whole sharing by Miss Kahn 312 00:15:54,110 --> 00:15:57,090 Speaker 1: that she had lied never happened at all the parties 313 00:15:57,090 --> 00:15:59,720 Speaker 1: seemed to have done nothing for two months. You know, 314 00:15:59,730 --> 00:16:02,870 Speaker 1: until the point where they realized that this was something 315 00:16:02,870 --> 00:16:04,480 Speaker 1: that was not going to go away and that there 316 00:16:04,480 --> 00:16:06,440 Speaker 1: was a need for them to address it, you know. 317 00:16:06,440 --> 00:16:09,050 Speaker 1: So so I think you know, there is that information 318 00:16:09,050 --> 00:16:10,760 Speaker 1: vacuum if I can put it that way 319 00:16:10,840 --> 00:16:13,640 Speaker 1: From what happened between August the 8th right up to 320 00:16:13,640 --> 00:16:14,950 Speaker 1: about October the 3rd. 321 00:16:15,140 --> 00:16:17,540 Speaker 1: What happened in between. And there doesn't appear to be 322 00:16:17,540 --> 00:16:21,240 Speaker 1: any contemporary records among the three party 323 00:16:21,240 --> 00:16:24,730 Speaker 2: leaders which is which is rather odd or any action taken. 324 00:16:24,730 --> 00:16:28,660 Speaker 2: So I think just as laypersons, not analysts or legal 325 00:16:28,660 --> 00:16:31,160 Speaker 2: scholars or anything, it's just 326 00:16:31,340 --> 00:16:34,820 Speaker 2: imagine that there would be some trail where you know, 327 00:16:34,820 --> 00:16:35,860 Speaker 2: the leaders would say 328 00:16:36,140 --> 00:16:38,850 Speaker 2: here's an aide memoire, you have to do this. You 329 00:16:38,850 --> 00:16:42,340 Speaker 2: have to do that within the timeline and address this issue. 330 00:16:42,350 --> 00:16:44,680 Speaker 2: That there should be some record or there should be 331 00:16:44,680 --> 00:16:48,880 Speaker 2: some action a drafting of statements on her behalf that's 332 00:16:48,880 --> 00:16:51,600 Speaker 2: really missing and it would have been useful if it 333 00:16:51,600 --> 00:16:54,970 Speaker 2: existed for it to have been presented. 334 00:16:55,240 --> 00:16:57,860 Speaker 2: That's why also Mr Singh was at pains to say 335 00:16:58,240 --> 00:16:58,850 Speaker 2: if 336 00:16:59,340 --> 00:17:02,120 Speaker 2: it happened all over again and the Mp told me 337 00:17:02,120 --> 00:17:05,900 Speaker 2: the circumstances under which he or she faced, I would 338 00:17:05,900 --> 00:17:08,880 Speaker 2: still act out of compassion and give that time. But 339 00:17:08,880 --> 00:17:13,150 Speaker 2: then it seemed that this time it was all too generous. 340 00:17:13,160 --> 00:17:17,350 Speaker 2: It then hits into the question of your judgment as 341 00:17:17,350 --> 00:17:18,060 Speaker 2: a leader 342 00:17:18,240 --> 00:17:21,419 Speaker 2: as to where you have to draw the line. You 343 00:17:21,420 --> 00:17:25,340 Speaker 2: can't have someone repeat the lie after you've already said 344 00:17:25,350 --> 00:17:28,540 Speaker 2: you have to come clean. So that's not possible. It's 345 00:17:28,540 --> 00:17:32,350 Speaker 2: difficult for us to understand it. But let's respect the 346 00:17:32,350 --> 00:17:36,189 Speaker 2: fact that Mr Singh did say yesterday that if it 347 00:17:36,190 --> 00:17:39,310 Speaker 2: was played out again, he would still offer in compassion 348 00:17:39,320 --> 00:17:40,260 Speaker 2: that time. 349 00:17:40,340 --> 00:17:42,350 Speaker 2: And he also mentioned the 350 00:17:42,440 --> 00:17:45,550 Speaker 2: point about the mental state how it was interpreted and 351 00:17:45,560 --> 00:17:49,010 Speaker 2: again repeated the context in which he presented that which 352 00:17:49,010 --> 00:17:53,280 Speaker 2: is for the question of capability and proportionality of the 353 00:17:53,280 --> 00:17:56,720 Speaker 2: punishment to follow. Mr Singh didn't say very much but 354 00:17:56,720 --> 00:17:59,200 Speaker 2: he suggested that if it's played out again, he wouldn't 355 00:17:59,200 --> 00:18:00,560 Speaker 2: have done any differently. 356 00:18:00,940 --> 00:18:03,450 Speaker 2: Well now that that's all done and dusted. I think 357 00:18:03,450 --> 00:18:06,409 Speaker 2: looking forward the next thing really is when the matter 358 00:18:06,410 --> 00:18:08,950 Speaker 2: is referred to the public prosecutor 359 00:18:09,540 --> 00:18:11,990 Speaker 2: fairness and a chance to clear their names have been 360 00:18:11,990 --> 00:18:15,960 Speaker 2: cited as reasons why this was done right instead 361 00:18:16,340 --> 00:18:19,300 Speaker 2: of the C. O. P. Imposing the fines or imposing 362 00:18:19,300 --> 00:18:24,040 Speaker 2: some sort of a sanction on faisal and directly. But Eugene, 363 00:18:24,040 --> 00:18:27,290 Speaker 2: could you outline for us when this matter is presented 364 00:18:27,290 --> 00:18:30,630 Speaker 2: to the public prosecutor, what are the different steps? How 365 00:18:30,630 --> 00:18:35,560 Speaker 2: is it different from when it's simply a sanctioned by Parliament? 366 00:18:35,640 --> 00:18:38,420 Speaker 1: When it's referred to the public prosecutor? There will be 367 00:18:38,430 --> 00:18:42,359 Speaker 1: an investigation done a fresh the public prosecutor doesn't do investigation. 368 00:18:42,640 --> 00:18:45,990 Speaker 1: It will be done by a law enforcement agency, probably 369 00:18:45,990 --> 00:18:49,120 Speaker 1: the police. And so they will have cognizance. They will 370 00:18:49,119 --> 00:18:52,990 Speaker 1: have access to whatever records that that parliament would share, 371 00:18:53,000 --> 00:18:55,890 Speaker 1: you know with the public prosecutor, but they're not bound 372 00:18:55,890 --> 00:18:57,670 Speaker 1: by the findings at all. 373 00:18:57,680 --> 00:18:59,570 Speaker 2: So it's a new chapter is in 374 00:18:59,570 --> 00:19:02,350 Speaker 1: a way a totally fresh investigation. 375 00:19:02,540 --> 00:19:05,070 Speaker 1: And so the public prosecutor would determine whether 376 00:19:05,340 --> 00:19:07,710 Speaker 1: a case has been made out whether a wrongdoing has 377 00:19:07,710 --> 00:19:10,310 Speaker 1: been committed. And then to determine whether it would be 378 00:19:10,310 --> 00:19:13,879 Speaker 1: in the public interest to prosecute one or both of 379 00:19:13,890 --> 00:19:17,090 Speaker 1: the leaders. And then if if the determination is that yes, 380 00:19:17,090 --> 00:19:20,510 Speaker 1: that they will proceed to charge them then to determine 381 00:19:20,520 --> 00:19:23,760 Speaker 1: which specific charges under which particular law 382 00:19:24,010 --> 00:19:25,620 Speaker 1: to charge them. And then of course, you know, then 383 00:19:25,619 --> 00:19:26,670 Speaker 1: it goes to trial. 384 00:19:26,740 --> 00:19:30,260 Speaker 1: The main thing really is that Mr Pritam Singh indicated 385 00:19:30,260 --> 00:19:33,060 Speaker 1: in his facebook post shortly after the 386 00:19:33,440 --> 00:19:35,570 Speaker 1: privileges committee report came out, you know that he was 387 00:19:35,570 --> 00:19:38,659 Speaker 1: concerned about the matter being referred to the PP. And 388 00:19:38,660 --> 00:19:42,310 Speaker 1: I think it's simply because if he is charged and convicted, 389 00:19:42,320 --> 00:19:46,940 Speaker 1: the probability of him losing his seat or even being 390 00:19:46,940 --> 00:19:51,119 Speaker 1: disqualified to contest in an election for five years is 391 00:19:51,130 --> 00:19:51,770 Speaker 1: greater 392 00:19:52,040 --> 00:19:55,109 Speaker 1: once he crosses a threshold in terms of define anything 393 00:19:55,340 --> 00:19:58,330 Speaker 1: Not less than $2,000 or a jail term not less 394 00:19:58,330 --> 00:20:02,070 Speaker 1: than a year will result in him automatically losing his 395 00:20:02,070 --> 00:20:05,100 Speaker 1: seat as well as being barred from contesting in a 396 00:20:05,100 --> 00:20:08,330 Speaker 1: general election. And none of the sanctions that parliament can 397 00:20:08,330 --> 00:20:11,480 Speaker 1: mete out would result in him being barred from contesting 398 00:20:11,480 --> 00:20:12,260 Speaker 1: in the election. 399 00:20:12,340 --> 00:20:15,139 Speaker 1: There is one significant sanction that parliament could give, you know, 400 00:20:15,140 --> 00:20:17,510 Speaker 1: which is to expel them from parliament and that also 401 00:20:17,510 --> 00:20:20,050 Speaker 1: resulted in an mp losing his or her seat. 402 00:20:20,240 --> 00:20:23,540 Speaker 1: There is no five year bar, you know, and of course, 403 00:20:23,540 --> 00:20:26,939 Speaker 1: you know, the optics of being found guilty by a 404 00:20:26,940 --> 00:20:32,470 Speaker 1: court of law is a lot more significant than finding 405 00:20:32,480 --> 00:20:36,859 Speaker 1: in Parliament that an Mp had conducted himself herself dishonorably 406 00:20:37,140 --> 00:20:39,090 Speaker 1: in the case of Parliament. We shouldn't be surprised that 407 00:20:39,090 --> 00:20:42,060 Speaker 1: w people to say that this is the party being victimized, 408 00:20:42,070 --> 00:20:45,510 Speaker 1: it is a political witch hunt, but they can't say 409 00:20:45,510 --> 00:20:48,359 Speaker 1: that of a court of law. So I think even 410 00:20:48,359 --> 00:20:51,350 Speaker 1: as they declared publicly, you know, that they would cooperate 411 00:20:51,350 --> 00:20:52,950 Speaker 1: with the P. P, which I'm sure they will and 412 00:20:52,950 --> 00:20:55,200 Speaker 1: in fact they have no choice. I think they would 413 00:20:55,200 --> 00:20:57,960 Speaker 1: have preferred for Parliament to have dealt with 414 00:20:58,240 --> 00:21:01,230 Speaker 1: the misconduct that the C. O. P. Found. 415 00:21:01,240 --> 00:21:04,170 Speaker 2: And that's what I think was missing in Mr Singh's speech. 416 00:21:04,340 --> 00:21:09,050 Speaker 2: He could have actually put across a more robust argument 417 00:21:09,440 --> 00:21:11,660 Speaker 2: for Parliament to manage the issue. 418 00:21:12,040 --> 00:21:14,970 Speaker 2: And given his three or four points as to why 419 00:21:15,030 --> 00:21:18,400 Speaker 2: there was no basis to the allegation that he had 420 00:21:18,400 --> 00:21:21,929 Speaker 2: lied on oath and really put forth to Parliament to 421 00:21:21,930 --> 00:21:23,350 Speaker 2: make a decision on this. 422 00:21:23,740 --> 00:21:27,560 Speaker 2: All we heard was MS lim spelling out the consequences 423 00:21:27,560 --> 00:21:28,859 Speaker 2: or the scenarios 424 00:21:29,240 --> 00:21:33,840 Speaker 2: of Parliament handling it and the public prosecutor handling it 425 00:21:33,840 --> 00:21:36,430 Speaker 2: just as you set out. So where was that robust 426 00:21:36,430 --> 00:21:40,460 Speaker 2: argument for it to be managed within Parliament? Because surely, 427 00:21:40,470 --> 00:21:44,230 Speaker 2: it would have been in his interest, given the scenarios 428 00:21:44,240 --> 00:21:47,960 Speaker 2: that this be managed within Parliament. The risk is lower 429 00:21:48,140 --> 00:21:51,480 Speaker 1: ultimately, you know, it was also a strategic concern that, 430 00:21:51,480 --> 00:21:54,240 Speaker 1: given that the committee had recommended, you know, for them 431 00:21:54,240 --> 00:21:56,170 Speaker 1: to be referred to the public prosecutor 432 00:21:56,340 --> 00:21:58,320 Speaker 1: and for the WP to say no, no, we would 433 00:21:58,320 --> 00:22:02,490 Speaker 1: rather be dealt with by Parliament would also cast another 434 00:22:02,490 --> 00:22:04,780 Speaker 1: element of doubt. And of course, you know, if parliament 435 00:22:04,780 --> 00:22:07,100 Speaker 1: were to sanction them, there was no way they could 436 00:22:07,100 --> 00:22:09,450 Speaker 1: say parliament was biased and all because, you know, they 437 00:22:09,450 --> 00:22:12,480 Speaker 1: had wanted for Parliament to deal with them. There is 438 00:22:12,480 --> 00:22:15,169 Speaker 1: a sense that they are going to deal with it 439 00:22:15,240 --> 00:22:18,100 Speaker 1: as the situation evolves, right? And so for now it 440 00:22:18,100 --> 00:22:19,050 Speaker 1: looks better, 441 00:22:19,240 --> 00:22:21,440 Speaker 1: you know, for them to say we are prepared to 442 00:22:21,440 --> 00:22:24,669 Speaker 1: be scrutinized by the public prosecutor and we will use 443 00:22:24,670 --> 00:22:27,740 Speaker 1: whatever opportunities we have to vindicate ourselves. 444 00:22:27,750 --> 00:22:30,650 Speaker 2: Two quick points. Of course, the numbers would suggest that 445 00:22:30,660 --> 00:22:34,619 Speaker 2: whatever Mr Britten said, it would go according to what 446 00:22:34,619 --> 00:22:37,169 Speaker 2: the dominant P AP had set out in Parliament and 447 00:22:37,170 --> 00:22:40,400 Speaker 2: the debate as well as the committee, which of course 448 00:22:40,400 --> 00:22:40,660 Speaker 2: had 449 00:22:41,040 --> 00:22:44,540 Speaker 2: far more members from the P. A. P than the WP. 450 00:22:44,550 --> 00:22:48,290 Speaker 2: Because it's just a representation of the numerical dominance of 451 00:22:48,300 --> 00:22:50,830 Speaker 2: the P. A. P. In Parliament. That's the first point. 452 00:22:50,840 --> 00:22:53,680 Speaker 2: But the second point is the key one that Mr 453 00:22:53,680 --> 00:22:55,940 Speaker 2: Singh would have put on record that he would have 454 00:22:55,940 --> 00:22:58,470 Speaker 2: preferred to have been dealt with in Parliament if that 455 00:22:58,470 --> 00:23:00,659 Speaker 2: were the case. But now we will 456 00:23:00,740 --> 00:23:02,560 Speaker 2: have you strung out. And 457 00:23:02,640 --> 00:23:06,980 Speaker 2: and I think that in terms of Singaporeans political culture. 458 00:23:06,990 --> 00:23:10,070 Speaker 2: They always feel that the court of Law is a 459 00:23:10,070 --> 00:23:14,970 Speaker 2: fairer platform. We've heard many debates in Parliament where then 460 00:23:14,970 --> 00:23:17,940 Speaker 2: the public looking on says, well, if it were the case, 461 00:23:17,940 --> 00:23:20,459 Speaker 2: then why don't we take it to a court of law? 462 00:23:20,540 --> 00:23:23,570 Speaker 2: So I think that's the second point. The counter to 463 00:23:23,580 --> 00:23:26,960 Speaker 2: my second point goodness. 464 00:23:27,640 --> 00:23:34,770 Speaker 2: It's interesting that you mentioned that because then I'm wondering 465 00:23:34,770 --> 00:23:37,560 Speaker 2: what are the implications for the P. A. P. Because 466 00:23:37,940 --> 00:23:41,000 Speaker 2: there could be the idea that the P. A. P. 467 00:23:41,000 --> 00:23:45,370 Speaker 2: Has managed this incident, perceived to be somewhat heavy handed 468 00:23:45,380 --> 00:23:48,880 Speaker 2: or even politically motivated. Is that inevitable? There isn't one 469 00:23:48,880 --> 00:23:51,910 Speaker 2: set of one set of public, you know, there's one 470 00:23:51,910 --> 00:23:55,810 Speaker 2: set of public sort of maybe moderate neutral and trying 471 00:23:55,810 --> 00:23:56,860 Speaker 2: its best to 472 00:23:56,940 --> 00:23:59,369 Speaker 2: catch at what they think would be the facts of 473 00:23:59,369 --> 00:24:00,560 Speaker 2: the case. And 474 00:24:00,740 --> 00:24:04,550 Speaker 2: try to see if the treatment has been fair. Really 475 00:24:04,550 --> 00:24:07,820 Speaker 2: think maybe, yeah, the Court of Law managing this in 476 00:24:07,820 --> 00:24:10,890 Speaker 2: the Court of Law would take out the political question 477 00:24:10,890 --> 00:24:13,590 Speaker 2: of whether this is a persecution by the P. A. P. 478 00:24:13,600 --> 00:24:15,660 Speaker 2: So that would be one side. The other side that 479 00:24:15,670 --> 00:24:17,869 Speaker 2: is skeptical is going to say, well, this was a 480 00:24:17,869 --> 00:24:19,060 Speaker 2: foregone conclusion, 481 00:24:19,540 --> 00:24:22,210 Speaker 2: nothing you say or do can convince me. And as 482 00:24:22,210 --> 00:24:25,310 Speaker 2: I watched the C. O. P. I found that if 483 00:24:25,310 --> 00:24:29,479 Speaker 2: they don't understand the inquisitorial approach to it found that 484 00:24:29,480 --> 00:24:33,610 Speaker 2: was already quite unfair. And so whatever happens, it's just 485 00:24:33,619 --> 00:24:36,110 Speaker 2: they say, well, this is par for the course for 486 00:24:36,119 --> 00:24:37,560 Speaker 2: oppositions 487 00:24:37,840 --> 00:24:39,680 Speaker 2: physician in Singapore anyway. 488 00:24:39,940 --> 00:24:43,450 Speaker 2: Yeah, so I think that'd be various counselor, not one view, 489 00:24:43,450 --> 00:24:44,050 Speaker 2: I think Prime 490 00:24:44,050 --> 00:24:46,800 Speaker 1: Minister lee Hsien Loong recognized that when he said, well, 491 00:24:46,810 --> 00:24:48,850 Speaker 1: the ruling party could take the easier option 492 00:24:49,240 --> 00:24:52,580 Speaker 1: give the opposition some slack, but he made a point, 493 00:24:52,580 --> 00:24:54,909 Speaker 1: you know, that in the end it is important to 494 00:24:54,910 --> 00:24:59,020 Speaker 1: preserve a certain level of integrity. In other words, a 495 00:24:59,020 --> 00:25:02,090 Speaker 1: high level of integrity and high standards of conduct and 496 00:25:02,090 --> 00:25:05,260 Speaker 1: property so that the institution of parliament will continue to 497 00:25:05,260 --> 00:25:08,440 Speaker 1: be respected. So, I think the ruling party is aware, 498 00:25:08,440 --> 00:25:09,060 Speaker 1: you know, that 499 00:25:09,240 --> 00:25:11,850 Speaker 1: because of the dominance in parliament, that 500 00:25:11,940 --> 00:25:15,480 Speaker 1: the whole matter could be seen as an attempt by 501 00:25:15,480 --> 00:25:19,170 Speaker 1: the ruling party, you know, to bully the leading opposition party, 502 00:25:19,170 --> 00:25:23,340 Speaker 1: which has made significant inroads over the last decade. But hopefully, 503 00:25:23,340 --> 00:25:27,709 Speaker 1: you know, people will look at the whole matter objectively 504 00:25:27,720 --> 00:25:31,350 Speaker 1: and decide what sort of parliament 505 00:25:31,540 --> 00:25:34,669 Speaker 1: do we want, what sort of conduct should we expect 506 00:25:34,680 --> 00:25:37,290 Speaker 1: of our leaders. And I think it's important to recognize 507 00:25:37,300 --> 00:25:42,000 Speaker 1: that whatever Mr Lee said yesterday, applies with equal force 508 00:25:42,010 --> 00:25:42,840 Speaker 1: to his own 509 00:25:42,840 --> 00:25:44,040 Speaker 2: party, right? 510 00:25:44,040 --> 00:25:47,150 Speaker 1: And so, of course, you know, if his party, himself 511 00:25:47,150 --> 00:25:48,670 Speaker 1: or his mps falls short, 512 00:25:48,840 --> 00:25:50,800 Speaker 1: it would be a worse bite, you know, than that 513 00:25:50,810 --> 00:25:52,010 Speaker 1: for for the Workers 514 00:25:52,010 --> 00:25:55,870 Speaker 2: Party, I think that the public would be merciless inciting 515 00:25:55,869 --> 00:25:57,060 Speaker 2: this and saying 516 00:25:57,240 --> 00:26:00,270 Speaker 2: it will be one standard for all right, that really 517 00:26:00,270 --> 00:26:02,879 Speaker 2: will put the P A P and the P A 518 00:26:02,880 --> 00:26:07,129 Speaker 2: PMP sort of notice and they will really have to 519 00:26:07,130 --> 00:26:09,170 Speaker 2: be whiter than white, 520 00:26:09,340 --> 00:26:12,000 Speaker 2: but play out the worst case scenario for the Workers 521 00:26:12,000 --> 00:26:15,670 Speaker 2: Party here find a jail term. And is it too 522 00:26:15,670 --> 00:26:18,510 Speaker 2: early to talk about the possibility of a by election 523 00:26:18,520 --> 00:26:19,560 Speaker 2: in our unit? 524 00:26:19,840 --> 00:26:20,399 Speaker 2: I don't 525 00:26:20,400 --> 00:26:23,109 Speaker 1: think there will be a by election, right, Unless the 526 00:26:23,109 --> 00:26:27,020 Speaker 1: pressure within the Workers Party is so great that it compels, 527 00:26:27,030 --> 00:26:30,439 Speaker 1: you know, the entire slate of five mps in alternate 528 00:26:30,440 --> 00:26:31,770 Speaker 1: to resign their seats. 529 00:26:32,140 --> 00:26:34,460 Speaker 1: But you asked about what would be the worst case scenario, 530 00:26:34,460 --> 00:26:36,390 Speaker 1: I think the worst case scenario, of course would be 531 00:26:36,400 --> 00:26:42,290 Speaker 1: for Mr Pritam Singh to be found guilty and then 532 00:26:42,300 --> 00:26:45,470 Speaker 1: attracting a penalty, you know, that would result in his 533 00:26:45,480 --> 00:26:49,709 Speaker 1: losing his seat and then being disqualified from running an 534 00:26:49,710 --> 00:26:51,270 Speaker 1: election for five years, 535 00:26:51,540 --> 00:26:52,669 Speaker 1: there would be a very 536 00:26:53,140 --> 00:26:58,460 Speaker 1: terrible outcome because you have the first and sitting leader opposition, 537 00:26:58,460 --> 00:27:01,050 Speaker 1: you know, being shown the exit in in a very 538 00:27:01,050 --> 00:27:04,590 Speaker 1: unceremonious way and very much for his own doing, because 539 00:27:04,600 --> 00:27:06,220 Speaker 1: that will have to be what the court would, would 540 00:27:06,220 --> 00:27:09,770 Speaker 1: have found, that is where the party's standing, you know, 541 00:27:09,770 --> 00:27:11,560 Speaker 1: would take an even bigger hit. 542 00:27:11,940 --> 00:27:14,390 Speaker 1: And of course, you know, that only deals with the 543 00:27:14,400 --> 00:27:18,210 Speaker 1: issue of Mr Singh lying before the committee of privileges, 544 00:27:18,210 --> 00:27:21,340 Speaker 1: you know, there is still the other matter of how 545 00:27:21,350 --> 00:27:24,930 Speaker 1: he and his party leaders handle the lye, when Miss 546 00:27:24,930 --> 00:27:27,660 Speaker 1: Reserve Kan told them that she had lied to Parliament, 547 00:27:27,740 --> 00:27:29,659 Speaker 1: that is not going to go before the courts, you know, 548 00:27:29,660 --> 00:27:32,760 Speaker 1: Parliament has just deferred that until the issue of whether 549 00:27:32,770 --> 00:27:35,960 Speaker 1: the party leaders had, like, or prevaricated before the committee 550 00:27:36,140 --> 00:27:38,260 Speaker 1: is dealt with, you know, So, you could have a 551 00:27:38,260 --> 00:27:41,090 Speaker 1: situation in which the three leaders that have been fingered 552 00:27:41,100 --> 00:27:44,389 Speaker 1: in the committee's report will see some form of sanctions, 553 00:27:44,390 --> 00:27:47,500 Speaker 1: you know, either from the courts or from Parliament, that 554 00:27:47,500 --> 00:27:50,580 Speaker 1: is going to mean that the party will have to 555 00:27:50,580 --> 00:27:53,800 Speaker 1: look elsewhere. Do you have to find a new second gen, 556 00:27:53,810 --> 00:27:54,950 Speaker 1: a new chairman and all? 557 00:27:55,200 --> 00:27:57,490 Speaker 1: But I think the bigger concern really is 558 00:27:57,640 --> 00:28:02,040 Speaker 1: what's the impact on the WP as the leading opposition party, 559 00:28:02,050 --> 00:28:07,560 Speaker 1: will this significant outcome result in Singaporeans not throwing their 560 00:28:07,560 --> 00:28:11,200 Speaker 1: support behind the Workers Party or will they feel that, 561 00:28:11,200 --> 00:28:13,889 Speaker 1: you know, the Workers Party has hit a bad run, 562 00:28:13,890 --> 00:28:16,200 Speaker 1: you know, but they're still deserving of support. So, in 563 00:28:16,200 --> 00:28:16,960 Speaker 1: that sense, 564 00:28:17,240 --> 00:28:19,619 Speaker 1: a lot will depend on how the party 565 00:28:19,840 --> 00:28:23,830 Speaker 1: deals with this evolving situation in the months and maybe 566 00:28:23,830 --> 00:28:25,949 Speaker 1: even the year or two ahead. Right, 567 00:28:25,960 --> 00:28:28,930 Speaker 2: Because you mentioned that there will be investigations, the court 568 00:28:28,930 --> 00:28:30,900 Speaker 2: will have to follow up. That sounds like it could 569 00:28:30,910 --> 00:28:33,439 Speaker 2: take a long time. Could that suck up the Workers 570 00:28:33,440 --> 00:28:36,600 Speaker 2: parties band with and pin them down? Not just on 571 00:28:36,600 --> 00:28:38,170 Speaker 2: this issue, but even in our unit, 572 00:28:38,440 --> 00:28:41,219 Speaker 2: but I think we also remember that there's an appeal 573 00:28:41,220 --> 00:28:42,990 Speaker 2: going on before the courts. 574 00:28:43,140 --> 00:28:47,050 Speaker 2: Bye Mr lau MS lim. Mr Singh was part of 575 00:28:47,050 --> 00:28:50,920 Speaker 2: the team of five in that case where they're sort 576 00:28:50,920 --> 00:28:54,320 Speaker 2: of trying to appeal the court's finding that MS lau 577 00:28:54,320 --> 00:28:59,150 Speaker 2: MS lim guilty of negligence in managing the HTC matters. 578 00:28:59,160 --> 00:29:02,959 Speaker 2: So you can see that at the leadership level, there's 579 00:29:03,140 --> 00:29:05,060 Speaker 2: going to be quite a lot of 580 00:29:05,240 --> 00:29:09,360 Speaker 2: draw on that bandwidth going forward. If former sector and 581 00:29:09,360 --> 00:29:11,840 Speaker 2: Mr lau says there's a lot of talent, then we'll 582 00:29:11,840 --> 00:29:15,980 Speaker 2: probably see this talent coming to the fore and lined 583 00:29:15,980 --> 00:29:19,930 Speaker 2: up as a sort of backup plan. You have three years, 584 00:29:19,940 --> 00:29:23,330 Speaker 2: three years to do that. Just the crystal ball gazing 585 00:29:23,330 --> 00:29:27,070 Speaker 2: a bit, the more immediate milestone is the workers party 586 00:29:27,070 --> 00:29:29,770 Speaker 2: CC election, which is due this year. 587 00:29:30,240 --> 00:29:33,230 Speaker 2: Do you foresee that there would be younger members would 588 00:29:33,230 --> 00:29:36,960 Speaker 2: be elevated? Certainly, yeah, I think the party 589 00:29:36,960 --> 00:29:41,380 Speaker 1: will will certainly want to reinforce what Mr has said 590 00:29:41,380 --> 00:29:44,680 Speaker 1: a couple of days ago that there is this Callum pool, 591 00:29:44,690 --> 00:29:47,990 Speaker 1: you know, within the workers Party. And so we shouldn't 592 00:29:47,990 --> 00:29:50,270 Speaker 1: be surprised if the other 593 00:29:50,340 --> 00:29:52,410 Speaker 1: seven Workers party mps 594 00:29:52,540 --> 00:29:57,800 Speaker 1: and other cadres are moved to significant positions within the party. 595 00:29:57,800 --> 00:30:01,590 Speaker 1: I think certainly the party recognizes that they need to 596 00:30:01,600 --> 00:30:05,320 Speaker 1: demonstrate that even if these three party leaders are badly 597 00:30:05,320 --> 00:30:07,930 Speaker 1: affected that there is nothing to stop the Workers party 598 00:30:07,930 --> 00:30:10,990 Speaker 1: from continuing with the work that they have been doing. 599 00:30:11,000 --> 00:30:13,920 Speaker 1: I think that's that's another track that the party was 600 00:30:13,920 --> 00:30:14,770 Speaker 1: to keep in mind, 601 00:30:14,940 --> 00:30:16,960 Speaker 1: you know, that even as they defend themselves from all 602 00:30:16,960 --> 00:30:21,400 Speaker 1: these different civil lawsuits, as well as possible criminal suits, 603 00:30:21,400 --> 00:30:25,140 Speaker 1: you know, that they continue to maintain the trust and 604 00:30:25,140 --> 00:30:28,720 Speaker 1: confidence of Singaporeans, otherwise they could be in for a 605 00:30:28,720 --> 00:30:31,320 Speaker 1: very difficult time come the next general election. 606 00:30:31,320 --> 00:30:33,660 Speaker 2: And is it serious enough to warrant perhaps 607 00:30:33,740 --> 00:30:36,800 Speaker 2: the return of Mr has been discussed. But what about 608 00:30:36,810 --> 00:30:39,170 Speaker 2: candidates in the past? Like me Jianzhong, 609 00:30:39,440 --> 00:30:42,040 Speaker 2: now that you mentioned, he Jianzhong, he'd written a book 610 00:30:42,050 --> 00:30:45,650 Speaker 2: and spelled out how as they looked at who would 611 00:30:45,650 --> 00:30:49,350 Speaker 2: be possible successors to Mr lau. It's not just Mr Singh, 612 00:30:49,350 --> 00:30:54,010 Speaker 2: but another non chinese person who's not leon Perera. And 613 00:30:54,010 --> 00:30:56,060 Speaker 2: that's just a suggestion about how they 614 00:30:56,240 --> 00:30:59,660 Speaker 2: as a party have been thinking about leadership renewal 615 00:30:59,840 --> 00:31:03,520 Speaker 2: in a systematic way rather than just the one person 616 00:31:03,530 --> 00:31:06,920 Speaker 2: who may seem to have been anointed by Mr lau 617 00:31:06,920 --> 00:31:11,370 Speaker 2: or trusted by Mr lau. And that there is also 618 00:31:11,380 --> 00:31:14,780 Speaker 2: the and Derek de cuna sets this out in his 619 00:31:14,780 --> 00:31:17,170 Speaker 2: book called breakthrough two point oh, 620 00:31:17,440 --> 00:31:20,780 Speaker 2: that it's retail politics. Mr He also says that it's 621 00:31:20,780 --> 00:31:22,450 Speaker 2: retail politics that matters. 622 00:31:22,740 --> 00:31:24,979 Speaker 2: They go to the ground. So whatever they said or 623 00:31:24,980 --> 00:31:26,720 Speaker 2: didn't say in Parliament yesterday, 624 00:31:27,140 --> 00:31:31,140 Speaker 2: they can say door to door in the comfort and 625 00:31:31,140 --> 00:31:35,120 Speaker 2: in the time and space. That's allowed by the constituents 626 00:31:35,120 --> 00:31:39,910 Speaker 2: in gang and gang. They can tell whatever they think 627 00:31:39,910 --> 00:31:43,160 Speaker 2: is their side of the story and this is where 628 00:31:43,240 --> 00:31:47,000 Speaker 2: all the younger mps go down and they redouble their 629 00:31:47,000 --> 00:31:47,500 Speaker 2: efforts 630 00:31:47,840 --> 00:31:51,180 Speaker 2: knocking on doors over the next few months to put 631 00:31:51,180 --> 00:31:55,370 Speaker 2: out their side of the story and build up their standing. 632 00:31:55,380 --> 00:31:57,970 Speaker 2: I think the third point is that really in the 633 00:31:57,970 --> 00:32:01,560 Speaker 2: choice Mr e said that they look for people who 634 00:32:01,570 --> 00:32:04,640 Speaker 2: can stand up to the P A P and not crumble. 635 00:32:04,640 --> 00:32:05,660 Speaker 2: In the face of 636 00:32:05,740 --> 00:32:08,610 Speaker 2: very robust arguments from the P A P side, 637 00:32:08,940 --> 00:32:12,910 Speaker 2: you will see that there are many important policy debates 638 00:32:12,910 --> 00:32:17,200 Speaker 2: are coming up the fiscal system, the tax system GsD 639 00:32:17,210 --> 00:32:20,380 Speaker 2: really trying to come out of the pandemic in as 640 00:32:20,380 --> 00:32:24,140 Speaker 2: best way possible when you see inflation's going up. So 641 00:32:24,140 --> 00:32:25,670 Speaker 2: cost of living is key 642 00:32:25,930 --> 00:32:29,180 Speaker 2: sustainability of jobs and livelihood. So 643 00:32:29,440 --> 00:32:32,300 Speaker 2: there is going to be a lot of scope for 644 00:32:32,310 --> 00:32:38,320 Speaker 2: all the younger mps to really present themselves as concerned 645 00:32:38,330 --> 00:32:42,500 Speaker 2: politicians who have good ideas and plans for the future 646 00:32:42,500 --> 00:32:45,320 Speaker 2: in the midst of very difficult age, that not just 647 00:32:45,320 --> 00:32:47,170 Speaker 2: Singapore but everybody is going through. 648 00:32:47,340 --> 00:32:50,320 Speaker 2: So, all the possibilities are there at the ground level 649 00:32:50,320 --> 00:32:51,860 Speaker 2: retail politics, at the 650 00:32:52,040 --> 00:32:56,040 Speaker 2: party level with the election and at the policy level 651 00:32:56,040 --> 00:32:59,450 Speaker 2: in Parliament. Last question, since you started to put us 652 00:32:59,450 --> 00:33:02,090 Speaker 2: on that course, is, is that the best case scenario 653 00:33:02,090 --> 00:33:04,160 Speaker 2: for the Workers Party and it's 654 00:33:04,240 --> 00:33:06,510 Speaker 2: the best case scenario for the Workers Party. The same 655 00:33:06,510 --> 00:33:09,080 Speaker 2: thing is the best case scenario for Singapore politics. Well, 656 00:33:09,080 --> 00:33:12,720 Speaker 2: you look at G 2020 and the great surprise, not 657 00:33:12,720 --> 00:33:14,670 Speaker 2: just that they took some gang, 658 00:33:14,840 --> 00:33:18,110 Speaker 2: but really they came back with greater force in our 659 00:33:18,110 --> 00:33:22,300 Speaker 2: unit and that means that they have that adversity quotient, 660 00:33:22,310 --> 00:33:25,570 Speaker 2: they present themselves first as being hit down by the 661 00:33:25,570 --> 00:33:27,950 Speaker 2: P A P is par for the course anyway, so 662 00:33:27,950 --> 00:33:29,900 Speaker 2: you start out by saying we're going to be busted 663 00:33:29,900 --> 00:33:30,170 Speaker 2: up 664 00:33:30,440 --> 00:33:32,800 Speaker 2: and so if we're going to be busted up anyway, 665 00:33:32,800 --> 00:33:35,560 Speaker 2: let's plan for how we always bounce back. 666 00:33:35,640 --> 00:33:38,700 Speaker 2: That is the flip side being able to bounce back 667 00:33:38,710 --> 00:33:42,030 Speaker 2: and build back, better to borrow a phrase. That's what 668 00:33:42,030 --> 00:33:44,980 Speaker 2: set out, not just by my saying so, but what 669 00:33:44,980 --> 00:33:48,330 Speaker 2: they've done and also by the insights we gathered from 670 00:33:48,450 --> 00:33:51,150 Speaker 2: Xinjiang of course, the WP would say that in their book, 671 00:33:51,160 --> 00:33:53,960 Speaker 2: but director kuna, I think the analysts who 672 00:33:54,140 --> 00:33:56,270 Speaker 2: speak to the WP know that they have 673 00:33:56,540 --> 00:33:59,360 Speaker 2: the people who joined them have that kind of grid anyway, 674 00:33:59,740 --> 00:34:01,150 Speaker 2: is that your thoughts as well? You 675 00:34:01,160 --> 00:34:03,490 Speaker 1: know, I think, I think it's certainly, you know, the 676 00:34:03,500 --> 00:34:07,240 Speaker 1: best case scenario would be one where the party emerges 677 00:34:07,250 --> 00:34:08,350 Speaker 1: even stronger. 678 00:34:08,739 --> 00:34:12,380 Speaker 1: But we don't know how the average Singaporean voter is 679 00:34:12,380 --> 00:34:16,399 Speaker 1: viewing this current saga, which still continues in the late 680 00:34:16,400 --> 00:34:19,609 Speaker 1: nineties and early two thousands. You know, they rejected the 681 00:34:19,610 --> 00:34:23,340 Speaker 1: politics of S. D. P. S. Dr, the lack of 682 00:34:23,350 --> 00:34:27,460 Speaker 1: truthfulness that the sort of very combative sort of politics. 683 00:34:27,739 --> 00:34:30,350 Speaker 1: And so the question now is whether voters will say 684 00:34:30,440 --> 00:34:32,450 Speaker 1: we have heard and seen enough and much as we 685 00:34:32,450 --> 00:34:35,480 Speaker 1: appreciate the role that WP has played, it may be 686 00:34:35,480 --> 00:34:40,029 Speaker 1: time perhaps to look at another opposition party seriously. Yes, 687 00:34:40,030 --> 00:34:42,980 Speaker 1: you know, it's certainly true that retail politics matter a lot, 688 00:34:42,989 --> 00:34:46,320 Speaker 1: and the WP has been very good at retail politics, 689 00:34:46,330 --> 00:34:50,740 Speaker 1: but the question is whether this particular episode, this saga 690 00:34:50,739 --> 00:34:53,020 Speaker 1: has damaged the party in a way that 691 00:34:53,030 --> 00:34:54,430 Speaker 2: people can come back from this, 692 00:34:54,430 --> 00:34:57,950 Speaker 1: Yes, people want to see more than just telling your narrative, 693 00:34:57,950 --> 00:35:00,430 Speaker 1: you know, that they want to see that the party 694 00:35:00,440 --> 00:35:04,950 Speaker 1: has moved decisively away from this episode, and that's the 695 00:35:04,950 --> 00:35:08,750 Speaker 1: challenge that I think, you know, the other WP Mps face, 696 00:35:08,840 --> 00:35:11,100 Speaker 1: because even though, you know, they could be groomed to 697 00:35:11,100 --> 00:35:14,339 Speaker 1: take over from the likes of Mr Singh Mr lim 698 00:35:14,340 --> 00:35:15,560 Speaker 1: and Mr Faisal man up. 699 00:35:15,739 --> 00:35:17,560 Speaker 1: You know, the question will be asked, you know, where 700 00:35:17,560 --> 00:35:20,000 Speaker 1: were they, what did they do when the party was 701 00:35:20,000 --> 00:35:24,259 Speaker 1: going through this debacle? Did they do enough to ensure 702 00:35:24,260 --> 00:35:27,259 Speaker 1: that the party didn't stray? There is a lot that 703 00:35:27,260 --> 00:35:28,779 Speaker 1: had to deal with, much as, you know, there's a 704 00:35:28,780 --> 00:35:31,029 Speaker 1: lot going for them, but I think they need to 705 00:35:31,030 --> 00:35:34,049 Speaker 1: respond not just in the sense of retail politics, you know, 706 00:35:34,050 --> 00:35:34,360 Speaker 1: but 707 00:35:34,739 --> 00:35:39,150 Speaker 1: also to be able to remove any doubts that this 708 00:35:39,150 --> 00:35:42,940 Speaker 1: is a party that would do right by Singapore and Singaporeans, 709 00:35:42,950 --> 00:35:45,360 Speaker 1: and I think that's really the challenge that they have 710 00:35:45,739 --> 00:35:47,660 Speaker 1: for the rest of this parliamentary term. 711 00:35:48,040 --> 00:35:51,350 Speaker 2: Well, Eugene julien, thanks again for coming down so soon 712 00:35:51,350 --> 00:35:53,260 Speaker 2: after the parliament debates yesterday 713 00:35:53,940 --> 00:35:56,850 Speaker 2: and to all listeners, Thanks for listening to us these 714 00:35:56,860 --> 00:35:58,980 Speaker 2: two years. Part of the matter will be taking a 715 00:35:58,980 --> 00:36:02,009 Speaker 2: break as it refreshes and retools, but tune in to 716 00:36:02,010 --> 00:36:04,190 Speaker 2: our other podcast on C. N. A. Like our new 717 00:36:04,190 --> 00:36:07,200 Speaker 2: Heartland tales beginning in March, which showcases a slice of 718 00:36:07,200 --> 00:36:10,540 Speaker 2: Singapore life in bite sizes and together with Christina robert, 719 00:36:10,540 --> 00:36:13,630 Speaker 2: our podcast editor and research writer, Aaron Low, and for 720 00:36:13,630 --> 00:36:15,450 Speaker 2: the last time I'm Lynn stooling, signing 721 00:36:15,450 --> 00:36:16,049 Speaker 1: off 722 00:36:16,340 --> 00:36:16,740 Speaker 1: mm hmm.