Former GIC investment chief Ng Kok Song's entry into the presidential race could see him competing for votes with both former Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam and founder of Harvey Norman Ossia George Goh, with one analyst describing him as the "middle ground' candidate.

Experts say the 75-year-old may appeal to voters who, all things being equal, might prefer someone not closely tied to the establishment or someone who pledges to take an overtly independent stance against the Government.

On Wednesday (July 19), Mr Ng Kok Song, when announcing his intention to run for presidency, said that he has "never been a political figure".

“Singapore needs a President who is independent of any political party to safeguard the integrity of our institutions,” said Mr Ng who was the latest person to announce his intention to run for presidency.

MIDDLEGROUND CANDIDATE IN A THREE-CORNERED FIGHT

Associate Professor Eugene Tan, a law lecturer at the Singapore Management University, said that Mr Ng’s entry raises the likelihood of there being a contest as his prospects of securing a Certificate of Eligibility are better than Mr Goh's.

In the event that both men qualify and there is a three-cornered fight, Assistant Professor Walid Jumblatt Abdullah from the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) said that the anti-establishment votes would be split between the two.

Agreeing, Assoc Prof Tan said that Mr Ng has positioned himself as being from the establishment but not from any political party or the Government.

“In other words, he is positioning himself in the same camp as Mr George Goh. Both men have used the word independent to describe themselves,” he said.

Asst Prof Walid, however, pointed out that people may see Mr Ng as more “polished” than Mr Goh, which may help the former garner more votes.

However, Dr Felix Tan, a political analyst from NTU, said that Mr Ng would definitely split some of the votes from Mr Tharman and Mr Goh as he appears to be on “some sort of middle ground".

“For those undecided voters, they might vote for Mr Ng given that he is straddling between a public servant as well as a private individual,” he said.

Should all three qualify, the election could also show whether Singaporeans vote along racial or ethnic lines.

Associate Professor Chong Ja Ian, from the political science department of the National University of Singapore said: “If Mr Tharman performs well against both of them, this will call into question the claim that Singaporeans vote along ethnic lines which undergirds both the GRC (Group Representation Constituency) and reserved presidency systems.”

However, Dr Tan and Asst Prof Walid noted that Mr Tharman is a strong contender who could be “above racial voting” due to his strong track record and proven competence.

MR NG VS MR THARMAN

Experts said that in the event that Mr Goh does not qualify and there is a head-on contest between Mr Ng and Mr Tharman, Mr Ng would garner the anti-establishment votes.

Assoc Prof Tan said that Mr Ng is likely to appeal to voters who prefer a President who is not closely allied with the Government and the ruling People's Action Party.

"Again, all things being equal, he may also pull in voters who might prefer an ethnic Chinese President," he added.

However, if voters go on the basis of merit, they would assess based on the indicators that matter to them and who is more meritorious, said Assoc Prof Tan.

Dr Tan from NTU said that he expects the votes to be split "quite evenly".

"Mr Ng will likely have more support from voters who do not want to see yet another establishment figure as the President," he said.

DIFFICULT FOR MR NG TO QUALIFY FOR PRIVATE SECTOR CRITERIA

On whether Mr Ng might qualify under the private sector criteria, experts said that it will be difficult for Mr Ng to do so due to his company’s shareholder equity.

Prospective candidates must have served as the chief executive of one company, or be the most senior executive running the firm, for at least three years.

In addition, the company must have at least S$500 million in shareholders’ equity during the person's most recent three-year period as CEO and have been profitable after tax for the entire time that the candidate served as CEO.

After retiring from GIC in 2013, Mr Ng co-founded Avanda Investment Management in 2015 and currently serves as the chairman of the private hedge fund.

However, Assoc Prof Tan said that Avanda’s shareholder equity is about S$75 million, which is a far cry from the S$500 million threshold.

In response to a media question on his eligibility, a spokesperson for Mr Ng cited the “public sector deliberative track” in the Constitution.

Mr Ng’s role as sovereign wealth fund GIC’s group chief investment officer is not in the list of public service roles that qualify for this deliberative track. However, the Presidential Elections Committee may consider the public service requirement to be met if the candidate has the experience and ability comparable to the CEO of a Fifth Schedule entity.

Fifth Schedule entities refer to key statutory boards and government companies that are listed in the Fifth Schedule under the Constitution, such as GIC and the Monetary Authority of Singapore.

HAVING THE MORAL MANDATE

Should all three men qualify to run, the country will see its first contested election since 2011 when Mr Tony Tan won with 35.2 per cent of the vote.

Back then, some Singaporeans had said that Mr Tan did not have the moral mandate since he won with less than half of the vote, narrowly beating Dr Tan Cheng Bock who garnered 34.85 per cent of the vote.

Mr Tan Jee Say and Mr Tan Kin Lian won 25.04 per cent and 4.91 per cent of the vote respectively.

When asked if the country might see a repeat of such complaints, several experts said the Singaporeans should accept that whoever emerges as the winner in the coming election has the moral mandate to take on the position.

However, others said that it would depend on the margin of victory.

Asst Prof Walid said: “If a candidate wins, they win. There is no such thing as not having a moral mandate if you have won fairly and under the rules.”

Agreeing, Assoc Prof Tan said that the winner would have the legal and moral mandate even if he secures less than 50 per cent of the popular vote.

“We need to disabuse ourselves of the notion that the person elected in a walkover or in a contest with less than 50 per cent of the vote share lacks legitimacy,” he said.

On the other hand, Assoc Prof Chong said that this would depend on the margin of victory.

“Any victor who just ekes across the line will face an uphill battle to win broader support, especially if they do not win a majority of votes and only have a small plurality,” he said.

Dr Tan of NTU added that the winner may be able to command more respect from the people in a three-cornered fight.

“However, this would also predicate on the number of votes that he can garner eventually and whether it’s a resounding or overwhelming vote in his favour. Otherwise, we will only see a repeat of the scenario in the 2011 election,” he said.

Source:
courtesy of TODAY

by CHARLENE GOH

If you have any stories or news that you would like to share with the global online community, please feel free to share it with us by contacting us directly at [email protected]