By Eugene Lee

2011 has indeed been a watershed year for Singapore politics, with a major point of significance being the emergence of a more politicized and discerning citizenry. During both the General Elections and Presidential Elections, many hot button issues such as the GRCs, Ministerial salaries, housing prices and the role of the Elected President were addressed.

The fact that Singaporeans are actively contributing to such debate bodes well for the country. However, while much has been discussed on the above issues, it is perhaps prudent to consider the seldom-mentioned topic of political donations and its growing effect on political parties in Singapore.

Money Talks

Finances are, without a doubt, crucial in the running for political office. Barack Obama spent US$740.6 million during his Presidential Campaign.  This feat was especially astounding as he was the first ever candidate to reject federal funding. In fact, it was his ability to raise funds early in the campaign that propelled him into the top tier during the Democratic primaries. This eventually culminated in him triumphing over Hillary Clinton.

The link between political success and having adequate support from generous financial backers is clear. While the amounts raised by the political parties in Singapore are not as mind boggling as those in the United States, raising campaign funding is nevertheless an issue of paramount importance, especially for the cash-strapped opposition. Furthermore, if the exponential rise in spending in the United States is of any indication, pecuniary concerns could very well emerge to be an issue of central significance during the next election.

Political Donations Act

The legislation that was at the forefront of Parliamentary debate in 2000 was the Political Donations Act. This Act basically serves to prohibit donations to political parties from anyone who is not defined as a permissible donor, i.e. foreigners.

Mr. Wong Kan Seng, then Minister for Home Affairs, mentioned that the purpose of the Act was to “prevent foreigners from intervening in our domestic politics.” He gave the example of the People’s Front in 1976. The People’s Front was a political party that was registered in 1971. The party was given financial assistance by an intelligence service in a neighbouring country and was allegedly used to advance ideas which were against the interests of Singapore.

Examined in this light, it is indeed justifiable to keep foreign funding out of Singapore politics. The sovereignty of the nation should be protected above all else, and it would be naïve to treat foreign donations as nothing more than charitable gifts; it is more likely than not that accepting foreign funds would turn political parties into mere proxies of the benefactors, and these foreign sources are likely to advance their own interests over Singapore’s.

It is perhaps the spillover effect of the Act towards local funding that is contentious.

A Political Move?

As a consequence of prohibiting foreign funding, the Act requires supporters donating to political parties to furnish their names, residential address and identity card numbers. In addition, persons donation $10,000 or more in a year are required to submit a report to the Registrar, with failure to do so resulting in a chargeable offence. Mr. Low Thia Khiang of the Worker’s Party has therefore criticized the Act on the grounds that it would dry up donations from anonymous sources – legitimate “permissible donors” who do not want to be named for fear of attracting reprisals from the ruling party.

In contrast, Mr. Low mentioned that while the Act would severely affect the Opposition, the ruling People’s Action Party would be relatively unaffected in their fundraising activities, due to the huge numbers of affluent MPs in the PAP camp. It is also interesting to note that the passage of the Bill coincided with the emergence of the internet, which would have greatly facilitated the transfer of funds to political parties had the Act not been implemented.

The future

It must be noted that the situation today is vastly different as compared to a decade ago. Support for the Opposition has increased significantly; hence the said spillover effects of the Act will probably not be as keenly felt today.

But the trend, as mentioned, point towards the increasingly central role of money in political activities. So while it is necessary for the Act to continue its function, Singaporeans should not regard it as a deterrence towards political donations. In fact, apart from taking a keener interest in political happenings, one can perhaps contribute more to the political scene by donating to the party he or she believes in.