Our soon-to-be Prime Minister doesn’t have many chess pieces on his board. In fact, there are a few missing pieces in the back row or, more pertinently, the front bench. Jurong GRC has lost Tharman Shanmugaratnam while West Coast GRC has lost S Iswaran. Tan Chuan-Jin, while not a minister, was seen as an important player as Speaker of Parliament. He used to be the anchor person for Marine Parade GRC.
Other ministers haven’t quite covered themselves in public glory. K Shanmugam (Nee Soon GRC) and Vivian Balakrishnan (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) will forever be known as the Rajahs of Ridout Road while Heng Swee Keat (East Coast GRC) as the man who asked to be dropped from being considered for the top post because he would be too old by then.
Wondering how Mr Wong will play his pieces on the Singapore chessboard has become an interesting parlour game. When he said that only marginal changes would be made to his incoming Cabinet, it might well be because he doesn’t have plenty of options.
Perhaps, Mr Wong’s options would be better if/when his People’s Action Party manages to draw some star power into its slate of new candidates for the coming general election – and get them elected.
He still has a couple of pieces at hand though: Ng Chee Meng, whom nobody doubts will be fielded despite the rejection from Sengkang GRC voters in 2020. This is despite Mr Ng telling the media not to read too much into his jaunts in Bukit Gombak, which is next to Jurong GRC. Another piece is Ravi Menon, the former Monetary Authority of Singapore head now cooling his heels as an ambassador for climate change.
Looking at PAP’s electoral history, its most star studded cast made their appearance in 2001: Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Gan Kim Yong, Halimah Yacob, Indranee Rajah, Khaw Boon Wan, Ng Eng Hen and Vivian Balakrishnan. Two moved on to be presidents, while the rest, with the exception of the still extremely powerful Mr Khaw, are still in the Cabinet.
The next group of stars turned up in 2011, with Lawrence Wong, Heng Swee Keat, Tan Chuan-Jin,, Chan Chun Sing and Desmond Lee.
But the PAP slate in the past two elections hasn’t been as shiny. In 2015, the only notable new candidate was Ong Ye Kung, himself a second-timer at the polls. Maybe Chee Hong Tat should be considered as one, but he took far longer to get to where he is today as Acting Minister for Transport,
In 2020, there was really only Tan See Leng. This private sector/corporate man is one of very few people without any public service credentials to have been plunged into the PAP Cabinet after the election. That is a feat for the PAP (or for Dr Tan?), which doesn’t seem to be able to lure top company men into its ranks.
Perhaps, it reflects the comfort level the PAP leaders have with people they have worked with or who move within their circles – those who have been in the public sector at one time or another or forever, former military men and professionals such as doctors and lawyers. Take a hard look at the resumes of everyone and you will see a certain trend: the closer you are to the top political office as a civil servant, the higher the chances of being invited to join them and move up.
The PAP’s recruitment playbook should change. Because Singapore has changed.
The perception is that the PAP seems to think that the best and the brightest are those in the public service. That these people know the tradeoffs that have to be made in policymaking and are steeped in the civil service ethos of integrity. That they think long-term all the time unlike myopic businessmen. Hence, they will make good ministers.
But public service scholarships no longer corner the market for the cream of the crop. As Singapore went from Third World to First, so did Singaporeans. Opportunities opened up for our best people. They are probably valued more overseas because they carry the Singapore brand. I daresay that most of our exceptional citizens are “not in town’’. They are doing big things for their companies and making a name for themselves on the regional or global front.
Will they come home? The usual answer will be that they are still building up their careers, have young children, reaching the peak of their powers and enjoying the fruits of their labours. Why sacrifice privacy and perks for power and politics?
The Singapore answer is to tout high ministerial salaries as a way to compensate high achievers who enter politics. But I think this actually works against getting good people in. More likely, they will be deterred because of the public angst against high salaries which, however deserving the person, places a greater burden on ministers to achieve the ever-changing public KPIs. And given how tight-knit the civil service is, why would anyone enter a culture where everyone already knows everyone and have probably been doing things in a certain way all the time? It is like crashing a private party.
Perhaps, the PAP should look for more Tan See Lengs, corporate head honchos who have already made their millions, whose children have grown up and are searching for a mid-to-late career change. An older and wiser head would probably be more adept at handling his staff officers compared to a young and brash outsider. Mr Tan was 55 when he entered politics in 2020.
While it will solve the talent problem in the short term, the fact remains that Singapore’s much-admired succession planning has been botched.
Lawrence Wong is 52. While Lee Hsien Loong took office at the same age in 2004, he already had a long runway in charge of several different portfolios including 14 years as Deputy Prime Minister. Mr Wong was made DPM in June 2022.
Mr Lee is now 72 and will be nearing the end of his fifth term as Prime Minister or close to 20 years in the job. His predecessor, Goh Chok Tong, was 49 when he assumed the post and served 14 years over three elections.
In other words, succession planning this time was too long in the making.
The earlier appointee Heng Swee Keat referred to this lack of runway when he declined the job in 2021. He was then already 62. If he had taken on the job at age 66 this year and served two terms, he would be much older than Lee Hsien Loong was at retirement.
With Mr Wong, the succession planning process seems to be back on track, provided that Mr Wong doesn’t serve beyond three terms and makes plans for a successor by the end of his first term. Two or three terms in power seems to me an appropriate working life for a Prime Minister, with enough time to “break in’’ a successor.
Observers have said that Mr Wong has his work cut out for him. That’s for sure. He would have to deal with the tag of being a last-minute compromise candidate who wasn’t even on the political radar pre-Covid, just as Goh Chok Tong had to fight the “seat warmer’’ label.
As PM, he will need help to shape his Cabinet and yet make sure he has control over his ministers and party members. Mr Wong should not be coy about picking his successor early.
PS. An earlier version of this column said that Gan Kim Yong belonged to the 2011 cohort. This is inaccurate. He entered politics in 2001. I apologise for the error
Bertha Harian 