January 30, 11:42 AM 
514 Chai Chee Lane 03-16, Singapore 469029 In an interview with Lianhe Zaobao during last year's General Election, Workers' Party (WP) Chief Low Thia Khiang said that “it will be a failure for the People’s Action Party (PAP) if it does not know how to score political points".
Low said that a politician "must have the political acumen to score political points" but "every politician needs to be responsible", as "one cannot just say populist things to score political points or raise populist subjects".
This must be an advice that the PAP MPs took to heart, during the debate in parliament on the motion to fill the third Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) seat, which will go to East Coast GRC candidate Daniel Goh.
But the motion to fill the NCMP seat was not so straightforward.
The heated debate lasted for close to 2 hours on a Friday evening past dinner time.
EXTRA TIME: 30 minutes added to #Parliament proceedings; NCMP motion still being debated https://t.co/gFabDOH5NF pic.twitter.com/bUKynKE3LD
— Channel NewsAsia (@ChannelNewsAsia) January 29, 2016
Anyway, let's get the facts right before we analyse the "political point scoring" by the PAP.
1. WP Sec-Gen Low tabled a motion to fill the third NCMP seat.
2. The Parliament supported WP's motion, after PAP Minister and Party Whip Chan Chun Sing amended WP's original motion.
3. WP MPs' dissent to the amendment was recorded.
4. All PAP MPs voted for the amended motion, while WP MPs and NCMPs abstained from the vote.
Those who abstain from voting raised their hands - Low and his WP MPs and NCMPs.
Here is how PAP scored its political points last night:
Political Point 1: PAP allowed WP to fill its third NCMP seat. It did not come across as "petty" by voting against filling up the third NCMP seat.
In other words, PAP's move supported the principle of having the maximum number of NCMPs in the House and dispelled the impression that it was afraid of WP star candidate and East Coast GRC candidate sociology professor Daniel Goh.
Political Point 2: PAP used its parliamentary advantage over WP (83 vs 6+2) to assert its viewpoint.
Even Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim (top left) is awed by the move.
What's the point that PAP wanted to make?
It was stated in the amendment filled by Chan.
Chan said the following:
"Madam, I propose to amend the Motion as such with the following additions for sub-para c. But regrets that Ms Lee Lilian having stood as a Workers’ Party candidate and received the highest vote share among all losing opposition candidates, has now decided to give up her NCMP seat to another candidate from her Party with a lower vote share, contrary to the expressed will of the voters. And that the Workers’ Party supports this political manoeuver to take full advantage of the NCMP seat, even as its secretary-general criticises NCMPS as just duckweeds on the water of the pond."
Political Point 3: PAP showed that it respects the office of the NCMP more than WP.
Chan: "In response to Mr Low's earlier point, I will be the first to say that if any of my PAP MPs dare call the NCMPs second-class citizens, I as the Whip will put them in their place. But on the other hand, please do not call them 'duckweeds', because even in a pond, the duckweeds has a purpose. Let us respect each other. Let us respect the different roles that we play in this House, be it MPs, NCMPs or NMPs."
Chan: When one takes up the NCMP scheme, I hope it is for the correct reason, to serve Singapore. And I hope it is not for the wrong reason, to showcase our talent. We don't want the NCMP scheme to be a revolving door."
