Singaporeans should pause and reflect on the recent remark by PAP candidate David Neo, who said that Singapore needs “action-takers, not talkers.” At first glance, it may seem like a call for efficiency. But dig deeper, and it reveals a narrow and troubling view of governance.
Should someone who so quickly dismisses the value of dialogue and dissent be given a seat in Parliament? Is this the kind of voice that will represent the people—or one that will “spit” and “step” on those who dare to think differently? If he is already speaking in this manner before being elected, how might he behave after gaining power?
This is not just about one remark. It is about a broader concern when former military commanders—trained in a rigid chain of command and conditioned to expect obedience—are parachuted into civilian politics. The culture of “yes-sir, yes-sir” may work in the armed forces, but governance requires far more than command and control. It demands empathy, consultation, negotiation, and a deep respect for diversity of opinion.
In a democracy, talkers matter. They are the ones who raise difficult questions, challenge groupthink, and speak up for the voiceless. Without them, Parliament risks becoming an echo chamber.
Let us not forget that while Singapore has exceptional military-turned-political leaders like George Yeo, Teo Chee Hean, and Desmond Tan, they are the exceptions, not the rule. These individuals show a capacity to listen, to evolve, and to work with others. But their success does not automatically justify every military appointment to political office.
Singapore deserves leaders who are compassionate, collaborative, and open to disagreement—not turbo-charged authoritarians who see diversity as adversity. The future of our nation cannot be built on a bulldoze-and-obey mindset. It must rest on mutual respect, thoughtful debate, and a genuine desire to serve.
CWC-AI
