A few days ago, one of my friends asked me what I thought about the recent Presidential Elections. I told him frankly that it didn't really concern me much, seeing how the candidate I supported, Mr S.R. Nathan, was accepted as President uncontested.
However, my apparent apathy sort of disgruntled my friend abit.
"What's the point of having an elected presidency if Singaporeans had no choice in the matter?" he fumed.
He conceded, nevertheless, that out of the four who submitted their names to the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC), Mr Nathan was indeed the most qualified person and would indubitably be the candidate he would root for in the event of an election. Still, he remonstrated, it would be nice if the people had a say in the matter for a change and not just leave the decision-making to a handful of people in a stuffy committee...
I guess I can understand my friend's disillusionment with the system. What with two consecutive walkovers, Mr Nathan's victory might seem to ring abit hollow. To dismiss speculations that the criteria is too stringent and there is a shortage in the number of people who qualify for the job, the press secretary to the PM wrote a letter to the ST's forum stating, amongst other things, that "there must be 700 to 800 people in Singapore who qualify."
Therefore, the fact that these individuals chose not to come forward could either mean that they trust Mr Nathan to do his job satisfactorily, or they are just not interested or/and are unwilling to run for president.
Whatever the case, with or without filtering of candidates by the PEC, we can't just allow any Tom, Dick or Harry to run for president right? I mean, we're talking about the post of PRESIDENT here -- and we gotta have someone who can make a good impression. And what's the point of having an election with incompetent candidates if just for the sake of competition?
PS: I would like to confess at this juncture that I do NOT actively support any particular political party and am not deliberately trying to be pro-gahmen =p
