Chapter 4: Results
4.2 Answering the research Question
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
emotionless policies, the use of foreign MP’s, the helping of the old and young, the ratio of teachers and pupils in school, the high defense budget, Singaporean’s being fussy with jobs and the limited land space in Singapore were also each addressed once in the coded dataset.
4.2 Answering the research question
RQ 1: Using Benoit’s Image Restoration theory as a framework, what response strategies were used by the PAP during the period leading up to the GE?
RQ 1 seeks to understand the type of strategies used by the PAP in regards to this issue during this election. The strategies are coded based on the description and understanding of Benoit’s Image restoration strategies. Tables 8.1 provide information regarding the usage of each image restoration strategy as well as the total sum of the each strategy used.
Table 8.1
Issues and type of strategies used
Cases Denial Shifting the blame Defeasibility Accident Provocation Good intentions Bolstering Minimization Differentiation Transcendence Attack theAccuser Compensation CorrectiveAction Mortification
Immigration 27 3 3 2 0 0 8 1
4
2 1 4 3 0 9 3
Cost of living 57 2 8 2 0 0 5 3
2
2 0 9 13 9 28 4
Housing 28 2 4 3 0 0 5 1
5
3 0 4 6 0 16 4
Others 1 29 1 0 1 0 0 3 1
3
3 0 5 2 0 12 5
Others 2 10 1 0 1 0 0 1 6 0 0 2 1 0 5 4
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Total 80 9 15 9 0 0 22 8
0
10 1 24 25 9 70 20
Based on Tables 8.1, we can then answer RQ1 of this research paper. The results from the content analysis have shown that the PAP has used all but accident as an image restoration theory when attempting to repair their image during the 2011 GE.
RQ 2: What was the most commonly used strategy?
From the Table 8.1 above, we can see that the most commonly used strategies are
bolstering and corrective action. In repairing their image, the PAP used a total of 80 instances of bolstering followed by 70 instances of corrective action. Attack the accuser is the third most commonly used strategy at a total sum of 25 instances and this is followed closely by the used of transcendence, good intentions and mortification at a sum of 24, 23 and 20 respectively. The strategy shifting the blame then had a total sum of 15 instances. The strategies denial,
defeasibility and compensation were each used a total of 9 times, minimization was used 10 times and differentiation, was the least commonly used strategies at 2 and there was no use of
provocation and accident as a strategy by the PAP.
RQ 3.1: Did the PAP choose more accommodative strategies in dealing with the issues?
Base on Coomb’s clustering of strategies base on their how accommodative they are as seen in Table 3.2, we can thus decipher how accommodative PAP was in dealing with the issues.
Based on Coomb’s accommodative to non-accommodative strategies, rebuild crisis response strategies (compensation, apology) are the most accommodative, followed by bolstering crisis
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
response strategies (reminder), diminish response strategies (excuse, justification) and lastly deny response strategies (denial, attack the accuser, scapegoating). Thus, as seen while answering RQ2.1, the use of bolstering and corrective action was the most at 80 and 70 respectively, fitting into Coomb’s spectrum of highly accommodative strategies. The use of other accommodative strategies like transcendence, good intentions and mortification was also often used with a sum of 24, 23 and 20 respectively. Other than the high use of attack the accuser (non-accommodative strategy), the use of other non-accommodative strategies like denial and shifting the blame is lower at 9 and 15 respectively as compared to the accommodative strategies. Thus to answer RQ3.1, the PAP did indeed use a more accommodative strategy in dealing with the three issues.
RQ3.2: What strategy/ies was/were used in regards to the unhappiness of Singaporeans with the immigration policy?
Looking once again at Table 8.1, the PAP, in dealing with the issue of immigration, most commonly used bolstering, which was used in 14 instances. This is followed by corrective action and good intentions at 11 and 9 instances respectively. The strategy transcendence was used in 4 instances. The use of denial, shifting the blame, attack the accuser and mortification were all used in 3 instances. Differentiation was used in 2 instances followed by minimization and provocation in 1 instance.
The results showed that for immigration, the PAP used all the strategies other than accident, provocation and compensation, which we have established earlier. The use of denial by the PAP is usually accompanied by statistics and figures to back up their denial. The first use of denial as a strategy was on 29th April when Minister Mentor (MM) Lee Kwan Yew denies the claims that foreigners are taking away jobs. He cited examples of how employment rose by 34%
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
between 2006 and 2010 and how half of the 115900 jobs added were filled by Singaporeans while the reminding jobs wen to foreigners as the PAP has created more jobs then Singaporeans could fill (Ramesh, 2011). The PAP also strongly denied that they are looking out for foreigners more than they are for Singaporeans and that Singaporeans are now considered 2nd class citizens.
The PAP cited examples of how the jobs going to the foreigners are usually jobs that Singaporeans do not want to do and also that these foreigners usually leave after their
employment pass is due. Also, the PAP cited examples of how a company must have a certain amount of locals before they can hire foreigners thus protecting the employment of Singaporeans.
When using shifting the blame, the PAP pushed the blame of immigration to firstly the Singaporeans themselves and secondly to the competition globally. In regards to immigration woes, the PAP pushed the blame to Singaporeans for their low fertility rate and also how
Singaporeans are the ones who are not willing to wait for housing and also not willing to do low end jobs but yet kept pushing the blame to foreign immigration. The PAP also shifted the blame of the woes of foreigners fighting for jobs with Singaporeans by blaming the global phenomenon and how it is the foreigners in other parts of the world that are competing with Singaporeans and not those that are in Singapore, thus shifting the blame to foreigners outside of Singapore.
Defeasibility was used by the PAP when Prime Minister (PM) Lee Hsien Loong held a rally on 4th of May and said that the issue of immigration and housing were things that that they were not able to predict. PM Lee said, “ the world is undergoing “very rapid and massive changes ... and, very often, we have to add to incomplete information or under uncertain
conditions” (Leong, 2011, para. 7). PM Lee claimed that the economy’s sudden recovery resulted in the shortage of flats and the growth in Singapore’s economy also meant that they had to bring in more foreigners to support the investments. These were things that were beyond their control.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The use of good intentions on the issue of immigration was mainly to justify the need of foreigners in Singapore. The biggest used of this strategy is on how stopping foreigners from entering Singapore would result in the lost of foreign investments and the moving of Multi-national companies away from Singapore thus resulting in the lost of jobs and potential incomes.
The PAP emphasizes that factories will shut down and jobs will be lost if they were to tighten the immigration policies. The second use of this strategy is on how these foreigners (blue collars) are doing jobs that Singaporeans do not want to do and without them, constructions and other heavy jobs would not be done. Thus to join in the “worldwide competition for growth and progress”
(Chan & Chan, 2011, para. 10) the government has good intentions for allowing foreigners into Singapore.
The use of bolstering on immigration was the highest at 14 counts. The main type of bolstering use was on the generic achievement of the PAP over the years and how the current Singapore got to where it is today because of the PAP. However specific bolstering on the issue of immigration is seen when PM Lee bolstered the image of the PAP by saying that the PAP has prepared Singaporeans well for the race and in fact we are at an advantage with the skills sets that we have due to the PAP’s policies for education etc.
The use of minimization of immigration is also done to down play the negative effects caused by the problems of having too many foreigners. The PAP says that there are Singaporeans who do wants more immigration laws to be looser because of their lack of manpower. The PAP also minimize the “having to compete with foreigners for jobs” unhappiness by stating that the government has job skill trainings for Singaporeans such as those in the Workfare Development
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Agency and National Trade Congress, that upgrades them and puts them in a better position when looking for a job, thus minimizing the competition mentality of Singaporeans with foreigners.
Differentiation was also used to tackle immigration and it is only here that differentiation was used throughout the campaign. On the 27th of April, MM Lee differentiated the problem of foreigners taking over Singapore when he said that most of the foreigners were people on a two-year permit that can be extended but who will have to go home eventually. These foreigners are thus just temporary staying in Singapore and not “taking over” the country like what
Singaporeans claims it to be.
The use of transcendence as a strategy to due with immigration issue is done by the PAP in such a way that they point this issue into a greater picture, which is the growth and prosperity of Singapore’s future and how Singapore is to fit in in this competitive global environment. They also challenge Singaporeans to know how to integrate with foreigners. However the bulk of transcendence, as a strategy, is done by the PAP in pointing the issue to the overall nation building and future of Singapore.
The use of attack the accuser as a strategy is significantly little when dealing with the issue of immigration. The 3 times that the strategy was used was done generically when the PAP attacked the opposition’s proposals as one that lack depth and insight.
The PAP claims to have introduce a series of measures to curb the issue of immigration and they will be implemented out these few years. They have also started to build more housing and improve transportation so as to deal with this issue. Further action will be taken by them to help integrate foreigners strongly into Singapore’s society. These are the corrective action taken by the PAP in dealing with the issue of immigration.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The PAP on the 4th of May, 2 days before cooling off day and 3 days before polling day, also issued an apology. PM Lee in his lunchtime rally acknowledges and apologized for all the mistakes that PAP made which includes the issue of immigration.
RQ3.3: What strategy/ies was/were used in regards to the issue of the high cost of living?
Similarly from the results from Table 8.1, the PAP most frequently used corrective action as the strategy in dealing with the issue of the cost of living. There are a total of 32 instances of the use of corrective action in dealing with this issue. This is followed closely by the strategy bolstering at 30 instances. The strategies attack the accuser was used in 13 instances,
compensation in 9 instances, transcendence in 9 instances, shifting the blame in 8 instances, mortification in 4 instances, denial and defeasibility both in 2 instances and minimization in 1 instance. The use of accident, provocation and differentiation was not used in regards to this issue.
The use of denial in dealing with the issue of the cost of living is first present on the 13th of April when there were rumours speculating that there will be a Goods Service Tax (GST) hike after the election that will worsen the current cost of living problem in Singapore. PM Lee denies this rumours and also denies that the PAP is not doing much to ease the cost of living by once again stating examples of how the PAP has invested carefully and funded $3 billion into the grow and share package. The use of denial on the GST increase is also taken to the next level when the PAP gave out pamphlets to Singaporeans to assure Singaporeans that there will be no GST hike.
The PAP when using shifting the blame to deal with the cost of living, usually shifted the blame to the events happening globally such as the raise in oil prices that lead to the raise in
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
product cost, the rise in cost of imported products, the political upheavals in the middle east, the tsunami and nuclear problems in Japan, debt problems in Europe and crisis in government finances in America. All these global problems together with inflation and the raise of food and oil prices led to the high cost of products in Singapore. Thus the PAP shifted the blame from themselves to that of the happenings of the world.
Defeasibility was used by Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Teo Chee Hean when he said that the economy was unpredictable and no one would know it would go down and up so quickly.
Also, the PAP was not the ones who are in control of the prices as the world market sets them.
Good intentions as a strategy was used to justify why the PAP “did not” do certain things to ease the cost of living in Singapore. The PAP proclaimed that there is no immediate shortcut in dealing with the cost of living in Singapore, thus instead of providing immediate relief to
Singaporeans, PAP justifies that they want to look for long term relief by strengthening Singapore’s economy and society for the future instead. Also, when questioned about their
overseas investment instead of helping Singaporeans tie over, PM Lee says that these investments are invested carefully so that there will be money to fund the $3 billion Grow and Share package.
Other issues such as why a lot of the money is used on defence is also justified by the PAP for having needing to stand their ground and stare down the competition so that we can still have our sovereignty. The PAP also used the strategy to deal with the unhappiness in the hike in transport prices by saying that operational cost for providing excellent transportation service requires money and if Singaporeans were to rely on subsidies, these subsidies ultimately is taken from the tax payers, therefore justifying their good intentions of not subsidizing the increase in public transportation.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Similar to the issue of immigration, the use of bolstering by the PAP mainly focuses on their past deeds in bringing Singapore to what it is today, and how the government has provided help to Singaporeans when needed. The PAP also emphasizes how the policies that they have come up with have not only make the Singapore dollar stable during the financial crisis but also how the government has provided aids such as the Grow and Share package, workfare and utilities rebate, Resilience package etc. that has help tied Singaporeans with the cost of living and to save Singaporean jobs and the Singapore economy. They build their bolstering strategy on how the PAP has never let Singaporeans down and how much Singapore have progressed towards the years.
The PAP utilizes minimization as a strategy by assuring Singaporeans that they will always have the government to rely on when dealing with the cost of living problems. This is to minimize the negative impact as well as to ease the anxiety of Singaporeans regarding the cost of living.
The use of transcendence, as a strategy by the PAP in dealing with the cost of living, is mostly done by redefining the issue to the good heartedness of Singaporeans and how
Singapore’s future should be worked on together (PAP and Singaporeans). This is done by PM Lee urging Singaporeans to help the poor and lower income in whichever way they can, as he believes that Singaporeans have a good heart and is able to make a difference. He also urges Singaporeans to take their part in building Singapore up together and to take great care of Singapore, as it is a precious jewel. The PAP also urged Singaporeans to work together rather then continuously discredit each other as this is for the future of Singapore. Similarly to immigration, the PAP transcends the problem of the cost of living to the greater social good, which does not aim at benefiting just the PAP but Singapore on the whole.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The use of attack the accuser by the PAP is mainly used to undermine the proposals of the opposition in improving the current negative impact of the cost of living. These proposals include setting up a needs based welfare system, raise income tax of the rich to 30%, increasing the pay of the low and medium income as well as to use $60 billion dollars of the reserve to fund the country. The PAP attack the oppositions lack of knowledge of the need for the reserves as well as how tax increase will only push talented individuals away from Singapore. They also undermine the opposition’s credibility when they question where the money will come from if they want to set up a welfare system as well as increase the pay of the low and medium income. The PAP uses this strategy to show that the opposition has no clue what they are talking about with the law Minister K. Shanmugam saying that the proposals of the oppositions are crazy and aimed only at playing up the emotions of Singaporeans.
Compensation to Singaporeans due to the issue of the cost of living is done with the PAP distributing the Growth and Share package, which gives out about S$300 to S$4000 each year per household. Other ill effects of the high cost of living is also dealt with through the Central
Providence Fund (CPF), the easing of electricity bills, the extra bursaries available for children’s education as well as conserving charges. The poor and low-income group who are hit hard by inflation were also getting Workfare Special Bonus and Comcare funds. These policies of the PAP are done to compensate the hardship that Singaporeans have to go through due to the issue of the cost of living.
The PAP uses the strategy of corrective action on the cost of living by trying to narrow the income gap as well as to provide relief to Singaporeans to ease the pain of the high cost of living. This includes easing electricity bills, personal income tax rebates and public assistance.
They have taken steps and budgeted S$1.5 million to help the low income and the poor and also
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
plan for a S$5.9 million worth of scholarships and bursaries to ease the cost of education. PAP’s Tin Pei Ling also personally talked to the merchants and Hawkers and managed to get them to not increase the price for the next six months at least. Dr Vivan Balakrishnan, then Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, also took action and managed to get coffee shop owners to drop their coffee prices by ten cents. The PAP also acknowledges that there is currently a high cost of living and is said to be taking steps to ease the burden of Singaporeans.
Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan was also quoted saying “Immediate concerns we are aware.
We empathise with them, we know that prices have been going up and we are actively working
We empathise with them, we know that prices have been going up and we are actively working