CNA’s pre April Fool story about how SAF generals are parachuted into the ruling party’s election machinery expecting that these individuals, if they win a seat riding on the coat tails of some current minister, be able to evolve from leading a regimental institution – the military – to lead in real life messiness. In one word: maybe. And in three words: A BIG maybe.

I am reminded of a conversation I had with a Bangladeshi minister in the 1990s. At the dinner we were having, he leaned over and asked me: “Why are there so many Brigadier-Generals in the Singapore cabinet?”

He went on to say “Usually the BG rank is a field rank obtained during war time activities. It is what the British do and isn’t Singapore a former British colony like us?“

First, I did not know that the BG rank was historically a field rank, but perhaps it could be in the Bangladeshi context and could have extrapolated from the British model.

Regardless, it was a question that I could not give a good answer especially when he then asked: “Did Singapore fight in a war, perhaps an independence war like what we did in Bangladesh?“

I said “no we did not have to do that, thankfully – we were kicked out of Malaysia in 1965 (some say it was a mutual separation) and that’s how we got our independence. No blood was shed for that.“

He looked puzzled and still wondered why there were so many BGs.

I suggested, tongue in cheek, that since these BGs did well in simulations and war games and so gained the rank. We both had a hearty laugh.

On a serious note, I think we have a good system in place in our SAF, SPF and SCDF that brings in people who are put through paces to become officers in their respective outfits and take on varying roles and responsibilities and execute them well.

It is, however, very, very unfair to “force” these people to leave their positions with what can only be deemed to be a golden handshake orchestrated by the ruling political party that offers them a shoe-in when they are fielded as a candidate in a GRC team. Before GRCs were created, there were some SAF generals that did have to actually contest in an election and win their seats, but once the GRCs were enacted, the GRCs became the magic carpet and coattail for these candidates to get into parliament.

Of the lot who were parachuted in, there is only one that stands out for me: George Yeo. Yeah, there is someone from his cohort who subsequently became the third prime minister, but George, is better.

So, while there seems to be a flurry of SAF generals (and civil service career individuals as well) leaving their posts with the view of landing a seat in parliament and, being rapidly promoted to potentially a minister (and thereby earn over S$1m a year), I think we, as a country, must ask why should this practise continue?

What qualities did they develop as a military officer that can translate easily into public service as a member of parliament?

I can, of course, ask the same question of anyone else as well, but let’s keep the whatabout out and focus on career uniformed personnel.

What value do they bring to the national conversation?

What new ideas would they have?

None of them ever worked in the private sector, nor were entrepreneurs, would not know what it means not to have a steady income (notwithstanding their growing up years which could be in very low income families).

What would they really know about the struggles of the low income families.

Some have made flippant comments like this: “The normal perception that all cardboard collectors are people who are unable to take care of themselves financially is not really true. There will be some who do this as their main source of income. Some do so to supplement what they have. Some prefer to earn extra monies, treat it as a form of exercise and activity rather than being cooped up at home. They do this to remain independent, so that they can have dignity and not have to ask their families for help.”

Looking forward to reading about more SAF generals being parachuted in for the upcoming General Elections.