KEY POINTS:
During my secondary school and pre-university years in Singapore, I was actively involved as a member of a group called the Young Christian Students.
The organisation was affiliated to another group called the Young Christian Workers, which fought for the rights of the poor and migrant workers, and
we students would work to help the cause.
I was asked to come up with slogans and produce posters for their campaigns, a mission I undertook with full enthusiasm being a new convert to the Catholic faith then. But as we were working on one of these campaigns, we were stunned when news broke that some of our leaders had been arrested in a government swoop.
That day in 1987, 16 people were arrested and accused of being part of a marxist conspiracy planning to topple the Singapore Government through illegal means.
Over the next few weeks there were further arrests and although I tried to put on a brave face in front of my friends and parents I was really shaking in my pants.
Each time there was a knock on the door or when the phone rang, I wondered if I was next to go.
Unlike New Zealand, the Internal Security Act in Singapore meant detention without trial and those arrested would not get the right to any legal defence.
The Government said the swoop was anti-marxist, but many felt that it was just a clampdown on political and social activism which is generally frowned upon in Singapore.
Although I didn't face arrest, the saga taught me to shut up and to just live and let live. I tried to keep a low profile and stay out of trouble.
But having become a news reporter soon after, that wasn't easy - and it didn't take long for me to get into trouble again.
I did a story on how some residents were unhappy with their local town council's choice of using a symbol of the rising sun as a logo for their estate, saying it reminded them too much of the Japanese occupation and their sufferings during World War II.
The story would have been all right for any other time, except for the fact that it was election year and the electorate where the incident happened was a closely fought one.
I was summoned to the electorate office of the incumbent MP, who was Singapore's education minister then, where I had to face an interrogation by some of his cronies.
Are you a member of an opposition party? With the elections coming, you'd better not create havoc with your stories. If you want to say anything, then register as an opposition party member.
I was let off with a stern warning and a reminder that in election year, it was best I steered clear of stories that could make the Government look bad and from making any political comments.
There is an element of fear in Singapore politics, and when growing up, I was constantly reminded of how not supporting Lee Kuan Yew and his Peoples Action Party was not only a bad thing, it could also be potentially dangerous. Political discussions were often done in hushed tones, and most definitely not in public.
What has any of this got to do with New Zealand? Well, with the contentious Electoral Finance Bill, everything. Because this is the slippery slope our democracy could be headed for.
The current freedom we enjoy in New Zealand has allowed me to express myself in ways that I could only dream about if I was still living in Singapore. Like organising the anti-racism march in Christchurch calling for stronger legislation on race-hate crimes.
Or getting invited to press interviews with leaders of all the political parties before the last elections, and being able to tell Winston Peters to his face what I thought of his remark that the racial mix on Queen St was not the right colour for New Zealand.
Organising the march in 2004 was straightforward but should the Electoral Finance Bill become law, organising the same rally next year would border on the impossible.
Not only would we have had to register as a third party, but we would also be required to file declarations about who our supporters and donors were and keep an account of expenses, making sure it did not exceed $120,000.
The topic of Asians and immigration is always grist for juicy debate in election year, a time when Asians are used for political football by some parties.
I shudder at the thought that rebuttals to any attacks will have to be restrained because, under the new law, they could be seen as encouraging people to vote or not vote for a type of party or a type of candidate.
Politicians aside, I cannot see how anyone else can say with a straight face that the Electoral Finance Bill is not a threat to democracy and freedom of speech.
The big difference between Singapore and New Zealand is this: Singaporeans are prepared to accept their brand of democracy, along with the clamping down of political activism, in exchange for security, stability and the economic gains that come with it. Are New Zealanders willing to sacrifice their freedom just to support a political party desperate to stay in power?