MAY 5 — Singapore held its general election on 3 May 2025, and the results are what many predicted. The PAP, the party that has ruled the island state for nearly 60 years, won 87 out of 97 seats, acing the election with a 65 per cent majority vote. It is a good result for the country’s new Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, who, on the campaign trail, emphasised that the election was as much about Singapore as it was about him seeking a convincing mandate to navigate an uncertain global economy.
It was a hard-fought victory for the PAP. The opposition, particularly the Workers’ Party, gave a good account of themselves, fielding candidates with impressive credentials. Since making huge inroads in the last election, the party has gained lots of traction. This time it introduced new candidates that included a senior legal counsel and a Harvard-trained consultant. Other political parties like the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) also fielded candidates with impressive CVs – a healthcare expert in infectious disease, a former member of the PAP and a former senior civil servant.
The election was mainly fought on bread-and-butter issues – rising cost of living, migration concerns and public housing affordability. From the start, opposition parties latched on to the government’s decision to increase the Goods and Services Tax (GST) from 7 to 9 per cent, arguing that it was ill-timed given inflation and the fact that the government enjoyed over S$6 billion in budget surplus.
Another long-standing issue was on migration, with candidates contending that Singaporeans have been priced out of the job market. High property prices were also raised in the hustings. With a population of more than 6 million, property prices in the island state have been trending up. Candidates lamented that public housing flats – where more than 80 per cent of Singaporeans live – are increasingly unaffordable with long waiting times for new flats.
The opposition parties also touched on the ruling party’s shortcomings in governance. The last few days of campaigning saw the release of a series of open letters from the former CEO of NTUC Income – a government majority-owned insurance company. The letters were directed at a PAP candidate who was then the Secretary General of NTUC – the country’s labour union.
The letters claimed that the latter did not fully flag the various concerns on the purported plan by the Allianz group to buy the government-owned national insurance. The plan was eventually aborted in October 2024 after much parliamentary debate. Coming as it did days before polling day, the timing of the letters prompted senior minister Lee Hsien Loong to come to the defence of the PAP candidate – Ng Chee Meng – the man at the centre of the controversy.
As in previous elections, there was also the usual comment on the ministerial pay. Singapore ministers are among the highest paid in the world. The opposition argued that the ministerial pay did not match the quality of some of the PAP candidates, with one party comparing the frequency of parliamentary questions by PAP members of parliament to that of opposition members.
Despite the big turnouts at opposition rallies and despite being subject to intense scrutiny, the PAP aced the election.
There are many factors that contributed to the PAP’s impressive victory. Foremost is that Singaporeans voted for the tried and tested. Voters’ flight to safety comes as no surprise when juxtaposed against the PAP’s impressive track record in steering the economy. Choosing the PAP is apparent. Singaporeans get an almost daily dosage of the premium of economic growth, political stability and the need to preserve market confidence to stay relevant in a global marketplace.
Despite the big turnouts at opposition rallies and despite being subject to intense scrutiny, the PAP aced the election. — Bernama pic
This has been part of the Singaporean psyche, honed by years of the state reminding Singaporeans of the state’s vulnerability and its near-complete dependence on the external political economy. Politics plays second fiddle, one that is associated with unnecessary noise and distractions from the task of economic growth and nation building. And if we consider the fact that for most Singaporeans their major assets come in the form of a public housing flats, to them only a PAP-rule, given its track record, can ensure a growing economy, rising asset prices and stable rental yields. When it comes to the crunch, the PAP’s achievement in steering the economy definitely weighed heavily on voters’ final calculations.
The opposition raised other issues that contributed to the PAP’s win. They argued that the redrawing of electoral boundaries just days before Parliament was dissolved, plus a short window between the dissolution of Parliament and nomination day, gave opposition parties little time to react and plan their election strategy.
One opposition party, the PSP, lamented that the redrawing of electoral boundaries saw one of the electoral wards which voted for the party in the last election being removed, only to be replaced by a ward that voted overwhelmingly for the PAP in the last election.
Another opposition party, the SDP, which narrowly lost in a particular single-member constituency in the last election, also saw the constituency being absorbed into a larger GRC, which is a PAP stronghold. The GRC is a collection of single constituency wards which, in the election, is treated as one giant electoral constituency. Despite the setback, the opposition parties put up a convincing and robust campaign that drew a large turnout.
The PAP’s impressive win belies the massive work that the party has in store, especially in keeping with the expectations of an increasingly mature, discerning and sophisticated electorate. What is seemingly clear is that the conversations raised in the nine days of campaigning signal the need for the PAP to revisit policies that are sacred cows.
The ministerial pay, methods of public financing, issues of migration, employment of local Singaporeans and public housing are persistent red flags. Judging from the commentaries, these are long-standing institutions that require constant retooling. Addressing the “asset rich, cash poor” concerns of Singaporeans require revisiting assumptions on designing taxes, managing wealth creation and treating budget surpluses. The election revealed the need for more sophisticated methods of public financing other than direct transfers in the form of vouchers and rebates.
When it comes to the ministerial pay, there might be the need to revisit the existing mechanism that ties remuneration with talent. While the major assumption is that attracting ministerial talent and remuneration should mirror private sector practices, public policy suggests that the public service operates differently from the private sector.
Finally having the most successful sovereign wealth fund could well provide Singapore the wherewithal to design creative ways of wealth creation, especially when it comes to managing the country’s provident fund.
The PAP’s legitimacy is tied to its continued ability to sustain Singapore’s growth. For now, it is difficult to see any political party challenging the PAP. The party is set to rule in the coming years with the Workers’ Party – the opposition party that secured 10 seats – poised to make a greater presence in Singapore politics.
As the country prepares to celebrate its 60th anniversary this August, Singapore, just like other democracies, must be prepared for change. Change has been the signature of the Singapore story, and the PAP has never shied away from tweaking its policies, but the recently concluded election demands that more be done.
* Abdillah Noh is an Associate Professor with the School of Politics and International Relations, University of Nottingham, Malaysia.
** This is the personal opinion of the writers or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
