Singapore leader defends election year handouts after criticism
By Philip J. Heijmans
(Bloomberg) – Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong defended an election year budget featuring a list of handouts after opposition figures criticised the measures as a short-sighted solution for addressing rising living costs.
Speaking to lawmakers in parliament Friday, Wong said that proposed vouchers totalling in the hundreds of dollars for each eligible Singaporean are just one element of the budget, with far more going into training and education programs designed to empower citizens.
'These are temporary help measures,' he said. 'They are not long-term solutions. In fact, they only make up a small part of our overall budget.'
Wong came under fire this week from opposition lawmakers who blamed the government for mishandling the economy, including by raising the goods and services tax rate last year to 9% from 8%, a move they said worsened inflation.
'The numerous vouchers will give us help for a little while, but not for long,' opposition leader Pritam Singh told parliament this week, while also accusing the government of 'poor fiscal marksmanship in trying to match Singapore's expenditure needs with revenue.'
The debate over the budget comes as Singapore prepares for an election that must be held by November but could come sooner. Wong, who is in his first year as prime minister, is seeking a strong mandate for his ruling party at a time when rising living costs are a pressing concern for many voters even though inflation has generally been slowing since late 2022.
Wong's People's Action Party has ruled Singapore since it gained independence in 1965.
This month, Wong said the government would spend almost S$124 billion ($92 billion) in the 2025 fiscal year for everything from airport upgrades to vouchers for supermarkets and elder care, according to data released after Wong's budget speech. He attributed Singapore's strong fiscal position to its ability to raise revenues.
A survey taken soon after Wong announced the budget showed that a majority of Singapore's residents viewed his measures as inadequate to helping them cope with the rising costs of living.
'Why is there a need to collect so much money when the government's fiscal projections are so unpredictable but somehow always so healthy when elections have to be called,' Singh asked earlier this week.
Wong said Friday that the criticism was unfair. 'Look, I know elections are approaching, but this chamber is not an election rally,' he said. 'Let's not get carried away by hyperbole and have a debate based on facts.'
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Putin's Oil Empire Gets Double Boost
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The U.S. will not back an EU proposal to impose a price cap on Russian oil that seeks to curb revenues for Russian President Vladimir Putin's war machine, according to Bloomberg. Russia could also benefit from the spike in oil prices following Israel's attack on Iran, a major producer of the commodity. Newsweek has contacted the White House for comment. A fuel tank farm of Russian oil pipeline giant Transneft on December 13, 2023. A fuel tank farm of Russian oil pipeline giant Transneft on December 13, It Matters Revenues from fossil fuels form the core of Russia's fiscal planning. As well as targeting Russia's natural gas, the European Commission's 18th sanctions package proposed lowering the cap on seaborne Russian oil from $60 to $45. The EU measures, which also target Russian businesses and banking, requires the backing of all 27 members. The proposal on Russian oil would need the support of the G7, which meets later this month. Bloomberg's report that Washington will not back the move deals a blow to Western hopes of limiting Moscow's means to fund its aggression in Ukraine, especially after oil prices rose following hostilities between Israel and Iran. What To Know The G7 introduced the $60-a-barrel cap that restricts the price Russia can earn from its seaborne oil. But it has not been effective in curbing the Kremlin's revenues since coming into effect in February 2023, partly because of Moscow's sanctions-busting "shadow fleet" of older vessels and a slump in oil prices. The European Commission proposed this week to drop the cap to $45, with High Representative Kaja Kallas suggesting that because Russian oil mostly transits the Baltic and Black Seas, U.S. support for the measure is not essential. An accord involving all G7 nations would be more effective because of the strength of U.S. enforcement, but the U.S. opposes dropping the price cap, Bloomberg reported, citing unnamed sources. Russian President Vladimir Putin at the St. George's Hall of the Grand Kremlin Palace on June 12. Russian President Vladimir Putin at the St. George's Hall of the Grand Kremlin Palace on June 12. Oil prices surged following Israel's strikes against Iran, and West Texas Intermediate crude futures advanced by more than 7 percent to settle near $73 a barrel, the biggest one-day jump since March 2022. The Institute for the Study of War said on Friday that the oil price rise may increase Russian revenue from oil sales and improve Russia's ability to sustain its war effort in Ukraine, delivering a boost to Putin. The Washington, D.C., think tank said Moscow might be able to leverage sudden oil price rises to weather economic challenges and finance a protracted war in Ukraine. This is notable given the concerns Putin previously voiced that any reduction in the oil price would likely risk destabilizing Russia's economy. Nikos Tzabouras, a senior market analyst at told Newsweek that although prices are set to rise, sustained hikes would require disruption to supply chains, and the U.S.'s denial of involvement in Israel's strikes keeps hope alive for a contained conflict, keeping downward pressure on oil. A sustained upside would require actual disruptions to physical flows, such as damage to Iran's oil infrastructure or a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a key global chokepoint, Tzabouras added. What People Are Saying The Institute for the Study of War said in a report on Friday: "Oil price increases following Israeli strikes against Iran may increase Russian revenue from oil sales and improve Russia's ability to sustain its war effort in Ukraine." Nikos Tzabouras, a senior market analyst at told Newsweek: "The U.S. denial of involvement offers a possible off-ramp, keeping hopes alive for a contained conflict and continuation of nuclear talks, which could pressure oil." Allen Good, the director of equity research at Morningstar, told Newsweek: "We expect, absent a wider war, today's rise in prices will likely prove to be a sell-the-news event. Oil markets remain amply supplied with OPEC set on increasing production and demand soft." What Happens Next The G7 summit is expected to discuss the oil price cap proposal when it meets in Alberta, Canada, from Sunday. The EU may try to proceed with the measure even if the U.S. rejects the proposal. U.S. President Donald Trump and his officials will make the final decision, Bloomberg reported. Meanwhile, markets continued to eye the effects the hostilities between Iran and Israel are having on oil prices.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
What It's Like at the Army Birthday Festival
This is the early scene at the Army festival on the National Mall. The 21-year-old Georgetown student said he got a small taste of the real thing Saturday, when he got to talk to soldiers and sit behind the controls of an Army Blackhawk, parked in the shadow of the Washington Monument. Originally from New Jersey, Wong said he voted for President Trump and plans to stick around all day for the parade, which Trump is expected to attend.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Our schools have a ‘boy problem' and we need to talk about it
These days it's impossible to avoid the avalanche of evidence about young men falling behind in America. Within the last month, the New York Times laid out the dismal data, the Wall Street Journal noted the rising misogyny among boys and Bloomberg documented their rising anger. One thing you won't read about the boys dilemma, this month or any other month: serious solutions to the problem. After a couple of decades as an education reporter, my first book was 'Why Boys Fail.' That was in 2011, one of several books written at the time about boys falling behind. Back then, it appeared we were on the cusp of finally doing something about it. But apparently not. Fourteen years later, all we have are more studies and op-eds. No solutions. Why? The boys dilemma has three components, and the reasons for inaction are different for each component. My focus for 'Why Boys Fail' was schooling. I traced the effects of well-intended education reforms that date back to the 1989 education summit in Charlottesville, Va., where President George H.W. Bush and 49 governors laid out a national plan for ramping up education achievement. The most notable goal was boosting early literacy skills to get all students on track for a shot at higher education. It was a noble goal, but President Bush and the governors overlooked a small but important detail: Girls are ready for early literacy challenges, but boys are not. Doubtful? Ask mothers of both boys and girls about who was the early reader. As schools pushed reading skills down by about two grades, boys faltered. They looked at the happy girls, who thrived on early reading, and concluded that school was for girls. Cue a massive school tap-out among boys, who found solace in video games. Why has nothing been done about this? Simply put, schools have no interest. Principals are overwhelmed by multiple challenges, boys being the least of them. Teachers, mostly women, have limited interest in the issue. They often see boys as discipline problems and prefer to focus on easier-to-teach girls. Groups such as the American Association of University Women (think of them as the 'thought leaders' behind the female-dominated teachers unions) see the boy problems as politically inconvenient. (It has to be a little awkward promoting women in higher education when, in fact, they are already dominating it to an almost embarrassing degree.) Second comes the problem of fatherless families, which by far hits Black males hardest. More than 70 percent of Black children grow up in families without a father. Strong mothers inspire the girls to pursue school success, but the boys appear to need more — far more. Why has nothing been done about this? That dilemma touches on issues that have long resisted solutions: race and economic inequity. Third, there's the self-image issue. Boys get thrown horribly off-track by confusing social cues. Are we supposed to be muscle-bound Jason Stathams, mowing down bad guys with punches and kicks, or sensitive Alan Aldas, whispering soothing life lessons to the ladies in his life? Why has nothing been done about this? Actually, there's been regression here. Do you really expect the current White House occupant, who brags about never having changed a diaper, praises the uneducated, bashes top universities and revels in UFC fights, to advise boys to tone down their masculinity? So, nothing gets done, and the spinoff problems fester. The biggest of those, the lack of 'marriageable mates' for women, is the little-mentioned driver behind the falling birth rate. Why would a woman take on a husband who is less likely to have a college degree than she is, and who has comparatively less to contribute to a family? Being realistic, the last two drivers of the boy problems may very well be intractable. That leaves schooling, which I would argue is the biggest factor and one that can actually be addressed. How? It all starts with convincing (in some cases, forcing) superintendents and principals to redirect schooling in boy-friendly directions. There's proof that it can be done. Roughly 15 years ago, when the alarm sounded that girls were falling behind in math and science schools engineered a turnaround for girls. Today, there's test evidence of that math-science gender turnaround everywhere. There are plenty of alarms sounding today about boys. So the question becomes: Why not do for boys what you already did for girls? Richard Whitmire is the author of six books on education issues. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
