GE2025: 2.6m Singaporeans head to the polls in PM Wong's first election as leader
Some 2.6 million Singaporeans will head to the polls on May 3 in a general election taking place amid great global uncertainty.
This election marks the first time Prime Minister Lawrence Wong is leading the ruling PAP in an electoral contest, and comes after nine days of intense and, at times, combative campaigning.
Candidates from various political parties fanned out across the island, delivering speeches at rallies, debating policies on podcasts, and engaging voters through social media posts, livestreams and memes.
There are 92 out of 97 parliamentary seats that await the verdict of voters, with Marine Parade-Braddell Heights GRC uncontested at this election.
The electoral contest takes place amid a backdrop of global uncertainty, persistent inflation, and concerns over issues such as cost of living, housing and social mobility.
In all, 11 political parties and two independents are contesting in 32 constituencies, including several new ones following electoral boundary changes in March. The five-member PAP team in Marine Parade-Braddell Heights GRC was elected unopposed on Nomination Day on April 23.
The PAP is fielding candidates in all constituencies, while the WP is contesting 26 seats in eight constituencies - five GRCs and three SMCs. The PSP is fielding 13 candidates in six constituencies, including four SMCs.
Other parties in the race include the People's Alliance for Reform, National Solidarity Party (NSP), Red Dot United, Singapore Democratic Party and People's Power Party (PPP).
Multi-cornered fights will take place in five-member Ang Mo Kio, Sembawang and Tampines GRCs, as well as the single seats of Potong Pasir and Radin Mas.
Tampines has the most number of contenders, with the PAP up against three opposition parties - the WP, NSP and PPP.
Other closely watched battlegrounds that have emerged during the hustings include the new Punggol GRC and Jalan Kayu SMC.
Polling will take place on May 3 from 8am to 8pm, with 1,240 stations set up islandwide, up from the 1,100 during GE2020.
Voters are encouraged to consider voting in the afternoon to avoid morning crowds, the Elections Department (ELD) said in a May 1 advisory.
They can check their polling station's queue status by scanning the QR code on their poll card before heading to their voting centre.
They must have with them their original NRIC or passport and poll card. Alternatively, they can present their digital NRIC and ePoll card on the Singpass app.
Voters are also reminded not to wear or carry any item that may be interpreted as political messaging. These include, but are not limited to, bags, water bottles, fans or clothing bearing party symbols or slogans. Those who do so may be turned away by election officials.
Voters are encouraged to use the self-inking "X" stamp provided at polling booths, although they may also use their own pen to mark the ballot.
The police have advised voters to walk or take public transport to their polling stations, and not to loiter in the area after voting.
Priority queues, wheelchairs and designated drop-off points will be available for voters who are sick or frail, or have disabilities.
After polls close at 8pm on May 3, counting will begin immediately at designated centres.
Preliminary results from sample counts, which are based on a random tally of ballot papers from each polling station, are expected to be released earlier in the night to give an indication of the likely outcome.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
21 hours ago
- Straits Times
Hear Me Out: Has the swing against elitism gone too far?
An art installation at the Padang. Vocal naysayers recently accused the Government's SG Culture Pass initiative of being the very thing it counteracted: elitism. PHOTO: ST FILE Hear Me Out: Has the swing against elitism gone too far? SINGAPORE – At a time when most people understand that the personal is political, individual views have become a battleground of virtue – equality, good; hierarchy, bad. Elitism? The worst possible kind of social evil. Yet, take a step back from this instinctive repulsion and there might be benefits to muddying the waters. Elitism, the belief that an elite group, however defined, should be entitled to the reins of power has been the norm throughout much of history. Whether it is the clergy, kings with their divine right, the Confucian scholar or today's fintech bros, there have been groups in each time period that societies tend to value and reward. It was only with increasing democratisation, and a growing disenfranchisement at the chasm between the top and the rest, that elitism has become a byword for undeserved privilege and gross injustice. This brief trip back in time is not to rehabilitate elitism, but to show that the current period against it – or at least one that pays lip service to not believing in an elite class – may be an aberrant one. In the West, this has been taken to extremes, manifesting in a debilitating disregard fo r e xperts and fatal results during the Covid-19 pandemic against the advice of doctors to vaccinate. In Singapore, it is the elite schools that are targeted, in the idealistic slogan that every school is a good school. Though, for perplexing reasons, this scepticism has not yet been extended to the natural reverence the majority of Singaporeans harbour for lawyers and doctors. Their expertise is assumed to be universally applicable – a mentality that has narrowed parents and students' conception of what success looks like. In any case, the ills of elitism have been thoroughly aired, including the type of entitled, discompassionate divas that it ends up producing. The very consensus of who deserves to be elite has also fractured. I wonder, though, if this enmity has led to some unexpected side effects. This is a train of thought sparked by recent reactions to the Government's SG Culture Pass initiative set out during the Budget statement in 2025. Self-sabotage Under the scheme, $100 would be given t o Si ngaporeans aged 18 and above for the consumption of the local arts, redeemable from September. One would expect rejoicing, but there was uproar from a group of vocal naysayers. They accused the credits of being the very thing it counteracted: elitism. Why? Because the money could be better spent on support for groceries. This, I thought, was a case of anti-elitism as self-sabotage. Central to this worldview was that the arts is an elitist activity patronised only by the rich and the hyper-educated aesthete, when one type of activity for the elite and one for the others is exactly the sort of segregation and self-limiting mentality that perpetuates divides. There was no sense that this $100 in credits was a way of making the perceived barrier more permeable. To put it in context, the Government also announced $800 in CDC vouchers. This was bread for all, and roses too. Yet another potentially problematic by-product is that the word 'elite' has since been tainted by association. No one dares lay claim to the word 'elite', or acknowledge that someone else may be elite in his or her field. The rare exemption is perhaps in sports, where athletes accept the cut-throat nature of their competition, and where non-athletes are so tangibly outside their league that there is no point in pretending otherwise. This is not in itself a problem – elite is after all just a word – though I find no easy replacement term that can immediately convey excellence to the same degree. But it incidentally comes at a time when there is a general reluctance to impose any kind of objective standard, supplemented by that compassionate but useless invention: the consolation prize. This applies to things: Is no one taste now better than another? As well as people, where so many takes on social media are considered equally valid, measured just by virality. It is the kind of ChatGPT mentality where how often something is repeated or the number of clicks on a website can influence results, with no regard to its truth value. The war against elitism may have come at the expense of standards and good sense. Reclaiming elite This impulse to drag discourse to the same level – usually downwards – has the right intentions, timely given that, for so long, highly selective elitist standards have been imposed as objective metrics. To right the ship so discourse is levelled upwards though, perhaps elite can be thought of as separate from elitism, rehabilitated without the corresponding concentration of resources and power. This should be expanded so that who is elite becomes not just about education but also because of other qualities – role models people can aspire to in different contexts. What constitutes an elite has always been reliant on man-made barometers, negotiated by the community. There should be no shame in aspiring to be elite. Anti-elitism should not mean an absence of the elite, but that all who put their heart and minds to it should have a fair shot at claiming its pedigree, or getting closer to it. It is a lifelong dusting off of mediocrity, and it begins with first recognising what is good. Hear Me Out is a new series where young journalists (over)share on topics ranging from navigating friendships to self-loathing, and the occasional intrusive thought. Check out the Headstart chatbot for answers to your questions on careers and work trends.
Straits Times
a day ago
- Straits Times
S'pore embassy in Washington seeking US clarification on Harvard's visa ban
SINGAPORE - Singapore's embassy in Washington has been seeking clarification from the US State Department and Department of Homeland Security on President Donald Trump's directive prohibiting foreigners from entering the country to study at Harvard University. The embassy is hoping for clarity from US authorities in the next few days, including on whether there will be any delay in the processing of visas for Singaporeans hoping to study in the US, Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan said on June 7. In a zoom call with Singapore media to wrap up his five-day visit to Washington, he noted that many current and prospective students looking to study in the United States had expressed their concern to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs over potential visa delays. Asked to elaborate on contingencies being planned should Singaporean students find themselves unable to proceeds with their plans to study in the US, he said the Government is trying to find solutions to deal with the worst case scenario where students are not able to physically study in Boston. 'We've got some ideas for how we can help them to, in a sense, deal with that eventuality without impairing their academic and professional progress,' said Dr Balakrishnan. 'For others who are not yet here, who have not yet secured visas, you may also need to have backup plans, but my main point is we will stay in touch, and we will continue to keep you informed.' Dr Balakrishnan noted that Singapore's ambassador to the US Lui Tuck Yew has also held a virtual town hall with students currently studying in Harvard. In the virtual town hall on May 30, Mr Lui told Singaporean students at Harvard that the Republic's autonomous universities can offer them placements if they wish to discontinue their studies in the US and return home. A Ministry of Education spokesperson said this message was shared with affected students so they could consider returning to Singapore as a possible option to continue their studies. There are six autonomous universities here: National University of Singapore, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Management University, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore University of Technology and Design and Singapore Institute of Technology. University statistics show that there are currently 151 Singaporean students in Harvard. Among them are 12 Public Service Commission scholarship holders. Foreign students at Harvard were thrown into limbo after Mr Trump's administration announced on May 22 that it had revoked Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Programme certification with immediate effect. The nearly 6,800 international students in the Ivy League college were given an ultimatum to either transfer to another institution, or face deportation. A federal judge later blocked the move, with the Trump administration rolling back its stance on May 29 and giving Harvard 30 days to submit evidence contesting the administration's plan to revoke the school's right to enrol international students. International students make up more than a quarter of Harvard's student body, but Mr Trump said the university should cap its international intake at 15 per cent. Dr Balakrishnan said the situation confronting international students stems from domestic political issues within the US. But students, including from Singapore, can become affected as collateral damage, and there will be a period of uncertainty of at least a few days or weeks. 'Nevertheless, we will continue to pursue this with the American authorities, and I hope we'll be able to find suitable solutions for our students who want to pursue educational opportunities in the United States.' At a macro level, it remains in both Singapore and the US' interests to keep opportunities open for Singaporeans who want to study and work in the US to expand their domain experience and their networks, he added. 'So this is an issue that we will continue to pursue with the State Department.' Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
CNA
2 days ago
- CNA
Commentary: Why Singapore PM Wong's recent comments on Israel actions in Gaza are significant
SINGAPORE: Last week, Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said that Israel's restriction of aid into Gaza may be a ' likely breach of international humanitarian law ' that 'cannot be justified'. The comments were the strongest so far by Singapore's leadership since the Hamas terrorist attack on Oct 7, 2023, and Israel's response. Beyond the language, the fact that Mr Wong made those comments at a joint press conference with visiting French President Emmanuel Macron was significant: Of late, Mr Macron had himself emphasised that Europe should 'harden its collective position' on Israel, including affording official recognition for a Palestinian state. This has come on the back of steps taken by the United Kingdom and Canada to denounce Israel's latest military offensive in Gaza, including the threat of 'concrete actions'. Perhaps what has raised eyebrows the most was German Chancellor Friedrich Merz 's recent comment that he could 'no longer understand' what goal Israel was aiming to achieve with its latest Gaza offensive. It was a clear break from Germany's longstanding 'reason of state' – a special responsibility for Israel on account of the horrors perpetrated against European Jews by the Nazis. These actions point to a growing consensus internationally – even in the West – that Israel should not be given carte blanche in Gaza. But where do statements end, and actions begin? HAS SINGAPORE'S POSITION SHIFTED? Following Mr Wong's remarks, Acting Minister-in-Charge of Muslim Affairs Faishal Ibrahim said he agreed with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who wrote in the newspaper Haaretz that Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza. Prof Faishal took pains to note Israel's contributions to 'Singapore in our early years', but said he thought it was time 'to be frank'. But while the Singapore leaders' remarks received much attention, they should not be seen as a shift in our position. Just four months after Israel began retaliating for Hamas' attacks, Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan told Parliament during the Committee of Supply debates on Feb 29, 2024 that its ' military response has gone too far '. This followed his speech in November 2023, which outlined the three principles of Singapore's position: zero tolerance towards terrorism; the right of self-defence dictated by international law; and that necessity and proportionality should be accounted for if military action is required for self-defence. Put simply, Singapore's position that Israel was using disproportionate force was arrived at quickly. What is less talked about is Singapore's longstanding support for Palestinian aspirations, including its voting record in the United Nations on the issue, and its constant backing for a two-state solution. After the Gaza war began, the government and people have backed their support with actions: The Republic of Singapore Air Force has delivered seven tranches of humanitarian aid to Gaza, totalling over S$19 million, including via air drop operations. The Singapore Armed Forces, together with the Ministry of Health, deployed a medical contingent in April to treat Palestinians in Egypt. When compared to the likes of China, whose aid delivery so far amounted to US$2.75 million – broken down into six shipments of food parcels – Singapore has again punched above its weight in the international arena. AN INCREASINGLY ISOLATED ISRAEL INTERNATIONALLY What is also significant about Mr Wong's remark is that it mirrors the increasing daylight between support for Israel and for the Netanyahu government, around the world, particularly in the West. What began with robust Spanish support for the Palestinians grew into recognition (alongside Ireland and Norway) of a Palestinian state in May 2024, and has now broadened into criticism of Israeli conduct among Israel's closest European friends. The European Union has even moved to review the EU-Israel Association Agreement – the basis for trade relations. Trouble for Israel is brewing across the Atlantic, too. United States President Donald Trump's has reportedly expressed frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, owing to a divide between the former's desire to see an end to the war and the latter's defiance. Mr Trump has blindsided Mr Netanyahu on several other occasions thus far, including negotiating a new nuclear deal with Iran, and brokering direct agreements with Hamas and the Houthis that left Israel sidelined and vulnerable. The US president's high-profile trip to the Middle East just two weeks ago omitted Israel, which spoke volumes – and that is before one accounts for his decision to lift sanctions on Syria. To rub salt in the wound, Vice President JD Vance scrapped a planned visit to Israel, too, reportedly over concerns that such a trip would validate its renewed offensive into Gaza. It must be said, however, that the current wave of criticism remains just that. Whether the US, Europe, or others will apply more than vocal and symbolic pressure on Israel in order to change the situation on the ground remains to be seen. INTRANSIGENCE LEADS TO IMMOBILITY Nevertheless, prospects for ending the war remain bleak for one reason: Neither side in Gaza has come down from their hardline positions. For every move made by Israel that prolongs the conflict, Hamas has one of its own. It recently torpedoed a US-backed ceasefire proposal with additional demands. As US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff said, the Hamas response 'only takes us backward', when the original intention was build momentum with 'substantive negotiations in good faith to try to reach a permanent ceasefire'. If external pressure is not working, perhaps domestic concerns will force a rethink, as discontent continues to percolate. In Israel, public letters by reservists denouncing the continuation of war and poll findings that indicate a lack of trust (at 70 per cent) in the government, point to Mr Netanyahu's precarious position. The latest survey conducted by the Pew Research Center reveals that 53 per cent of Israelis view the prime minister unfavourably. Likewise, in Gaza, support for Hamas has dwindled. Findings released by the Palestinian Center for Policy Survey Research show a significant drop in Gazan support for Hamas, from 64 per cent in June 2024 to 39 per cent in September 2024. In March this year, Palestinians also took to the streets in the Strip to demonstrate against Hamas, with chants of 'we want an end to the war'. This should make both sides realise that an off-ramp is needed quickly. If this is to happen sooner rather than later, consistent messages from Israel's friends – like the ones from Singapore – rather than hopping between unconditional support and shrill warnings, will be key.
