PAP has to retain its position for Singapore to keep doing well: SM Lee
Otherwise, it will become harder to govern Singapore well and get support for policies required to make the country work and progress, said SM Lee.
Speaking at a National Day dinner in Serangoon on Sunday (Jul 27), SM Lee said the People's Action Party (PAP) government continues to deliver good results and enjoys the confidence of Singaporeans.
'But at the same time, after all these years of peace and prosperity and progress, the desire for more alternative voices in Parliament has become stronger,' he said.
'The number of opposition MPs in Parliament has also grown, and the sentiment - I think it is quite natural, it is quite understandable,' he added.
Following the 2025 General Election, Singapore's 15th Parliament - which will sit for the first time on Sep 5 - will have 12 opposition MPs including two Non-Constituency MPs. The opposition had also secured 12 seats in the 2020 General Election.
BT in your inbox
Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.
Sign Up
Sign Up
Said SM Lee: 'So my attitude is: the opposition is here to stay in Singapore politics. But in order for Singapore to keep on doing well, the Government has to continue to hold its own, and to win votes and to win seats in elections.
'Because otherwise, beyond a point, it will become harder for us to form a team, harder for us to govern Singapore well, harder for us to get support for policies which we need, in order to make the country work and progress.'
He warned that when that happens, the quality of the Government will 'go down' and that the country's future will be affected.
'You can elect more opposition MPs to check the government, to bold it to work better, but once you are set on that path, you are heading in the wrong direction,' he said.
Instead, he called for striking the right balance between having stronger alternative voices in Government, and supporting and electing an effective one.
'One which will deliver high standards and good results, which Singaporeans have gotten used to and have come to expect from the Government; one which will take the tough but necessary decisions to secure our long-term future, particularly in today's troubled world,' he added.
SM Lee said he was glad that Singaporeans understood this and gave the PAP government a clear mandate during the elections in May.
The PAP secured 65.57 per cent of the popular vote, up from the 61.24 per cent it garnered in the 2020 General Election.
SM Lee was addressing a crowd that included the PAP candidates that had run in Aljunied GRC and Hougang SMC at the 2025 General Election in May - namely Ms Chan Hui Yuh, Daniel Liu, Faisal Abdul Aziz, Adrian Ang, and Jagathishwaran Rajo for Aljunied GRC; and Marshall Lim for Hougang SMC.
Despite the overall swing towards the PAP, both teams lost to the Workers' Party, which retained its hold over these constituencies.
The ruling party's candidates have stayed on as non-elected PAP representatives in their respective divisions.
'Now the elections are over, it does not matter who you voted for in the election,' said SM Lee, assuring Singaporeans that the PAP Government 'will continue to take care of all citizens, no matter which constituency you live in, or which party you voted for.'
SM Lee added that grassroots advisers and leaders in Aljunied and Serangoon 'do not have an easy job' as they are not elected MPs who oversee the town councils in these divisions.
'But they will always do their best,' he said, pointing out that they will continue to serve residents through explaining Government policies and measures, implementing support schemes, and organising programmes for seniors, youth and families. THE STRAITS TIMES
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
10 hours ago
- Straits Times
Recognising our imperfections is part of what makes Singapore whole
Acknowledging our flaws shows a quiet confidence and clarifies where we must go and what we must improve, says the writer. Last year, around National Day, just after I had moved back to Singapore, I wrote about seeing the country again with fresh eyes – how we seemed kinder, gentler and more at ease with our multiracialism. My point was that in the eyes of a returnee like myself, it is far more apparent that the experiment our founders embarked on six decades ago is succeeding, even if day-to-day life sometimes obscures that progress.
Online Citizen
a day ago
- Online Citizen
Singapore at 60: The secret talks and political risks behind separation from Malaysia
On the morning of 9 August 1965, Singaporeans woke to news that would change their history. At 9.30am, in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysian Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman told Parliament that Singapore was leaving the Federation of Malaysia. Barely three hours later, in Singapore, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew appeared on television. His voice broke, his eyes brimmed with tears, and he called it 'a moment of anguish' — the end of the merger he had fought for just two years earlier. For decades, the story would be told as a sudden expulsion. Yet, archival records, memoirs, and even a 1965 U.S. Embassy telegram reveal a more complex truth: the separation was the outcome of secret talks, calculated risks, and decisions made by a handful of leaders under intense political pressure. The road to merger The Malaysia Agreement, signed on 9 July 1963, was meant to reunite Singapore, Sabah, Sarawak, and Malaya. For Lee Kuan Yew and the PAP, merger was both a nationalist goal and a political necessity. As historian Dr Thum Ping Tjin explained in a 2015 interview, 'In 1957, a survey found 90% of Singaporeans in favour of merger. It wasn't just an ideal — if you wanted to win elections, you had to be openly for reunification with Malaya.' Lee himself saw merger as a platform to influence politics in Kuala Lumpur and perhaps rise to lead a united Malaysia. But the terms of merger were not equal. Singaporeans could only vote in Singapore. PAP politicians could not contest mainland seats. These restrictions limited Lee's ambitions from the start. Early rifts On 31 August 1963 — just over two weeks before Malaysia's formal formation — Lee declared Singapore's unilateral independence and called a general election. This blindsided Tunku Abdul Rahman. The September 1963 elections pitted PAP against Malaysia's ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional (BN). BN lost every seat it contested, including three Malay-majority constituencies in Singapore. For Tunku, it was a warning: Malay voters on the island were not reliably UMNO supporters. In 1964, PAP broke another informal pledge by contesting 11 mainland seats in Malaysia's general election. Only Devan Nair won — in Bangsar — but the move was seen as a direct challenge to UMNO's political dominance. 1964: Riots and mistrust Relations soured further with the 21 July 1964 racial riots in Singapore. Scores were killed, hundreds injured, and mutual trust eroded. Dr Thum notes that Lee, who had once used racial arguments to push for merger, now began championing a 'Malaysian Malaysia' — equal rights regardless of race. For UMNO leaders, this reversal appeared opportunistic and threatening. In December 1964, during a golf game, Tunku proposed to Goh Keng Swee a looser federation: Singapore would leave Malaysia's Parliament but still pay for defence and surrender control over Malay affairs on the island. Goh rejected the terms as politically unacceptable. 1965: A choice takes shape By mid-1965, the political relationship was beyond repair. In June, Lee delivered his 'Malaysia for Malaysians' speech at the Malaysian Solidarity Convention, earning his wife Kwa Geok Choo's praise but further alienating UMNO. In July, while recovering from illness in London, Tunku decided Singapore must leave. On 15 July, Malaysian ministers Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman and Ja'afar Albar met Goh in Kuala Lumpur. The meeting began as a criticism of Lee but turned into a proposal for separation. Goh agreed in principle, warning that delay would only strengthen Lee's position. Only Lee, Goh, Law Minister E.W. Barker, and Finance Minister Lim Kim San were aware. On 26 July, Goh arrived with a handwritten note from Lee authorising him to negotiate. Barker began drafting the separation agreement. Risk and secrecy The talks carried enormous personal risk. If they failed, Goh and Barker could be charged with sedition under Malaysia's constitution. One telephone conversation between Goh and Lee was conducted in halting Mandarin to keep the operator from understanding. On 3 August, Tun Abdul Razak presented Tunku's conditions: Singapore must contribute to Malaysia's defence budget and avoid foreign defence pacts. Goh sidestepped these points, saying Singapore lacked resources to build a military. By 6 August, the draft was nearly final. That night, Goh and Barker travelled to Kuala Lumpur to complete the deal. They negotiated late into the night. When Barker returned, Lee reportedly thanked him for delivering 'a bloodless coup'. Cabinet resistance On 7 August, Lee revealed the plan to the PAP Cabinet. Opposition came from Foreign Minister S. Rajaratnam and Deputy Prime Minister Toh Chin Chye, who saw separation as a betrayal of Sabah and Sarawak allies. They even considered contacting communist militants to resist a Malaysian takeover — an idea Lee rejected. By 8 August, preparations moved quickly. PAP leaders spread the news to party activists across Malaysia. That night, the separation documents were printed in secrecy in Serangoon. The British were informed only after signatures were secured. 9 August 1965: Announcements in two capitals At 9.30am, Tunku told the Malaysian Parliament that Singapore was leaving. The constitutional amendment passed, but only after Tunku warned Alliance MPs he would resign if they refused. According to the U.S. Embassy telegram, this ultimatum damaged Tunku's image as a unifier but cemented his dominance over the Alliance. Only one senior figure — UMNO Secretary-General Ja'afar Albar — defied him, and was forced to resign. At noon, Lee addressed Singaporeans in an emotional broadcast. Behind the public grief was a political reality: by leaving Malaysia, Lee secured unchallenged leadership in Singapore. Shockwaves in Malaysian politics The separation left no one fully satisfied. The U.S. Embassy reported that only the communist-influenced Socialist Front and some far-right Malay nationalists appeared pleased. Malay extremists in UMNO were bitter. Some younger members might have followed Albar in a revolt, but he publicly pledged loyalty to Tunku while quietly working to strengthen his position. Among the Chinese political class, the reaction was sharp. MCA youth were furious that their leaders had allowed what they saw as the 'ejection' of 1.5 million Chinese from Malaysia, weakening their bargaining power. MCA leader Tan Siew Sin told party youth that separation was a tragedy but unavoidable, placing blame on Lee and urging unity. Economic calculations On paper, Malaysia lost significant resources with Singapore's departure. The loss of promised development funds for Borneo was cited as a blow, but cooperation had already been minimal. Singapore's commitment to a M$150 million loan was conditional on labour access for Borneo — a point never agreed. Economic ties, however, could not be severed easily. While tariffs and quotas on Malaysian goods caused initial animosity, both governments recognised their interdependence. A 'common market' remained possible, and many businessmen were optimistic trade relations could be repaired if politics stayed out of the way. Nation-building in Singapore For Lee, independence meant both a political victory and a new challenge. Dr Thum notes that Lee had to abandon the Malayan identity he had championed since 1959 and instead emphasise a distinct Singaporean identity. Policies shifted towards English and Chinese as dominant languages, while Malay remained the national language in name. Economically, Singapore moved towards an open, export-driven model, free from Kuala Lumpur's protectionist policies. Sixty years later Today, Singapore marks its 60th National Day with a clearer understanding of 1965's events. The separation was not a sudden ejection but the outcome of covert manoeuvres, calculated risks, and political trade-offs. It was, in Lee's words, a 'bloodless coup' — and one that set both nations on divergent but enduringly connected paths.
AsiaOne
a day ago
- AsiaOne
Nation building is every Singaporean's responsibility, not the work of one party alone: Pritam, Singapore News
SINGAPORE - Nation building has never been the work of one party or one generation, and is both an individual and collective effort, said Leader of the Opposition and Workers' Party chief Pritam Singh in his National Day message. "Each and every Singaporean has the power to shape Singapore's future," he said in the message put up on his party's Facebook page on Aug 8. "This civic duty is our responsibility alone." In 60 years, Singapore has become a nation "united by Singaporeans with big hearts, a sense of righteousness, and a deep appreciation for mutual respect among all, regardless of race, language, or religion", said Mr Singh. He added that while Singapore, at 60, is not very old, it is certainly also not very young. And the Singapore story is still being written by everyone, from the seniors who live out their years with grace and purpose, to gig workers, public sector employees and young students, among others, he said. Describing this story as one of resilience - of "the pioneers, our parents, and now ourselves" - Mr Singh said it was this quality that has taken Singapore through independence, economic downturns and global pandemics. Resilience will continue to be essential amid the very different world to come, he added. The Singapore story will also become "more layered and complex" as new citizens from various parts of the world join the Singapore family, he said. Calling on all Singaporeans to build a future where "opportunity is more equitable, where no one is forgotten, and where every Singaporean has the space to grow, speak, and dream", he said: "All your contributions - seen or unseen - keep our nation thriving." He added: "As we look ahead, let us do so with hope, compassion and the understanding that we are stronger not in spite of our differences, but because of them." [[nid:717255]] This article was first published in The Straits Times . Permission required for reproduction.
