GE2025: Pritam Singh reaffirms Workers' Party's commitment to Singapore's democratic values
SINGAPORE: In the first public political broadcast of the 2025 General Election on 25 April, Workers' Party (WP) Secretary-General Pritam Singh reaffirmed the party's commitment to democratic principles and urged voters to support a 'sustainable and effective opposition' in Parliament.
Referencing the National Pledge, Singh emphasised the word 'build' in the phrase 'to build a democratic society,' underscoring the ongoing effort required to uphold democratic values.
He described the WP's role as integral to this process, positioning the party as a long-term pillar in Singapore's political landscape.
'Let me highlight three ways in which the Workers' Party works for Singapore and Singaporeans,' he said, outlining the party's contributions in managing town councils, serving in Parliament, and engaging with the public to plan for the future.
Town Council Management: Delivering Results
Singh began by highlighting the WP's track record in local governance, noting that both Aljunied-Hougang and Sengkang Town Councils received the top 'green' rating in the Ministry of National Development's 2024 Town Council Management Report.
He pointed out that WP has managed Hougang for 34 years and Aljunied GRC for 14 years, with the experience extending to Sengkang GRC over the last five years.
'Voters can trust us to leverage our town council experience to serve our current and new constituencies well,' he said, thanking residents for their support and acknowledging the efforts of the party's staff on the ground.
Role in Parliament: Asking the Necessary Questions
Turning to the party's role in Parliament, Singh stressed the importance of opposition MPs in holding the government accountable.
He said WP Members of Parliament ask 'appropriate and necessary' questions that are rooted in research and public interest.
'Workers' Party MPs can ask any question, especially the difficult questions which are necessary in the public interest,' he said, adding that the party does not automatically align with the People's Action Party (PAP) in legislative votes.
He cited the WP's role in passing a constitutional amendment in March 2023 as an example of the party's significance in Parliament.
According to the Hansard, the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Bill, which introduced a framework to better combat new psychoactive substances, was tabled on 21 March 2023.
It was presented alongside the Misuse of Drugs (Amendment) Bill, which proposed harsher penalties for large-scale possession of Class A drugs such as cocaine and cannabis.
Hansard records showed that 67 MPs voted in favour of the amendments, with no objections or abstentions. The quorum for a constitutional amendment requires at least two-thirds of all seats — 62 votes — to be cast.
Seven WP MPs — Gerald Giam, He Ting Ru, Jamus Lim, Sylvia Lim, Leon Perera, Pritam Singh, and Dennis Tan — were present and voted in favour, making their support crucial to the passing of the amendments.
'This shows that the Workers' Party is there in Parliament working for you when it counts,' Singh said, emphasising that the party supports or opposes legislation based on national interest.
Engaging Singaporeans Beyond Constituency Lines
Singh also spoke about the WP's consistent outreach across the island, beyond the constituencies it currently holds.
He noted that WP members have visited homes and public areas in various constituencies throughout the years, not just during election periods.
A Sustainable Opposition for the Future
In his closing remarks, Singh stressed the importance of building a sustainable opposition for the long term, regardless of the outcome of GE2025.
He acknowledged that the PAP is likely to form the next government, but warned that opposition constituencies could still be lost.
'One or even two WP GRCs can be easily lost. Nothing can be taken for granted,' he said.
'With more WP constituencies comes a higher chance that Parliament will continue to have a fully elected democratic opposition presence for the longer term. This will make our system stable and sustainable for the future.'
He concluded with a rallying call: 'Vote for the Workers' Party to work for you to build a democratic society.
We will continue 'Working for Singapore', no matter what the storm ahead, to achieve happiness, prosperity, and progress for our nation.'
The WP was allocated the second-longest broadcast time — six minutes — for the public political broadcasts (PPBs), as it is contesting a total of 26 parliamentary seats. Eligibility for the PPBs is limited to political parties that field at least six candidates under a recognised party symbol.
The PPBs were aired across six Mediacorp television channels and 13 radio stations operated by Mediacorp, SPH Media, and So Drama! Entertainment, on top of its social media channels.
The WP is contesting Aljunied GRC, Sengkang GRC, East Coast GRC, Punggol GRC, Tampines GRC, Hougang SMC, Jalan Kayu SMC, and Tampines Changkat SMC.
The next political broadcast will take place on 1 May.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
7 hours ago
- CNA
Singaporeans living in Los Angeles take extra precautions amid immigration protests
Some Singaporeans living in Los Angeles say they are taking extra precautions, like avoiding downtown LA, as US immigration protests enter the fourth day. They tell CNA that the Singapore embassy has also not issued any warnings or advisory notes, as the bulk of the Singaporean community who are still there feel relatively safe.
Straits Times
2 days ago
- Straits Times
Man fined $6,000 for posting TikTok video claiming minister made offensive remarks about Malays in Ch 8 interview
Nadine Chua The Straits Times June 6, 2025 A blogger was fined $6,000 after he posted a TikTok video falsely claiming that Minister for Digital Development and Information Josephine Teo had made offensive remarks against Malays. Manmeet Singh Bahadar Singh, 57, pleaded guilty on June 6 to knowingly committing an act that promoted disharmony between different racial groups. Singh had uploaded a video on TikTok on Aug 12, 2024, after receiving a link to a WordPress blog post via WhatsApp from an unknown person. The blog post claimed that Mrs Teo made an offensive remark against Malays when asked about racial progress during an interview with the Chinese media about Singapore's development since 1965. Singh felt offended and posted a TikTok video bearing the words "Minister Josephine Teo blurted 'Malays are i*****' in a Chinese interview", without verifying the authenticity of the claims. He repeated the blog post's allegations in his video and told his viewers to "go look it up". Singh added: "I have been voicing out for, you know, against racial discrimination in Singapore. And look what happened now? My prediction's right!" At the end of the video, he also uttered the phrase "bring them down". His TikTok account had over 9,000 followers when he uploaded the video, which was online long enough for Mrs Teo's colleagues and a reporter to ask the minister about it. About four hours after the video was uploaded, Mrs Teo informed her press secretary, who downloaded a copy of the video and made a police report. Suspecting that his claims were false, Singh removed the TikTok video later that day. He subsequently posted another video apologising to Mrs Teo, admitting that his claims were false. Mrs Teo took to various social media platforms to clarify that the allegations were false. Singh was arrested on Feb 4 and released on bail the next day. For promoting racial disharmony, an offender can be jailed for up to three years, fined, or both. In response to media queries, Mrs Teo said: "Growing up in the 1970s, I have seen for myself how precious - and fragile - racial and religious harmony is in our diverse society. It is why I do not take for granted the many friendships with schoolmates, colleagues and community leaders of different faiths or races." She added that the accusation made by Singh against her was serious and cast a shadow on these friendships. "Besides feeling personally hurt, I was concerned about the hurt to my friends if things were not put right," she said, adding that this was why her press secretary had made a police report. "With the sentencing passed, I hope to put this episode behind me. Our world threatens to fall apart because of all kinds of hatred and conflicts. I hope this episode reminds us all to be careful not to sow discord but instead to spread peace," said Mrs Teo. Click here to contribute a story or submit it to our WhatsApp Get more of Stomp's latest updates by following us on:
Straits Times
3 days 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.
