Harpreet Singh: WP team in Punggol is just getting started
SINGAPORE: Harpreet Singh Nehal, who had been part of the Workers' Party slate in the May 3 polls, said in a recent social media post that the Workers' Party (WP) team at Punggol 'is just getting started'.
The team, comprising Senior Counsel Mr Singh, legal counsel Siti Mattar, business development professional Alexis Dang, and communications practitioner Jackson Au, won 44.83% of the vote. This was a very respectable showing for an all-newbie slate that was up against a team from the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) headed by Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Gan Kim Yong and that also included the very popular Minister of State for Home Affairs and Social and Family Development, Sun Xueling.
Mr Singh jokingly addressed those who may have thought the WP team would only be seen in the lead-up to the next election.
'SORRY—YOU WON'T SEE US IN FIVE YEARS,' he wrote, 'You'll see us much earlier than that!'
The Senior Counsel added, 'The Workers' Party team in Punggol is just getting started. We may not have won the seat this time, but your response—in Punggol and throughout Singapore—has been overwhelming.'
He also promised that the team would continue with groundwork and outreach initiatives 'because meaningful change takes more than just nine days of campaigning—it takes years of commitment, presence, and continuity' and appealed to like-minded people to join in.
Towards the end of his post, Mr Singh addressed a commentator who had pointed out that at 59, he may only be able to contest one more time.
'Well, well, well… I'm sorry, but you don't know me, bro.
'I'm in good health, good shape, and (touch wood) I plan to be here for a long, long time!
'Let's just say — you're not getting rid of me that easily.'
His post has since received many likes, comments, and shares, with many Facebook users expressing their support and encouragement.
Even former Nominated Member of Parliament Calvin Cheng, known for his pro-government views, commented on his post, writing, 'I do wish you a healthy, long life and many more elections to come! Hope to meet you one day.'
'You got me with your first line Mr Harpreet Singh Nehal. I am so glad and heartened to know that your solid solid team will continue to work hard and win Punggol over. I knew that you will never give up!' another netizen wrote.
A commenter urged him to consider a lesson from history. 'Looking at the past, the Workers' Party took at least 2 GEs to win Aljunied, Hougang, etc. Well, we were THAT close to win Tampines GRC, Jalan Kayu SMC &…. Punggol GRC.. Don't despair, I'm sure you guys will be there & ready to dominate by GE2030! Go Hammers!!' /TISG
Read also: 'We won something deeper': Harpreet Singh's post leaves people hopeful that he'll stay in politics
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
8 hours ago
- CNA
Commentary: America First, China Next? Why Trump's new travel ban harms US interests
SINGAPORE: United States President Donald Trump has rebooted his travel ban, hitting Southeast Asia for the first time. He banned – partially or fully – citizens of 19 countries, including Myanmar and Laos, from entering the US with effect from Monday (Jun 9). He clearly learned lessons from the ban he instituted initially during his first term. Mr Trump' playbook started with an executive order on the first day of his second term ordering the State Department to launch a global review of foreign governments' vetting and screening capabilities and to identify which were 'so deficient as to warrant' a travel ban. This time, instead of calling it a 'Muslim ban' like he did eight years ago with no study, he justified the ban for national security reasons after a review of several months, claiming also that people from those countries had high rates of overstaying their visas. This policy, preordained but dressed in process, will likely be upheld by the courts. 'A CONVENIENT DISTRACTION' FROM BAD NEWS The travel ban comes amid reports of the lowest US job growth in two years, strong public criticism of Mr Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' from Elon Musk as they feud, and an antisemitic attack a week ago. 'This noxious reboot comes as a convenient distraction from so many bad news items in the form of setbacks for the Trump agenda,' Thurgood Marshall Jr, a senior Clinton official, told me. And while Mr Trump said last week's Colorado 'terror attack' for which an Egyptian national has been charged with injuring several with gasoline bombs spurred the timing of the travel ban, Egypt not being on the list undercuts his premise this ban would have prevented it from happening. This ban both appeals to his core MAGA anti-immigration base and advances his governing philosophy. Mr Trump made the real message plain as he announced the travel ban: 'We don't want them.' The 'America First' agenda includes a sweeping crackdown on immigration: So far, he has barred international students from Harvard University, halted student visa interviews for those accepted to US schools and ordered immigration raids across the country. Of course, every country can and should aim to ensure only legal and lawful immigration to their territory. Citizens from certain countries should receive higher scrutiny for any number of reasons, including whether their government sponsors terrorism. Individuals who have a high chance of overstaying their visa can also be denied one. A blanket ban on all citizens from a given country provides the easy way out administratively and a political win from his base; however, it brings upon the US geopolitical harm. SOUTHEAST ASIA NOT SPARED This time, Laos and Myanmar were included in Mr Trump's travel ban – countries that accounted for barely 11,000 of the 72 million foreign visitors in 2024 per the Department of Commerce. Rick Reece, Executive Director of non-governmental organisation Village Focus International, an American who has lived and worked in Laos since 1998, told me: 'There are so many family connections [with the US] here. Now, uncertainty with the US comes out in anger and cynicism.' 'I hope Lao people don't lose their respect and admiration for the US. My own son and wife, both Lao passport holders, would love to visit the US to see friends and family, but I can't see that happening for the foreseeable future,' he added. Tatum Albertine, a former State Department and USAID official with years of experience in Myanmar, told me it was surprising to see Myanmar included in the travel ban. 'I don't think the Trump Administration even knows what it wants out of its relationship with them,' she said. The US had already taken a reputational hit in the country in the wake of the deadly earthquake in March. 'Trump 2.0 massively failed in sending a USAID humanitarian intervention team,' she added. '[Secretary of State Marco] Rubio said they were deployed, but people on the ground tell me that was not true – those people who were ready had been fired.' The rest of Southeast Asia, including Singapore, are also caught in Mr Trump's continuing assault on immigration, with the halt to student visa interviews pending the expansion of 'social media screening and vetting'. No one knows how long this will last. Some students who have been accepted to US schools have no idea when, or if, they'll be allowed to enter the country. Those already enrolled aren't sure if they will be let back in if they head home during the summer break. In a region where the US competes with China for influence, a ban on two ASEAN member states and collateral damage from the change to student visas could strengthen China's hand. AMERICA FIRST LEADS TO CHINA NEXT While there will be no immediate fallout by banning travel from these countries given their lack of geopolitical and geoeconomic standing, there will still be consequences. Mr Trump's broader immigration policies create anxiety about US travel, amid unhappiness about his sweeping tariffs. A head of global public affairs at an American multinational told me she can't have her team meet in the US this summer because many of her international staff fear travelling there. New York City, the top US destination for internation travel, estimated 2.5 million (or 17 per cent) fewer foreign travellers in 2025. Travel from Canada, the US' top source of visitors, is expected to go down more than 20 per cent. The World Travel & Tourism Council projects a US$12.5 billion loss in international visitor spending this year. Nelson Cunningham, who served in the Biden administration as a Senior Advisor at the State Department, told me: 'If we cut off contact with the best and brightest around the world, America First cannot help but become America Alone'. 'America First inevitably leads to China Next,' he concluded. With the new travel ban, governments will continue to seek alternate markets and partners for trade and security. Businesses will see diminish their advantages with access to foreign government officials, customers and employees. The erosion of Brand America continues.
CNA
8 hours ago
- CNA
Commentary: South Korea's presidential election does not fix the country's polarisation
BUSAN: When a president is impeached for attempting martial law, one would expect his party to collapse at the polls. In South Korea, it didn't. Despite Yoon Suk Yeol's dramatic fall, the conservatives performed far better than expected. That may be the most important story in South Korea's snap election last week. Left-leaning Lee Jae-myung won the presidency, as most polls predicted. He will enjoy a unified government. That is, his party – the Democratic Party of Korea – controls both the presidency and the legislature. A unified government is rare in presidential democracies; the voters often return divided government. Mr Lee will face pressure from the left-wing of his coalition to move quickly on favoured issues, such as detente with North Korea. A unified government opens a window until the next election – for the legislature in 2028 – for Mr Lee to govern aggressively from the left. Mr Lee does not need many conservative votes in the legislature. And the South Korean conservative party – of which Yoon was a member – faces an internal crisis. It hesitated to fully condemn Yoon's martial law power grab. It is probably best for South Korea's long-term democratic stability that the left won. The right needs to publicly and more credibly commit to democratic processes before it can be trusted with power again. Nevertheless, a robust left-wing policy drive on the back of unified progressive government would be a mistake. Despite its defeat in the election, the South Korean right significantly overperformed expectations. Mr Lee won legitimately and is the country's rightful president, but he does not have a mandate for wide-ranging liberal governance. SOUTH KOREA'S CHRONIC POLARISATION In 1974, US President Richard Nixon resigned the presidency three months before Congressional elections. Mr Nixon had been disgraced by Watergate scandal and would have been impeached had he not resigned. Mr Nixon was a Republican, and his departure led to a massive Republican defeat that year – what political science refers to as a 'wave election' (for the Democrats). Then, there were enough swing voters to swing hard against the Republican party, punishing it for Watergate. This did not happen in South Korea. Despite a conservative scandal equal to or worse than Watergate – it is unclear how long Yoon intended to suspend constitutional governance – almost no conservative or independent voters defected to Mr Lee. This is remarkable, and somewhat worrisome. It suggests that right-left polarisation in South Korea is so intense that even a partisan challenge to foundational democratic values cannot shake loose many voters from their ideological camps. Thankfully for South Korean democracy, the South Korean left did squeak into a majority. Mr Lee polled 49.42 per cent of the vote, and a factional leftist candidate received 0.98 per cent of the vote, totaling 50.4 per cent of the vote for parties which publicly and vigorously rejected the martial law declaration. The two candidates of the right polled a combined 49.49 per cent of the vote. And while both did eventually condemn the martial law declaration, they danced around the topic as much as possible to avoid alienating diehard Yoon supporters. A substantial slice of South Korean opinion – at least 30 per cent – rejected Yoon's impeachment, despite a large majority impeachment vote in the legislature and a unanimous removal vote by the country's high court. LEE SHOULD GOVERN HIS FRACTURED COUNTRY WITH CARE Deep partisan polarisation – unmoved even by a constitutional crisis – is deeply worrisome. Divisions of that depth can fuel violence or civil conflict. Thankfully, South Korea is not at that point; its institutions held up robustly under the pressures of Yoon's power grab and the subsequent impeachment process. But the obvious policy implication of such deep, persistent division of opinion is that Mr Lee should govern cautiously. He would be wise not to exploit the current window of unified leftist government to steamroll the right. His progressive presidential predecessor – Moon Jae-in – did that. Mr Moon won with just 41 per cent of the vote in 2017, but he governed as if he had won a wave election. He pursued a North Korea detente policy that particularly deeply alienated South Korean conservatives, and he did not consult them at all. The result was worsening polarisation and wild conspiracy theories on the right that Mr Moon was a North Korean operative. Mr Lee will want to avoid making the same error. There may be value in looking for issues with some nonpartisan or transpartisan valence to build consensus for his presidency before pushing on more divisive policies. The hard right and Yoon partisans will reject cooperation with him, of course, but there will be some moderate and swing voices Mr Lee can attract to give his policy platform bipartisan appeal. For example, US President Donald Trump's tariff war strikes at South Korea's export-oriented economy. All serious elements of South Korean society want that resolved. Mr Lee could start with that, enjoying broad support for some kind of trade deal with the Americans. Mr Lee enters office with a clean slate and a clear victory after months of political contention. But he did not, perhaps surprisingly, win anything close to a mandate. South Korea is sharply and persistently divided. Mr Lee should remember that when the activists of his coalition encourage rapid action which will breed backlash and further stasis.
CNA
15 hours ago
- CNA
CNA speaks to Cardinal William Goh about voting for the Pope
The Papal Conclave is an event shrouded in secrecy. But, for the first time, a Singaporean cast his vote in choosing the next Pope. Nicolas Ng speaks to Cardinal William Goh, who was in the room where it happened.
