Disclaimer: This analysis is a speculative exploration based on geopolitical trends, historical patterns, and open-source intelligence.

Foreign interference isn’t a conspiracy theory; it’s a global reality, from Russia’s 2016 U.S. election hacks to China’s whispered influence in Australia.

Singapore, a tiny island with outsized influence, is a high-value target. Its role as a global financial hub, with approximately S$5.4 trillion in assets under management makes its electoral outcome a matter of international consequence.

China

China, Singapore’s largest trading partner with S$150 billion in bilateral trade in 2022, has strong incentives to influence GE2025.

As ASEAN’s diplomatic anchor, Singapore influences regional policies critical to China’s Belt and Road Initiative and South China Sea claims.

A government aligned with Beijing would enhance its dominance in Southeast Asia, where Singapore’s neutrality is a linchpin.

Moreover, Singapore’s military training partnerships with Taiwan make it a target for China’s efforts to suppress Taiwanese independence narratives.

Past disinformation campaigns

China has a well-documented history of disinformation:

• Taiwan: Beijing has used deepfakes and propaganda to discredit Taiwanese leaders and deter voters from supporting independence, targeting Chinese-speaking communities to sow division, as reported by regional security experts.

• Philippines: China has promoted narratives portraying itself as a constructive regional actor while casting doubt on U.S. reliability, aiming to weaken U.S.-Philippine ties, per the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

• Singapore (2017): A notable incident involved Huang Jing, a U.S. citizen and academic at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, who was expelled in August 2017 for acting as an agent of influence for a foreign country, widely understood to be China. Huang used his position to share privileged information with foreign intelligence operatives and attempted to influence Singapore’s foreign policy, per MHA.

Potential impact in Singapore

Singapore’s 74% ethnic Chinese population and economic ties with China create vulnerabilities to disinformation.

AI-generated deepfakes on platforms like Meta and Tiktok could depict candidates disparaging Chinese culture, alienating voters.

Cyber operations might target journalists of alternative and mainstream media outlets, while covert funding through Chinese business networks or clan associations could support pro-China candidates.

The October 2024 deepfake video targeting former President Halimah Yacob, falsely showing her criticizing the government, underscores this threat.

The 2020 case of Dickson Yeo, a Singaporean sentenced in the U.S. for spying for Chinese intelligence, further highlights Beijing’s use of local operatives, though Yeo claimed no disloyalty to Singapore.

Why Singapore?

Singapore’s diplomatic leadership in ASEAN and military ties with Taiwan make it a strategic target.

China’s ambition to dominate ASEAN relies on influencing key players like Singapore, whose neutral stance could shift regional dynamics if manipulated.

Disinformation could erode public trust or promote candidates aligned with Beijing’s goals.

Israel

Israel, a key defense partner supplying Singapore with technologies like the Iron Dome, seeks to maintain a government supportive of bilateral ties.

As one of Singapore’s few ASEAN allies alongside Thailand, and with neighbors like Malaysia and Indonesia holding anti-Israel stances, Singapore’s pro-Israel policies are crucial.

A change in government could disrupt defense cooperation or weaken Israel’s Southeast Asian foothold, where Singapore is a diplomatic and technological hub.

Past disinformation campaigns

Israel’s disinformation efforts, particularly since the Gaza war, have aimed to shape global narratives:

• U.S. Lawmakers (2024): Israel funded a $2 million campaign through Stoic, a Tel Aviv-based firm, using 600 fake social media accounts to target 128 U.S. Congresspeople with pro-Israel messaging. Active as of June 2024, it employed AI tools like ChatGPT and fake news sites to attack UNRWA and influence policy (The New York Times, June 2024).

• Gaza War propaganda: AI-driven bot farms spread false narratives to dehumanize Palestinians and pressure policymakers, as reported by The Intercept in February 2024 (Gaza: Israel, Netanyahu, propaganda, lies, Palestinians).

• Meta censorship: Israel secured the removal of 38.8 million pro-Palestinian posts on Meta platforms by April 2025, aligning with efforts to suppress criticism (Dropsite News).

• Specific falsehoods: Misleading claims, such as audio evidence in the Gaza Baptist Hospital massacre, highlight tactical disinformation (Euronews, February 2024).

Potential impact on Singapore

Israel’s cyber capabilities, exemplified by tools like Pegasus and Graphite used in Singapore pose a threat.

While the 2024 Graphite spyware from Paragon Solutions was reportedly halted, Israel’s history with Pegasus—sold to various governments—suggests that comparable tools remain active.

Disinformation campaigns might target Singapore’s Malay-Muslim community (15% of the population) to counter anti-Israel sentiments, using bots on platforms like Meta.

Covert lobbying through defense or tech partnerships could subtly influence policy.

Why Singapore?

Singapore’s status as a rare ASEAN ally makes it a linchpin for Israel’s regional strategy.

A pro-Israel government ensures sustained defense cooperation and counters regional hostility.

Disinformation could protect these ties by shaping elite perceptions or neutralizing anti-Israel narratives.

Singapore's defense capabilities

Singapore has fortified its electoral process against disinformation:

• Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act 2021 (FICA): Enables authorities to remove false content and scrutinize foreign funding, countering China’s deepfakes and Israel’s bot campaigns Countering Foreign Interference.

• Cybersecurity: The Cyber Security Agency (CSA) secures electoral systems, with 2023 advisories promoting robust digital protections Advisory to Presidential Election Candidates.

• Public resilience: Media literacy campaigns and high public trust (84% in government, 2023 Edelman Trust Barometer) equip citizens to identify disinformation Commentary: What Singapore can do more against rising threat of foreign interference.

The FICA law was in the news recently when four members of one of Singapore's richest families were designated as "politically significant persons" for their membership to a China political advisory body. MHA had emphasised that the four individuals had not engaged in any “egregious activity”. As such, their designation can be seen as a pre-emptive move to guard against any potential vulnerabilities to foreign interference.

Also last year, FICA was invoked to block 95 social media accounts linked to self-exiled Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, the first time that the account restrictions directions under FICA were being deployed.

Foreign disinformation poses a significant threat to GE2025.

China aims to dominate ASEAN by leveraging Singapore’s diplomatic influence and cultural ties, while Israel seeks to preserve its strategic alliance.

Singapore’s FICA, cybersecurity, and public resilience provide a strong defense, but sustained vigilance is critical.

Enhanced cyber audits, monitoring of foreign networks, and public education will ensure Singapore’s vote remains untainted.

As GE2025 approaches, the nation’s commitment to sovereignty will determine its success in countering these threats.

The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) released its manifesto for Singapore's 2025 General Election, titled “Progress for All,” outlining over 60 policy proposals to address key national issues.

The manifesto focuses on building a fair society, ensuring dignified living standards, providing diverse educational pathways, and strengthening democratic institutions.

Below is a detailed, reorganized summary of the manifesto’s key points, structured for clarity and coherence, based on the provided document.

1. Cost of Living

The PSP addresses Singapore’s escalating cost of living, driven by a 18% rise in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from July 2020 to February 2025, with specific increases in hawker food (20%), public transport (20%), and water prices (18%). The GST hike from 7% to 9% in 2024 and soaring HDB resale prices (50% increase from Q2 2020 to Q4 2024) exacerbate the burden, while median wages have only risen 21% from $4,534 to $5,500.

• GST Reduction and Exemptions:
  • Reduce GST to 7%, arguing it’s regressive and Singapore’s $1.2 trillion reserves (12 years of government expenditure) allow fiscal flexibility.
  • Exempt basic essentials (e.g., water, rice, eggs, cooking oil, formula milk) from GST, with price thresholds (e.g., rice under $2/kg) to target lower-income households.
• Land Cost Reforms:
  • Defer land cost for HDB Build-To-Order (BTO) flats, recording it at sale and recovering it with interest upon resale, treating public housing as essential infrastructure like schools.
  • Treat land sales proceeds as revenue over the lease period (e.g., 99 years), allowing 5% annual draw for budget use, providing a cumulative revenue stream without depleting reserves.
• Commercial Rent Control:
  • Have the Fair Tenancy Industry Committee (FTIC) issue guidelines on annual rent increases for commercial properties, aligning with economic growth to moderate business costs.
• Hawker Centre Reforms:
  • Set hawker stall rents at $500/month or 3% of gross turnover (whichever is higher), replacing the tender system to lower costs (current median: $1,625/month).
  • Phase out Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHCs) and centralize management under a new agency, “Hawker Singapore,” to reduce costs and promote hawker culture.
• Food Affordability:
  • Provide government-funded food discounts for Pioneer Generation, Merdeka Generation, and CHAS cardholders at hawker centres, funded by respective funds.
  • Increase CDC Vouchers for lower-income households to offset food costs, relieving hawkers from funding budget meals.
• Healthcare Affordability:
  • Nationalize MediShield Life and CareShield Life, with government-funded premiums for all Singaporeans, costing $2-3 billion annually to ease premium burdens.
  • Centralize drug procurement for public and private healthcare facilities to reduce costs through bulk bargaining.
  • Offer a $3,000 “HealthierMother” cash gift per child to defray confinement costs post-childbirth.

2. Housing

The PSP critiques the BTO system’s long waiting times and rising resale prices (50% increase from Q2 2020 to Q4 2024), driven by land costs (60% of BTO costs) and lease decay concerns. The government’s subsidies to keep BTO prices affordable increase fiscal burdens, necessitating a rethink of housing policies.

• Affordable Homes Scheme (AHS):
  • Replace BTO with AHS, selling flats at construction cost plus a location-based premium, excluding land cost unless sold on the resale market.
  • Ensure affordability without depleting CPF savings, severing the link between housing and retirement, with minimal impact on resale market due to limited supply (20,000 flats/year).
• Singles Housing Access:
  • Allow singles aged 28+ to buy 2- and 3-room BTO flats and all resale flats in any estate, compared to the current age 35 limit for 2-room Flexi BTOs.
• Increase Flat Supply:
  • Build more flats based on forecasted demand (e.g., marriage and birth rates), using unused state properties (e.g., former schools) to reduce waiting times.
• Millennial Apartments Scheme:
  • Offer affordable, high-quality rental apartments in the CBD and mature estates for young couples/singles on 2-5 year leases, providing flexibility and reducing pressure to buy early.

3. Jobs and Wages

With foreign workers comprising 39% of the workforce, the PSP aims to prioritize Singaporeans while ensuring fair competition and better work-life balance, addressing overwork (90% work beyond official hours) and wage stagnation.

• Minimum Living Wage:
  • Set a $2,250/month minimum wage ($1,800 take-home after CPF), based on 2019 Minimum Income Standard, to ensure dignity and reduce reliance on subsidies.
• Foreign Worker Policies:
  • Strengthen the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) by extending job ad periods, requiring more ads, and proving no suitable Singaporean candidate.
  • Introduce per-company EP quotas, with higher quotas for SMEs, to balance global talent access and local priority.
  • Impose a $1,200/month EP levy to offset employers’ CPF savings on foreign workers.
  • Raise EP minimum qualifying salary to $10,000/month (from $5,600-$10,700).
  • Limit single-nationality work pass holders per company to prevent workplace enclaves.
• Worker Protections:
  • Exempt retrenched employees from non-compete clauses to ease job transitions.
  • Mandate statutory retrenchment benefits (2 weeks’ salary per year of service for 2+ years’ service), exempting small or bankrupt firms.
• Parental Leave:
  • Equalize parental leave at 15 weeks per parent (4 weeks maternity/paternity, 22 weeks shared equally), promoting shared parenting responsibilities.
• Family-Friendly Employers:
  • Offer incentives like higher foreign worker quotas to employers supporting parental leave.

4. Social Safety Net

The PSP seeks to simplify and strengthen social support, reducing reliance on complex schemes and supporting caregivers, seniors, and healthcare needs.

• Redundancy Insurance:
  • Introduce a scheme paying 75% of the last-drawn salary for 6 months (capped at $3,750/month), funded by 0.5% monthly contributions from employers/employees.
• Caregiver Support:
  • Provide a $1,250/month allowance (including CPF) for full-time caregivers of children under 7, costing up to $2.5 billion annually, replacing childcare subsidies.
• Silver Support Scheme:
  • Double payouts to $430-$2,160/quarter ($144-$720/month), based on flat type and income, for seniors with low retirement savings.
• Pioneer and Merdeka Funds:
  • Publish projected investment income and ensure full utilization of funds ($5.52 billion for PG, $5.55 billion for MG as of March 2024).
• CPF Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme (LRIS):
  • Implement LRIS, allowing investment in low-fee, diversified funds (6-10% annual returns over 5 years, per US 401(k) data), boosting retirement savings.
• MediSave Expansion:
  • Increase MediSave500/700 withdrawal limits ($500/$700 annually for outpatient care) and cover preventive dental treatments, maternity fees, and egg freezing.
• Fertility Support:
  • Offer 75% co-funding for unlimited ART cycles for women under 40 (until 2 children), and 3 fresh/3 frozen cycles for ages 40-45.
• Mental Health:
  • Increase MediSave withdrawal limits for mental health treatments (e.g., schizophrenia, depression), regulate counsellors, and reduce public hospital waiting times (47 days for psychiatrists, 36 for psychologists in 2023).

5. Education

Despite Singapore’s top PISA 2022 rankings, the PSP critiques over-reliance on tuition ($104.80/month household expenditure in 2023) and high-stakes exams, which foster fear of failure (2018 PISA). The system should offer diverse pathways and equal opportunities.

• Through-Train Programme:
  • Pilot a 10-year programme (Primary 1 to Secondary 4) with optional PSLE, emphasizing holistic curricula (arts, humanities, sports) and flexible assessments.
• School Size Diversity:
  • Maintain a range of school sizes, avoiding mergers to preserve heritage and support diverse needs (e.g., neurodivergent students).
• Assessment Reform:
  • Reduce reliance on summative exams, using portfolios and projects to foster critical thinking, collaboration, and creativity.
• Smaller Class Sizes:
  • Lower class sizes (from 33.6 primary, 32.6 secondary in 2023) by re-employing older teachers as Flexi-Adjuncts and using technology to reduce administrative burdens.
• Mental Health Support:
  • Conduct annual mental health assessments for students, increase school counsellors to 2 per school (from 1 in two-thirds of schools), and monitor teacher burnout.
• International Students:
  • Limit scholarships/tuition grants for international students (10% of AU undergrads, $238 million in 2019), prioritizing full-fee payers to subsidize locals.
• University Access:
  • Review AU places for Singaporeans, especially in Medicine, and expand vocational pathways (e.g., WSQ qualifications) for university admission.

6. Governance

The PSP addresses concerns over the PAP’s parliamentary dominance, lack of checks and balances, and recent policy missteps (e.g., Covid-19 dormitory outbreaks, SimplyGo reversal). It seeks to enhance transparency and accountability.

• Ministerial Salaries:
  • Benchmark salaries to median Singaporean income (not top 1,000 earners) to reflect public service ethos.
• Asset Declarations:
  • Require MPs to publicly declare assets post-election in a Register of Interests, following Commonwealth practices (e.g., UK, Australia).
• Sovereign Wealth Funds:
  • Hold closed-door parliamentary hearings for Temasek and GIC, publish senior management salary ranges, and compare performance to global benchmarks.
• Freedom of Information:
  • Enact a Freedom of Information Act, requiring government disclosure unless exemptions (e.g., national security) are justified in court.
  • Automatically declassify documents after 25 years, unless restricted for security.
• Media Reform:
  • Liberalize the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act, removing ministerial approval for management shares, and reduce online news content provider bonds ($50,000 to $20,000).
  • Establish an independent press standards committee to handle complaints and enforce journalistic integrity, funded by Parliament.
  • Fund local digital media start-ups to foster diversity, redirecting $900 million SPH Media Trust and $310 million MediaCorp grants.
• POFMA Reform:
  • Vest POFMA powers in the judiciary, limiting use to deliberate falsehood campaigns to reduce chilling effects on free speech.
• Electoral Reforms:
  • Abolish GRCs, replacing with minority NCMP schemes or a hybrid FPTP/proportional representation system with multi-racial candidate mandates.
  • Reform electoral boundary reviews with transparent processes, fixed voter counts (30,000 ±10%), and bipartisan approval for major boundary changes.
• People’s Association (PA):
  • Depoliticize PA by appointing neutral public servants as Grassroots Advisors, excluding MPs and political figures.
• Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs):
  • Mandate public EIAs for major developments, with 2-month feedback periods, evaluating biodiversity, ecosystems, and emissions.
• Voting Age:
  • Lower voting age to 18, aligning with global norms and National Service obligations.
• Parliamentary Support:
  • Create a Parliament Research Service (PRS) with seconded experts to support MPs’ policy research.
  • Form bipartisan standing committees to scrutinize legislation over 2 months, with powers to subpoena witnesses and access PRS.

Conclusion

Launched ahead of the May 3, 2025, election, the PSP’s manifesto builds on parliamentary proposals since 2020, reflecting resident feedback and critiques of PAP policies.

The party emphasizes its role in holding the government accountable, citing past PAP responses (e.g., Pioneer Generation Package) to opposition gains.

Implementation challenges include fiscal costs (e.g., GST reduction, caregiver allowances) and political resistance to reforms like GRC abolition.

The PSP’s focus on affordability, housing, and governance aligns with public concerns, but success depends on electing at least 33 opposition MPs to block constitutional amendments.

With HDB resale prices up 50% since 2020 and BTO waiting times stretching to five years, affordability and access are strangling young couples, singles, and retirees alike.

The 99-year lease model, once a cornerstone of stability, now looms as a ticking time bomb for ageing flats.

The PAP, WP, SDP and PSP have rolled out their housing manifestos, each claiming to fix voters' housing concerns.

But do they deliver?

PAP - more flats, same old tune

Flood the market with supply, tweak eligibilit, and tackle lease decay head-on

The PAP, Singapore’s ruling juggernaut, promises to build over 50,000 new HDB flats in three years—enough for an entire Ang Mo Kio town.

They’re doubling down on Shorter Waiting Time flats to cut BTO delays, exploring options for higher-income couples and singles, and pushing the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) to rejuvenate old estates like Kallang-Whampoa.

More flats don’t automatically mean cheaper flats

The Housing Price Index (HPI) ratio—median flat price to median income—hovers around 5-6, far from affordable for a $80,000-a-year household eyeing a $400,000 4-room BTO.

PAP’s reliance on grants, like the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant, is a band-aid, not a cure, when resale prices have soared 50% in five years.

VERS sounds promising but lacks teeth—its voluntary nature and vague compensation details leave residents guessing, unlike the more decisive Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS).

Expanding access for singles and higher-income groups is inclusive but risks diverting resources from lower-income families who can’t even dream of a $500,000 resale flat.

And while 50,000 flats sound impressive, global supply chain crunches and labor shortages could derail delivery, as seen in past construction delays.

Stability, not affordability

PAP’s plan is feasible, backed by HDB’s machine and approximately $1.2 trillion in reserves, but it’s incremental, not transformative.

PAP is betting on stability, not affordability, leaving young Singaporeans stuck in a cycle of grants and grit.

WP - bold on ideas, shaky on substance

The Workers’ Party takes a different tack, zeroing in on affordability with a promise to slash the HPI ratio to 3.0 or below—meaning a 4-room flat for a median-income family would cost no more than $240,000.

They propose 70-year BTO leases at lower prices, with an option to top up to 99 years, and a universal buy-back scheme to rescue retirees from depreciating flats.

To sweeten the deal, WP wants HDB to reacquire coffee shops and cap rents to inflation, easing living costs in estates.

Gutsy policy proposals but no clarity on how to fund it

WP's proposed housing policies speak directly to middle-class families and retirees crushed by prices.

An HPI of 3.0 would be a game-changer, making homeownership a reality, not a pipe dream.

The 70-year lease option is clever, offering flexibility for cash-strapped buyers, while the buy-back scheme tackles lease decay with precision, ensuring grannies in 40-year-old flats aren’t left penniless.

A very costly proposal

But ambition comes at a cost.

Dropping the HPI to 3.0 means slashing flat prices by 40-50%, requiring massive subsidies or land cost write-offs that could dent fiscal reserves or spike taxes.

The buy-back scheme, while noble, could cost billions if applied universally, and WP’s manifesto is mum on funding.

Worse, there’s no clear plan to boost flat supply, leaving waiting times untouched—a glaring blind spot when young couples are begging for faster BTOs.

WP’s heart is in the right place, but its wallet might not be.

PSP - radical vision, risky bet

The Progress Singapore Party swings for the fences with its Affordable Homes Scheme (AHS), scrapping BTOs to sell flats without land costs—recovered only on resale. This could halve prices, dropping a $400,000 flat to $200,000.

Singles aged 28+ get to buy 2- and 3-room flats anywhere, more flats will be built based on demand, and a Millennial Apartments Scheme offers short-term rentals in prime spots for young folks.

It’s a bold, youth-centric vision, promising to break the affordability curse and free CPF savings for retirement.

Revolutionary if it works, catastrophic if it flops

AHS is a stroke of genius on paper, tackling the root of high prices: land costs, which eat up half a flat’s value.

Letting singles buy at 28 in any estate is a nod to a growing demographic—30% of adults are single—while rental apartments cater to millennials delaying marriage.

But genius comes with glitches.

Deferring land costs guts government revenue ($20 billion yearly from land sales), risking budget shortfalls or reserve dips that Singapore’s fiscal hawks will savage.

Resale markets could tank as cheap new flats flood in, rattling homeowners’ wealth.

AHS demands a complete HDB overhaul, a bureaucratic nightmare to implement.

The Millennial Scheme sounds sexy but faces land scarcity in prime areas, limiting scale.

And PSP’s silence on lease decay is a fatal flaw—retirees with 30 years left on their flats get no lifeline.

It’s a high-stakes gamble: revolutionary if it works, catastrophic if it flops.

SDP - bold but tricky to execute

Slash prices with NOM flats, prioritize families, and secure retirements

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) proposes a transformative Non-Open Market (NOM) Scheme, selling HDB flats at cost—excluding land costs—for as low as S$70,000 (2-room) to S$240,000 (5-room).

NOM flats can’t be resold on the open market, only back to HDB, curbing speculation.

The Young Families Priority Scheme (YFPS) fast-tracks flat access for couples with kids, while singles, single parents, and low-income renters get broader eligibility.

An enhanced Lease Buy-Back Scheme offers seniors inflation-adjusted annuities, and a buffer stock of flats aims to slash waiting times.

A sophisticated Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) balloting system promises efficient allocation.

Affordability and inclusivity with a side of complexity

SDP’s NOM Scheme is a masterstroke for affordability, potentially cutting a 4-room flat from S$400,000 to S$160,000, freeing CPF savings for retirement and family needs.

YFPS directly tackles Singapore’s dismal 0.78 Total Fertility Rate by prioritizing young families, while inclusive policies for singles and single parents resonate with 30% of adults who are single.

The buffer stock and VCG system could shrink waiting times, addressing a key pain point.

The annuity-based Lease Buy-Back is a lifeline for retirees, ensuring dignity without depleting equity.

Bold but tricky to execute

NOM’s cost-recovery model, while appealing, risks government revenue losses similar to PSP’s AHS, though SDP’s resale restrictions may stabilize markets better.

Converting existing flats to NOM could spark legal or financial disputes over compensation.

The VCG system, while innovative, may confuse applicants unused to bidding premiums, and maintaining a buffer stock demands precise demographic forecasting to avoid oversupply.

Funding grants for low-income households (up to S$60,000) and annuities could strain reserves without clear fiscal plans.

SDP’s vision is bold and inclusive but hinges on complex execution and public buy-in.

Verdict

Singapore’s housing crisis—skyrocketing prices, endless waits, and lease decay—demands more than manifesto bravado.

• PAP offers stability and supply but ducks affordability, betting voters will trust its track record over flashy fixes. Its plan will keep the system humming but won’t ease the squeeze.

• WP’s price-slashing ambition and retiree focus hit the mark but stumble on funding and supply, risking empty promises. Its heart is right, but its math is shaky.

• PSP’s radical AHS and youth appeal are electrifying but teeter on fiscal recklessness, ignoring older voters’ fears and homeowners who see housing as their nest egg. Its vision is thrilling but could crash the economy.

• SDP balances affordability, inclusivity, and demographic fixes with NOM flats and family-focused policies, but its complex mechanisms and revenue risks need ironclad execution. Its plan is ambitious but navigates a tightrope.

GE2025’s housing debate exposes a truth - no party has a silver bullet. Voters must weigh stability against bold reform, affordability against fiscal prudence, and inclusivity against execution risks.

Comparative Analysis

The manifestos of the People’s Action Party (PAP), Workers’ Party (WP), Progress Singapore Party (PSP), and Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) for the 2025 Singapore General Election reveal a spectrum of priorities, as summarized in the following table:

This table highlights the diversity in approach, with PAP focusing on continuity, WP on balanced reform, PSP on transformative change, and SDP on social justice and democratic overhaul.

Critical Insights

1. Addressing Public Concerns:

   • PAP: Targeted subsidies (e.g., Assurance Package) provide immediate relief but may not address root causes like rising costs, appealing to those prioritizing stability.
   • WP: GST exemptions and a $1,600 minimum wage offer practical relief, balancing affordability with feasibility, suitable for middle-class voters.
   • PSP: Reducing GST to 7% and deferring HDB land costs are bold, voter-friendly moves, but fiscal risks may concern cautious voters.
   • SDP: Abolishing GST on essentials and taxing the top 1% directly tackle inequality, appealing to lower-income groups, but lack of cost estimates raises feasibility questions.

2. Housing:

   • PAP: Over 50,000 new flats increase supply, with VERS addressing lease decay, maintaining market stability.
   • WP: 70-year leases and buy-back schemes focus on affordability, offering a middle-ground solution.
   • PSP: AHS excludes land costs for affordability, with Millennial Apartments addressing youth needs, but market disruption is a risk.
   • SDP: The $270,000 NOM Scheme cap is innovative but lacks specifics on flat types or fiscal impact. Building more flats is vague without a supply target, unlike PAP’s 50,000 or PSP’s 20,000/year.

3. Governance and Democracy:

   • PAP: Prioritizes stability and anti-corruption, avoiding structural reforms.
   • WP: Proposes an Ombudsman and GRC abolition for accountability, balancing reform with pragmatism.
   • PSP: Freedom of Information Act and GRC abolition push transparency, appealing to reformists.
   • SDP: POFMA reform, constitutional changes, and GLC divestment are radical, aligning with its democratic ethos, but may face resistance in Singapore’s conservative political culture.

4. Economic Growth:

   • PAP: Balances local and global needs, supporting PMETs and businesses.
   • WP: Enhances local talent via SkillsFuture, maintaining economic competitiveness.
   • PSP: A $2,250 minimum wage risks business costs but benefits workers.
   • SDP: Minimum wage and foreign labor reduction prioritize locals but lack specific figures, potentially disrupting Singapore’s globalized economy.

5. Social Safety Net:

   • PAP: Strengthens ComCare and Silver Support, building on proven systems.
   • WP: Simplifies assistance, focusing on healthcare and retirees.
   • PSP: Introduces caregiver allowances and MediSave expansion, resembling a basic income model.
   • SDP: NHIF and free maternal/pediatric care are ambitious but lack costings, while the Malay community plan and gender equality initiatives address inclusivity without specific actions.

Overall Assessment

• PAP: Appeals to voters valuing economic stability, strong governance, and proven leadership, attracting conservative voters, older generations, and middle to upper-income brackets. Its continuity is robust but may seem out-of-touch with reformists.

• WP: Offers a credible, pragmatic alternative, appealing to middle-class families, younger voters concerned about housing and education, and those desiring a stronger check on PAP. Its balanced approach is feasible but may lack transformative vision.

• PSP: Presents a bold platform for change, drawing support from younger demographics, lower-income workers, and reformists willing to risk significant change. Its ambition is appealing but faces feasibility challenges.

• SDP: Champions social justice and democratic reform, appealing to lower-income groups, youth, and reformists frustrated with inequality and governance restrictions. Its radical proposals (e.g., abolish PSLE, scrap CPF Minimum Sum) resonate with those seeking systemic change but risk alienating moderates due to limited electoral track record and vague costings.

The election outcome on May 3, 2025, will hinge on voter priorities—stability versus change—and how each party builds trust amid economic and social challenges.

Singapore Democratic Party’s (SDP) Chee Soon Juan has made a questionable choice nominating Ariffin Sha, the 27-year-old founder of Wake Up, Singapore (WUSG), to contest Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC.

The decision is not a minor oversight—it points to a lapse in judgment that may cast doubts on Chee’s fitness for ministerial office.

While the People’s Action Party (PAP) has faced its own scandals involving individuals who were later convicted (Eg. Iswaran), these typically emerge after elections, not before.

Background

In August 2024, Ariffin was fined S$8,000 after pleading guilty to criminal defamation for publishing a fabricated story about KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, falsely claiming a woman suffered a miscarriage due to negligence.

Chee’s response to Ariffin's red flag is has been evasive.

At a press conference on April 13, 2025, he urged voters to focus on SDP’s policies, not Ariffin’s past, and compared the case to former PAP Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin’s resignation over an extramarital affair. The comparison misses the mark: Tan’s personal lapse, while serious, did not involve lawbreaking or public harm.

Chee’s deflection sidesteps the core issue of vetting a candidate with a known conviction.

Leadership requires sound judgement

The PAP is not immune to scrutiny.

Cases like former Transport Minister S. Iswaran’s corruption charges in January 2024 and former Tampines GRC MP Cheng Li Hui’s affair with Speaker of Parliament Tan Chuan Jin reveal vetting gaps.

However, these issues emerged after elections. The PAP acted decisively, removing Iswaran from his post and asked both Tan Chuan Jin and Cheng Li Hui to resign.

No system guarantees flawless candidates, but knowingly selecting a convict pre-election reflects a clearer lapse in judgment.

Zero tolerance on misinformation

Ariffin’s case strikes at Singapore’s zero-tolerance stance on misinformation.

In 2024, POFMA was invoked 15 times to correct falsehoods, underscoring the harm of unchecked narratives. Ariffin’s defamation directly contravened this ethos, making his nomination a liability in a constituency where community cohesion is vital.

Residents value reliability in governance. Chee’s oversight suggests a disconnect, potentially eroding confidence in SDP’s ability to address bread-and-butter issues like job security and affordability.

Ariffin’s supporters may cite his work with Wake Up, Singapore, which amplifies marginalized voices, or argue his youth mitigates his error. These arguments carry limited weight.

Public office demands high standards, especially in Singapore, where trust underpins stability.

Ariffin’s conviction reflects a lapse in responsibility, and Chee’s endorsement suggests inadequate scrutiny.