I turned 37 earlier this week. It feels like quite a big number but I feel exactly the same. In fact, the older I get the more I enthusiastically embrace the things that brought me joy as a teenager, like fangirling and fanfiction.
(1)
If you think People’s Action Party just sails through elections, you’d be wrong, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong says. Don’t be fooled by the massive incumbent advantage, the huge imbalance in funds and resources, the systematic and long-term suppression of political opponents, the gerrymandering, the compliant mainstream media, and the calling of snap elections that leave everyone else scrambling—according to Wong, GE2025 was much tougher for the PAP than people might think. Tampines and Punggol were particularly hot battle grounds, he observed, even though losing those two constituencies still wouldn’t have deprived the party of the majority of the seats in Parliament and the ability to form government. Instead of seeing this as a sign of how unused to and untested by truly competitive politics the PAP is, Singaporeans are supposed to interpret this as a close shave and a narrow escape from a political landscape where the ruling party doesn’t have a “strong mandate”.
Wong also argued that the PAP needs to “set the tone” for Singapore’s politics, as if that’s not already the case. He said that it’s important not to open the door to distorted truths for political gain, populist stances, or using race and religion to score political points. I hope members of his own party were taking notes.
(2)
In other political news, it’s Nominated Member of Parliament appointment time. Jeremy Tan and Darryl Lo, the two independent candidates of GE2025, are putting themselves forward. And why not? Lo, who’s 28, hopes to be able to represent younger Singaporeans in the House. Tan says he wants more diverse political representation in Parliament, and wants to inspire other independent-minded Singaporeans to step forward like he has.
But is this what the NMP scheme should be? asks The Straits Times (paywalled). “The NMP scheme was conceived to give voice to those without electoral ambitions who could still help shape our laws and contribute to parliamentary debate,” opinion editor Lin Suling writes. “To appoint individuals already positioning themselves for the next general election or explicitly advancing a partisan agenda risks bending that principle. Worse, it could turn a platform for civic advocacy into a back door into Parliament for candidates who failed to secure a victory at the ballot box or a Non-Constituency MP seat.”
As Lin notes, two NMPs, Raj Thomas and Syed Harun Alhabsyi, from the last term resigned midway through to join the ruling party. What does this mean for a role that’s supposed to be non-partisan and provide Parliament with more diverse voices?
I’m not too fussed by this sort of hand-wringing. Instead of worrying about what the NMP scheme is or isn't, I'd rather we get rid of it completely (and the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament scheme too) and instead had genuine electoral reform so that Singapore's general elections are truly free and fair. A properly level playing field and space for political expression is worth far more than tokenistic schemes put in place by the ruling party to make us feel better about having more voices in Parliament.
(3)
Pritam Singh sat down for an interview with neurodivergent people recently, and even that managed to generate some drama. The Leader of the Opposition is appealing his conviction and sentence for lying to a parliamentary committee, but said on CNA’s The Assembly that he isn’t worrying too much about it because, regardless of what his political opponents might lob at him, he believes that “the court of public opinion can be bigger than any court in the world”.
This upset Edwin Tong, the law minister and Temu Shanmugam. He slammed Singh’s comment as “an outrageous statement, plainly wrong and also completely unacceptable”, and accused him of undermining public confidence in the judiciary and the system—a sentiment backed by his predecessor and home affairs minister, Actual Shanmugam.
As the Workers’ Party shapes up to occupy a more permanent spot as Singapore’s second party (for better or worse, depending on your politics), it seems as if the PAP can’t help but seize every possible opportunity to take a swipe, even if it leaves them looking petty and silly. My reading of Singh’s comment is that it was a polite way of saying that Singaporeans can recognise politically motivated fuckery when we see it. Court cases can run their course and the judges can set out how they arrived at their decision—and, whatever we think of the verdict, they are legally binding—but when it comes to the ballot box the choices that voters make will still be political ones. This is hardly an unprecedented or shocking observation. Singh has also clarified that what he said wasn’t “directed at the judicial system, judges or their independence, nor did it denigrate any of these institutions”.
Makan Minum Workers, a collective of F&B workers, has set up a fundraiser for the workers of Twelve Cupcakes who were left high and dry after the company suddenly folded. (I wrote about this a couple of issues ago.) The 80 workers haven’t received their wages for their last month of work, leaving them at a loose end with rent and bills to pay.
Something interesting
🎧 If you haven’t done so yet, please check out and subscribe to Currents, a podcast and newsletter series focused on human rights and change-making in Asia. Recent episodes include a discussion on the closure of The Projector and an interview with Filipino human rights lawyer Edre Olalia, who represented Mary Jane Veloso, who was saved from death row in Indonesia and finally repatriated to the Philippines in 2024. In the 1990s, Olalia also tried to save Flor Contemplacion, a Filipino domestic worker hanged in Singapore.
Thank you for reading! As always, feel free to forward this weekly wrap to anyone you like, and spread the word about this newsletter!
