Anticipation builds for PAP’s leadership change: Can Wong secure full authority?

As Singapore heads towards its next general election, which must be called by November 2025, the much-anticipated leadership transition within the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) is expected to reach completion at the party convention on 24 November at the Singapore Expo.

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, who took office in May, may soon take over the PAP’s top role of Secretary General from former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (LHL), although the timing and processes leading up to the handover have prompted widespread interest and speculation.

This delay partly stems from the extended selection process for LHL’s successor—which ESM Goh Chok Tong previously commented on—along with changes in candidates and the unexpected choice of Wong’s deputy.

Wong was appointed in 2022 after LHL’s originally chosen successor Heng Swee Keat stepped aside due to an apparently lately discovered “lack of runway,” to succeed LHL as Prime Minister.

LHL has indicated a potential timeline for stepping down from key leadership roles by the PAP’s 70th anniversary in November 2024, which he initiated by announcing in April this year the handover of the prime ministerial role to Wong.

Some had originally anticipated that this timeline would lead to a general election before the PAP’s anniversary, but a series of unexpected controversies has derailed any prospect of a snap election.

Furthermore, as the formation of the Electoral Boundary Review Committee has yet to be announced, the expectation is that an election this year would be logistically improbable.

Many Singaporeans are thus awaiting potential leadership changes within the PAP’s Central Executive Committee (CEC) election later this year before the next election.

Historically, the role of Secretary General has been always been held by Singapore’s sitting prime minister. For instance, Lee Kuan Yew stepped down as Secretary General in 1992, two years after Goh Chok Tong had become prime minister in 1990.

Likewise, Goh passed on the party leadership role in 2004 after LHL assumed the prime ministerial position earlier that year.

Wong may follow a similar trajectory, though Goh’s delayed succession and perceived role as a “seat-warmer” raised questions about the definitive transition in the PAP leadership at the time, questions that Wong probably hopes will not resurface this time.

Although LHL has praised Wong’s handling of Singapore’s COVID-19 response and has also voiced confidence in his leadership, the lack of a concrete handover of the party (and, for that matter, key organizations such as the chairmanship of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation) has raised questions about LHL’s ongoing influence within PAP and Singapore Inc.

Singapore Management University’s Associate Professor Eugene Tan told Nikkei Asia that a complete transition to Wong would signal the renewal process is finished. Without such clarity, Tan suggested, some might perceive that Wong does not yet hold full confidence within PAP’s ranks.

In the same article, Assistant Professor Ja Ian Chong from the National University of Singapore noted that “Lee Hsien Loong has every right to hold onto the sec-gen position even if Lawrence Wong remains prime minister, so long as the PAP wants it.”

However, Chong added that if the leadership transition does not extend to the Secretary General role, it may create a public impression that the PAP lacks full confidence in Wong’s leadership.

Different succession approaches reveal varying levels of transparency and clarity in Singapore’s political landscape

On the point of leadership succession, veteran opposition politician Low Thia Khiang took a direct approach within the Workers’ Party (WP).

After 17 years as Secretary General, Low publicly announced at the WP’s 60th anniversary dinner that he would not be contesting the role of secretary-general, stating that the WP’s younger leaders were “ready to drive the party forward” and take on full leadership.

This announcement provided the WP with a clear and unambiguous pathway to renewal, leading to Pritam Singh’s orderly election to leadership the following year.

In contrast, although LHL has praised Wong’s leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic, stating at the PAP Convention in November 2023 that “there is no reason to delay the political transition,” his comments seem to refer specifically to the role of prime minister rather than the Secretary General position.

LHL stated that he “intends to hand over to DPM Lawrence before the next general election” and that he would support Wong “in whatever way he thinks I can be useful.”

This has left some questioning whether LHL’s role as Secretary General will remain in place, potentially complicating Wong’s full authority over party leadership.

Low’s transparent approach gave his successor complete autonomy and strengthened WP’s image as a unified opposition force committed to renewal. This contrast underscores the more measured approach seen in the PAP, where the timeline and clarity around the Secretary General role remain points of speculation.

Handling of 38 Oxley Road: A Test of Lawrence Wong’s Leadership Style and Vision

The longstanding dispute over 38 Oxley Road, the residence of Singapore’s late founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, adds to the complexity of the PAP’s leadership question.

The question of whether to demolish or preserve the house has become emblematic of debates over legacy and authority.

In October, Lee Kuan Yew’s son, Lee Hsien Yang, publicly appealed to Wong to honour Lee Kuan Yew’s repeatedly expressed wish for the property’s demolition following Dr Lee Wei Ling’s recent passing.

“PM Lawrence Wong, the decision on 38 Oxley Road is your responsibility. In Lee Kuan Yew’s will, he wished for his house to be demolished ‘immediately after’ Wei Ling was not there. The time for that decision is now,” LHY wrote in a Facebook post, referring to the passing of his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, on 9 October 2024.

Wong did not respond directly to Lee Hsien Yang’s call; instead, a statement from an unnamed government spokesperson rebutted Lee Hsien Yang’s position, suggesting that preserving options for the property would allow for broader public input on the building’s fate and the legacy of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister.

This indirect approach contrasts sharply with Lee Kuan Yew’s decisive style, as he once famously asserted, “Whoever governs Singapore must have that iron in him,” calling for unwavering strength in contentious matters. Wong’s lack of a public stance on the Oxley Road issue has led some to question if his approach aligns with the firm leadership style historically associated with the PAP.

Back in 1990, Goh Chok Tong, then Prime Minister-designate, emphasised that as Prime Minister he would hold the final authority on policies, even with Lee Kuan Yew as Senior Minister and PAP Secretary General. Goh underscored that leadership required clear, decisive authority on policy matters.

This precedent may resonate with the public today as Wong navigates his own leadership under the influence of LHL. As he tackles high-profile issues like the Oxley Road debate, observers may look to see if he demonstrates similar assertiveness—a quality valued by Singapore’s former leaders in a Prime Minister.

Leadership Challenge and Public Expectations

Wong has signalled his intention to address perceptions of elitism within the PAP, including pledges to improve inclusivity and increase female representation in politics.

As Wong faces the task of rejuvenating the PAP’s public appeal ahead of the next election, his leadership will likely be tested as he confronts criticism of persistent elitism and continued high salaries in the government, compounded by the recent corruption scandal involving former transport minister S Iswaran.

For Low, who now remains active in the WP’s CEC without any formal leadership role, his handover to Singh exemplified a structure that allows for the new leadership to set the party’s direction without the former leadership “looking over their shoulder”.

Meanwhile, LHL’s continued role in the PAP has led to questions about Wong’s true autonomy, especially in light of his handling of the Oxley Road matter, which Wong has not addressed directly despite public calls for leadership on the issue.

As Singaporeans continue to reflect on the ruling party’s leadership style and values, LHL’s gradual transition may be seen as a more conservative approach prioritising stability.

However, a more definitive handover—akin to Low’s approach in WP—could potentially further reinforce Wong’s standing as both the party leader and prime minister.

As PAP’s CEC convenes in the coming weeks, the public will closely watch whether Wong assumes both roles unambiguously.

The nature of this handover is likely to shape both public perception as well as PAP’s approach to leadership renewal in the lead-up to the general election. Both of these are critical to Singaporeans who are looking for leadership in the current world of geopolitical instability, rising costs and increasing demographic pressures.

We can only hope that PM Wong is given the chance to take a stand as his own man and to keep his promises to “listen to the people of Singapore”.