Purported resignation message from Li Hongyi as Singpass director goes viral; GovTech yet to confirm authenticity

A viral message circulating on Singaporean private messaging platforms since 30 October appears to show Li Hongyi, son of Singapore’s Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong, announcing his resignation as Director of Singpass.

The undated post, shared from what seems to be a Slack chat addressed to over 200 participants, is purportedly from Li, explaining his decision to step down due to alleged trust issues and a lack of alignment with Singpass leadership.

TOC has reached out to both GovTech and Li Hongyi to confirm the post’s authenticity but has not yet received a response.

The message reportedly begins with an announcement of resignation, stating, “Some of you may have already heard, but I wanted you to hear it directly from me: I’ve resigned as Director of Singpass.”

According to the post, Li shared that the decision had been under discussion with management for several months due to differences over work approach and team direction.

The purported post details three main areas of conflict, the first being the “minimisation and outright dismissal” of his team’s efforts.

The message claims that despite a significant team size reduction from 270 to 110 and cost reduction from S$153 million to S$73 million, Singpass’s Chief Executive (CE) and Second Permanent Secretary (2PS) continued to push for further headcount reductions without adjusting project scope, describing their expectations as “unrealistic.”

In the second issue, the post criticises “erratic direction” from leadership, suggesting that the agreed priority for system security and stability was disrupted by shifting management demands.

Li reportedly outlines that the pressures to accelerate migration and maintain non-core product support were inconsistent with the goals he initially agreed upon, creating, in his words, a situation “beyond my ability to comprehend.”

Finally, the message describes a perceived “lack of trust” from Singpass management. It alleges that discussions around team needs, partner relations, and project obstacles were frequently met with resistance, leaving Li to conclude that his standards of communication did not align with those of the leadership.

The message concludes with a statement of pride in his team’s accomplishments, noting that despite challenges, he believes in Singpass’s role in Singapore’s future. Li expressed gratitude for his team’s support and a commitment to aid in a smooth transition, according to the post.

However, it is understood that Li continues to serve as Director for Open Government Products within GovTech.

Should the message be verified, this would not be Li Hongyi’s first public communication on professional disagreements.

In 2007, Li, then 20 and serving in the Singapore military, made headlines after sending an email to military leadership, including the Defence Minister, regarding a superior officer who allegedly went AWOL without consequence.

The incident prompted an investigation and resulted in a reprimand for Li.

The purported WhatsApp message of Li’s post in full:

Some of you may have already heard but I wanted you to hear it directly from me: I’ve resigned as Director of Singpass. I know this may seem sudden, but it’s something I’ve been discussing with the bosses for a few months now. It’s become quite clear to me that I do not have the trust of the leadership on either the difficulty of the work nor the direction of the team. Given that’s the case, I think it’s best if they find someone else they feel can work with and execute on their requests.

I’ve been putting some thought into how much to share with you about my reasons for doing this. On the one hand, I owe it to you to be honest about my reasons and on the other hand I want to be professional and set the team up for success. I’ll try to share my perspective the best I can, but please take it as just my perspective.

The first point is the minimisation and outright dismissal of the difficulty of the work. We’ve done a tremendous feat by cutting our team size down from 270 to 110 people in just a year, while reducing the annual cost from $153m to $73m, while improving security and reliability at the same time. Yet, CE and 2PS are still looking for every opportunity to shave headcount off the team. To be clear, I empathise with the headcount constraint and understand the need to work within it. But rather than prioritise and reduce our scope, they want to increase the use of augmented resources and frame the problem as “not that difficult”. Most recently, Augustine claimed that supporting under 15 accounts wouldn’t require any additional work. To me, this is just not realistic nor achievable. To be clear, if it was just one conflict or objection I think we can settle the misunderstanding. But over the past year it’s become clear to me this is their constant direction. It’s clear to me that they feel their requests are reasonable, but this is a direction that is beyond me to deliver. And so I think it’s best they find someone who can.

The second point is the erratic direction. When I first took on the role of director NDI I aligned with bosses that the priority was the security and stability of the system, while moving away from our vendor reliance and build our long run capability. It’s hard enough to fix deep security and reliability issues, harder still to do so while reducing costs, and even harder still while training up a team. To do so, I was clear that we needed to be disciplined and aggressively cut out as many things as we could. At the start, the bosses were adamant that I try to level everyone up. Later on once Govtech’s headcount constraints became clear, they became insistent that I try to identify who would not succeed in training and move them off as quickly as possible. This would be doable, except that we had to delay training because they were insistent that we finish the migration ASAP because it was upsetting a lot of our partners. And that would be doable, except that whenever I tried to cut out less critical products they insisted that we keep supporting them to avoid unhappiness from those partners. It’s clear that whatever long term vision or strategy they have, it is beyond my ability to comprehend. And so I think it’s best they find someone who can.

The third point is the lack of trust they have in me. When I bring up our headcount needs due to new requests, they bring up that I previously told them we could do it with a leaner team. When I try to explain how we were handling our conversations with our partners, they admonish me for not informing them first. When I try to raise issues that we are blocked by, they put that what I’m telling them isn’t true. Sharing candidly, it feels less like a professional discussion and more like haggling at a pasar malam. It’s clear that whatever their standards of honestly and integrity, it is beyond my own character to meet. And so I think it’s best they find someone who can.

To be clear, I think we’ve done amazing work as a team and I really do believe in the vision we set out for how Singpass enables the future of Singapore. But given the lack of alignment between me and our leadership, and quite frankly my own mental health, I think it’s best they find someone whom they can work with. I’ll leave it to them to let me know who they want me to handoff to, and I’ll do my best to help in the transition. I really appreciate all the support the team has given our mission and me personally. I’ll do my best to help set the team up for success going forward.