Lawrence Wong’s leadership, housing policies, and political freedoms under scrutiny

A lively panel discussion took place on Sunday evening, featuring political commentators Terry Xu, Chief Editor of The Online Citizen; Thum Ping Tjin, Founder and Managing Director of New Naratif; and Sean Francis Han, former Editor-in-Chief of Wake Up Singapore and activist.

The conversation spanned the People’s Action Party’s strategies, housing policy implications, the potential emergence of a stronger opposition, the evolving social compact, and concerns over political freedoms.

The discussion opened with Xu introducing the topic of Lawrence Wong’s speech at the 70th PAP Anniversary, where the Prime Minister emphasised stability, unity, and continuity within the ruling party.

Xu questioned whether these themes signalled internal party challenges or a response to a politically charged electorate increasingly critical of bread-and-butter issues like cost of living and housing affordability.

Thum critiqued the PAP’s recurring narrative, summarising Wong’s speech as a plea for trust in the party to sustain Singapore’s growth.

Thum remarked, “The PAP’s transition to a new era under Wong is stage-managed to highlight stability while downplaying the systemic inequalities exacerbated by decades of policy choices.” He questioned the feasibility of Wong delivering meaningful change, given the entrenched structures and incentives guiding the government.

Francis echoed Thum’s scepticism but highlighted Wong’s efforts to adopt a more relatable persona, leveraging social media and cultural symbols.

“There is an attempt to connect with younger voters, positioning himself as an everyman,” Francis noted. He expressed cautious optimism that this strategy could lead to a less fear-driven election campaign, focusing on substantive policy discussions instead.

Fear-Mongering in Election Campaigns

The panel delved into the PAP’s longstanding use of fear as an electoral strategy, with both PJ Thum and Sean Francis raising concerns over how this tactic has influenced voter behaviour.

During his speech at the , Wong stated that while most Singaporeans support PAP as the ruling government, there is a growing desire for more opposition voices.

“Actually, there is no chance of [an opposition wipeout] happening at all,” Wong said, citing the Non-constituency Member of the Parliament (NCMP) scheme’s provision of at least 12 opposition members in Parliament. Wong emphasised that the opposition’s presence is “guaranteed” and warned of the potential risk of losing a stable and strong government if this sentiment is overemphasised.

Thum cited studies showing that fear of repercussions, such as reduced access to resources or being singled out for opposition support, has led many Singaporeans to vote for the PAP despite their dissatisfaction with its policies.

“As many as 30% of voters who preferred the opposition have admitted to changing their vote out of fear,” Thum noted. He argued that this tactic has been instrumental in maintaining the PAP’s dominance but comes at the cost of undermining genuine democratic choice.

Francis expressed cautious optimism that Wong’s leadership might shift away from such approaches. “Wong’s attempts to present himself as relatable and affable could signal a softer touch, but the legacy of fear-mongering is deeply entrenched,” he remarked.

The panellists agreed that fear remains a significant barrier to political change in Singapore, as voters often perceive the risks of challenging the status quo as greater than the potential benefits of supporting opposition parties.

“It’s not just about opposition weakness; it’s about the system creating a climate where even considering change feels dangerous,” Thum concluded.

Housing Crisis and Economic Models

Housing policy emerged as a central theme, with all panellists weighing in on its broader implications. Thum highlighted how the government’s dependence on rising property values to fund CPF retirement accounts has created a volatile market. He noted, “The reliance on real estate appreciation as a cornerstone of retirement savings ties the government’s hands. It cannot afford to slow housing inflation without jeopardising retirees’ financial security.”

Xu built on this by addressing the growing trend of young couples viewing housing as a speculative investment rather than a long-term home.

“Flipping property post-minimum occupancy has become the norm, driving prices higher and sidelining genuine homebuyers,” he remarked. He also questioned whether public housing had strayed too far from its original purpose of providing affordable, stable shelter for Singaporeans, instead becoming a tool for wealth accumulation.

The panel also explored the risks inherent in Singapore’s economic model, which relies heavily on migrant labour.

Francis remarked, “The government’s approach perpetuates inequality by fostering an economy dependent on exploitation rather than innovation or value creation.” Xu agreed, arguing that such reliance creates downward pressure on wages and opportunities for Singaporeans, particularly in middle- and lower-income groups.

Xu raised an additional concern about the economic outflows created by this reliance. “While foreign workers contribute to the local economy through their labour, much of their earnings are sent back to their home countries. This results in significant outflows of money, limiting the domestic economic multiplier effect that would strengthen Singapore’s internal market,” he explained.

Thum echoed these concerns, describing the model as unsustainable in the long term. He pointed out that Singapore’s reliance on foreign workers disproportionately affects the nation’s most vulnerable populations while deepening socio-economic divides.

The Future of Political Freedoms

The panellists turned their attention to the political environment, particularly the perceived erosion of freedoms under the PAP’s long-standing rule. Xu pointed to recent legislation and lawsuits targeting activists and opposition politicians. “Under Wong’s leadership, Singapore has seen increasing restrictions on free speech, making it harder for alternative voices to emerge,” he said.

Francis expressed concern that the government’s tightening grip could further dissuade Singaporeans from engaging in political discourse.

“If Lawrence Wong is serious about refreshing the social compact, he must ensure that Singaporeans feel safe to express dissent without fear of retaliation,” he said.

Thum added, “The PAP’s rhetoric about a vibrant democracy is contradicted by its actions. Laws like the Foreign Interference Countermeasures Act (FICA) and the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) have been used to silence criticism, making true dialogue impossible.”

The Social Compact and Bread-and-Butter Issues

Wong’s Forward Singapore initiative to refresh the social compact also came under scrutiny. Thum questioned whether the initiative was more rhetoric than substance. “Wong talks about a new social compact, but the policies he proposes—on housing, population growth, and economic competition—remain firmly rooted in the PAP’s long-standing approach,” he said.

Xu noted the irony in Wong’s call for unity while implementing policies that appear to deepen divisions. “The PAP asks Singaporeans to unite behind its vision, but fails to address the growing inequality and insecurity that its policies have created,” he remarked.

The panellists explored Wong’s focus on “lowering expectations” among Singaporeans. Francis described it as a pragmatic, albeit uninspiring, move. “Instead of aiming for a brighter future, Wong seems to be preparing Singaporeans for mediocrity,” he said.

Xu agreed, calling it a departure from the aspirational leadership of previous generations.

The Oxley Road Litmus Test

The controversy over 38 Oxley Road, the late Lee Kuan Yew’s residence, has resurfaced following Lee Hsien Yang’s recent request to demolish the house in line with his father’s last wish. This request came after the passing of his sister, Lee Wei Ling, in October 2024.

While Lee Kuan Yew had explicitly stated in his will that the house should be demolished to prevent it from becoming a public monument, the government has delayed its decision. It cited the need for the Singapore Heritage Board to reevaluate the property’s heritage value, sparking renewed debate over whether the government will honour Lee’s wish or preserve the house as a historical site.

The panel explored the implications of this delay, with Terry Xu framing it as a litmus test for Lawrence Wong’s independence as a leader. “If Wong cannot act decisively on this relatively straightforward issue, it raises doubts about his ability to tackle more significant challenges,” Xu said.

PJ Thum added that indecision on the matter could leave the PAP open to criticism. “This could become a major election issue, undermining the party’s claims of unity and stability,” he warned.

Opportunities for the Opposition and Civil Society

The panellists agreed that Singapore’s opposition parties and civil society must seize the moment to present credible alternatives.

Francis urged opposition leaders to articulate a vision that resonates with everyday concerns. “Singaporeans are frustrated with the status quo. Offering transformative policies focused on reducing inequality and improving quality of life could be a game-changer,” he said.

Thum highlighted the importance of grassroots activism and independent media in shaping public opinion. “This is a critical period for anyone seeking change. We need more voices to step up and challenge the dominant narrative,” he said.

Looking Ahead to the General Election

Speculation about the timing of the next general election added urgency to the discussion. Xu noted that the PAP could capitalise on SG60 celebrations to bolster its position.

However, he warned that global trends showing dissatisfaction with incumbent governments could influence Singaporeans. “This election will test whether the PAP can maintain its dominance in an increasingly sceptical electorate,” he said.

The panel concluded with a call to action for Singaporeans. “This is an opportunity for everyone to fight for the Singapore they want,” Thum said, urging citizens, activists, and opposition parties to step up and shape the country’s future.

Editor’s Note: This session was pre-recorded and will undergo editing prior to release. Due to limited manpower, the video will be made available at a later date. We appreciate your patience and support.