Netizens call out Lawrence Wong for hypocrisy after he decries WP’s “negative” tone toward Gan Kim Yong

SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has expressed surprise and disappointment over what he described as the “negative tone” adopted by the Workers’ Party (WP) during their recent rally, particularly in their criticisms of Gan Kim Yong and the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) team in Punggol.

Speaking to reporters during a walkabout at One Punggol Hawker Centre on 29 April, Wong, who is also the PAP candidate for Marsiling–Yew Tee GRC, responded to remarks made at the WP rally the night before.

He said he was “rather taken aback” by the WP’s approach, noting that while political differences were expected, there was no need for personal attacks—especially against someone like Gan Kim Yong, who he said had made significant contributions to Singapore.

“We may have our differences, but there is no need to go into negative attacks on individuals—especially someone like Gan Kim Yong, who has done so much for Singapore,” Wong stated.

Expressing regret over the tone of the campaign, Wong urged Punggol residents to reject what he called “negative politics.”

“The tone of the campaign is regretful. But I would say to Punggol residents—let’s reject this kind of negative politics,” he said.

Wong: Gan Is ‘No Stranger’ to Punggol or Singapore

Addressing questions about whether Gan Kim Yong was a “stranger” to Punggol, Wong insisted that Gan was well-known to both the constituency and the country.

“Gan Kim Yong is surely no stranger to Punggol residents or to Singaporeans. How can he be? He spent so much of his life in public service.

He helped us through COVID. He’s done so much for Singapore, and we treat him like a stranger? Let’s be more gracious,” he said.

A Surprise Move to Field Gan in Punggol

Wong also elaborated on the decision to field Gan in Punggol GRC—a move announced on Nomination Day, 23 April, which surprised many as Gan had been expected to remain in Chua Chu Kang GRC.

Wong explained that the decision was made to fill a leadership gap left by Teo Chee Hean’s departure.

Wong speculated that the WP may not have anticipated the move.

“No doubt the WP would have preferred me to field a new minister here, or perhaps just stick with the existing team and add a new candidate.

That’s likely why they decided to drop everything in Marine Parade–Braddell Heights and parachute into Punggol, not expecting me to make this move,” he said.

“So, let's be clear: the WP didn’t step up—they stepped away from Marine Parade.”

Netizens Accuse PAP of Double Standards

Wong's comments sparked a wave of backlash online, with over 1,600 comments on The Straits Times' YouTube and Facebook pages, where many netizens accused him of applying double standards — some even going so far as to call him hypocritical.

Several pointed out that while the ruling party often criticised opposition candidates, it seemed to take offence when similar remarks were directed at its own leaders.

One user questioned the double standards, pointing out that while the Workers' Party (WP) was accused of "parachuting," the same could be said about the decision to move Gan Kim Yong (GKY) to Punggol.

The user also highlighted that when the WP criticised, it was deemed "negative," but when Ong Ye Kung attacked Chee Soon Juan, it was not considered so.

"How many double standards are you practising?”

Another commenter pointed out that the PAP could accuse the opposition of abandoning constituencies, parachuting in, and calling them strangers whenever it suited them.

However, when the opposition defended itself and called out hypocrisy, the PAP framed it as dirty politics and a lack of graciousness.

Netizens Point Out PAP Started Negative Rhetoric Against Opposition

Many netizens argued that the PAP itself had initiated negative rhetoric, citing past instances where opposition candidates were accused of being "strangers" or “abandoning” constituencies.

One user remarked, “Why does Wong act like the PAP has never attacked the opposition negatively before?”

Another added, “PAP behaves like a child—attacks others first, then plays innocent when hit back. All GE speeches are recorded and can be replayed. Those who think critically can easily see who started the fire.”

“Now PM Wong wants to play ‘Mr Nice Guy’ and advise the opposition to be gracious? How hypocritical is that?” another user wrote.

Some commenters urged Wong not to "spin" what was said at the WP rally, suggesting that his framing of the situation was an attempt to gain sympathy from voters.

“Don’t try to pretend to be the victim,” one user said.

Claims of Personal Attacks on Gan Disputed

Some netizens who watched the WP rally disputed Wong’s claim that there were personal attacks on Gan Kim Yong.

They pointed out that WP candidate Harpreet Singh had specifically urged the crowd not to boo Gan.

One user argued that the rally only questioned Wong’s decision to field Gan in Punggol as DPM, rather than in the Central Executive Committee.

“There was zero attack,” the user said.

Another commenter challenged Wong’s approach, asking, “Why not just address and respond to the scepticism instead of dodging it like how questions were avoided in Parliament?"

“You can’t just label it as negative because you don’t like it.”

Workers' Party Questions Political Decisions Surrounding Gan Kim Yong’s Candidacy in Punggol

At the WP rally held on 28 April, party chief Pritam Singh and other WP candidates took aim at the PAP team in Punggol, specifically Gan.

Singh raised concerns about Gan not being elected into the PAP’s central executive committee in 2024, suggesting it might signal his readiness to retire and questioning his suitability for this election.

“If so, can he be so critical to the PM’s plans?” he asked.

Singh also addressed Gan’s earlier remarks at a PAP rally, where he stated he would speak to Prime Minister Wong to secure infrastructure funding for Punggol.

“Do I need to be his friend for taxpayer funding to be allocated to Punggol? No,” Singh said.

WP candidate Harpreet Singh, a senior counsel, called for greater transparency over Gan’s involvement in the cancelled Income-Allianz deal.

Singh stressed the need for “fair politics and accountability” in Singapore’s leadership.

The senior counsel argued that critical questions raised by former NTUC Income CEO Tan Suee Chieh must be answered by Gan, who is leading the People’s Action Party (PAP) team in Punggol GRC for the General Election 2025.

In an open letter dated 28 April 2025, Tan called for DPM Gan to disclose his role in the deal, citing concerns about regulatory oversight and the strategic direction of NTUC entities.

Tan’s letter, widely circulated on social media, marked his fourth attempt to seek accountability from Gan, following three earlier letters sent between August and September 2024.

WP candidate Alexis Dang addressed comments made by PAP candidate Sun Xueling, who had previously stated that “strangers” were not needed in Punggol.

Dang questioned whether this standard applied to Gan Kim Yong, who had been moved to Punggol after two decades in Chua Chu Kang GRC.

“Is he exempted because he’s a good friend of PM Lawrence Wong?” she asked.

While expressing respect for Singapore's leaders, she raised concerns about political decisions being made based on personal friendships rather than merit.

She questioned, "Is this the kind of leadership we want to endorse? Is this the political culture we want to pass on to our children, where success is based on connections rather than fairness?"

In his rally speech on 29 April, Workers’ Party (WP) Secretary-General Pritam Singh delivered a pointed rebuttal to recent remarks by Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, who had accused the WP of engaging in “negative politics.” Singh countered that it was the People’s Action Party (PAP) that had long practised such politics through its treatment of opposition-held constituencies.

He cited past HDB upgrading policies, where opposition wards were deprioritised, and pointed out that access to community clubs and national events—such as citizenship ceremonies—had been consistently denied to opposition MPs.

Singh argued that these actions reflected a longstanding pattern of political exclusion. “The PAP only listens when it loses vote share and parliamentary seats to the Workers’ Party,” he said, drawing strong applause from the crowd.

Tying his argument to broader themes of national development, Singh referenced Singapore’s 60th year of independence, which has been designated the “Year of Resilience.” He suggested that the political resistance demonstrated by opposition wards in the face of discriminatory policies represented a true form of resilience—one that deserved to be taught in schools.

Singh also revisited a historical remark made by a former prime minister, who once said he would need to spend time “fixing the opposition” if they gained more seats. Singh questioned whether such a stance could be considered positive politics, asking pointedly: “I wonder what Prime Minister Lawrence Wong would say about this. Is this negative politics?”

He concluded by directly addressing Wong: “Please say yes or no before polling day. Let me know, so I can go and debate with Prime Minister Lawrence Wong in Parliament. What is the real meaning of negative politics?”