‘Systemic constraints are real’: Pritam Singh highlights gerrymandering as original sin in Singapore politics

Speaking on the YouTube podcast “Keluar Sekejap” on 24 June 2025, Singapore’s Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh offered candid reflections on the political realities facing opposition parties in the country. In a wide-ranging conversation, Singh identified systemic barriers—such as aggressive gerrymandering and institutional exclusion—as key challenges that prevent robust opposition growth. He was interviewed by co-hosts Khairy Jamaluddin, a former Malaysian health minister, and Shahril Hamdan, a former United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) leader. Responding to Shahril’s question on why Singaporeans remain seemingly content with the People’s Action Party (PAP), Singh said one major factor is the structural imbalance in Singapore’s electoral system. He described aggressive gerrymandering as “the original sin in Singapore politics”, pointing to how electoral boundaries were changed just 1.5 months before nomination day during the last general election. "That's one strand or one vertical you can look at, the nature of the system which just makes it difficult to enter and successfully campaign as an opposition party," said Singh. He added that while any Singaporean over the age of 21 who is not bankrupt may technically contest elections, the real hurdles are institutional.

Singh: Small-minded exclusion of opposition MPs from citizenship ceremonies must end

Pritam Singh highlighted the exclusion of opposition MPs from citizenship ceremonies, even when these are held in their own constituencies. He criticised the practice as petty and unprogressive, especially given that around 20,000 new citizens are welcomed annually in Singapore. "I find that incredibly small-minded, incredibly small-minded. Here we are talking about a united Singapore and you've got such a policy and that policy has to change in my view." Pritam candidly acknowledged that the PAP has implemented policies that Singaporeans appreciate, Examples include world-class public libraries, parks, green spaces, and public gymnasiums. He added that even the opposition supports many government policies in Parliament when they are well-reasoned and beneficial. Singh pointed out that Singaporeans do see value in the current system, especially in aspects that touch their daily lives positively.

Too restrained for the 'jungle'? Singh pressed to adopt bolder political style

Shahril questioned whether the Workers’ Party’s approach—perceived as incremental and technocratic—fails to connect emotionally with voters grappling with real-life concerns such as inflation and housing affordability. Khairy agreed, suggesting that Singh’s restrained and rational tone may not suit Singapore’s competitive political terrain. He described the environment as a “jungle” dominated by the PAP, saying Singh might need to adopt a more combative style to galvanise public sentiment. According to Khairy, this would mean behaving more like a “street fighter”, employing sharper rhetoric and stoking public anger over contentious issues such as GST hikes, immigration, and financial scandals. He contrasted this with Malaysia’s opposition, which has a tradition of mobilising mass protests and public campaigns, and questioned why the WP does not adopt similar tactics.

Singh: PAP avoided key issues to shield against public backlash

In response, Singh maintained that the WP’s campaign focused on core issues such as the cost of living and housing. “But the PAP didn’t take the bait,” he said. He argued that the ruling party ran a defensive campaign, deliberately avoiding engagement on politically sensitive topics. “They knew these were pain points,” Singh added. “The strategy was: let’s not talk about them.” Citing a report from CNA, Singh noted that even senior ministers like Vivian Balakrishnan and Josephine Teo did not give any speeches during the election period. “And they were, according to that newspaper article, it was by design. Don’t say anything stupid which will make Singaporeans angry,” he said. Singh also recounted confronting Prime Minister Lawrence Wong in Parliament, where he accused the government of “turbocharging inflation.” The response he received was, “This is not an election rally.” “I said it again during the rally, but they don’t want to engage that issue at that point,” Singh continued. “Or they probably decided, look, this is something we can’t win anyway. Nobody is going to back us and say, ‘Yes, raising GST was a good decision.’” He concluded that the PAP had a clear and cautious campaign strategy. “They knew what they wanted to do, and they knew what they didn’t want to do—regardless of how much incitement the opposition would have generated.”

Constraints on opposition strategy

When asked why WP does not adopt a more activist posture, Singh pointed to strict regulations on public assembly. He said Singapore’s legal and political environment limits the kinds of tactics opposition parties can use. While admitting that WP’s strategy may not have been perfect, Singh maintained that the party aimed to be credible and serious. He argued that Singaporeans are discerning, rejecting unserious or opportunistic candidates, as seen in multi-cornered contests where some parties received 0% of the vote.

Raeesah Khan incident and trust recovery

Singh also addressed the Raeesah Khan affair, a key incident where the former WP MP admitted to lying in Parliament. This led to Singh being referred to the Committee of Privileges and later found guilty by the High Court—a verdict he is now appealing. He said he remained focused and maintained a clear conscience throughout, despite disagreeing with the ruling. "And you could feel the ground vibe. And the BBC report I alluded to earlier used the words 'a politically motivated persecution almost of the Leader of the Opposition'." Singh admitted to potential shortcomings in how the situation was handled but denied the accusations made against him.

WP’s stand on Gaza and international law

On the ongoing conflict in Gaza, Singh reaffirmed the WP’s stance, calling it a humanitarian crisis that transcends race or religion. He emphasised that small nations like Singapore must stand firm on international norms and laws for their own security. If powerful countries can flout these rules, it sets a dangerous precedent, Singh argued. He said WP’s support for recognising the state of Palestine stems from principle, not electoral calculation, aligning with Singapore’s values and its commitment to justice.

A missed opportunity: the cancelled HSR project

Turning to regional relations, Singh described the cancellation of the Kuala Lumpur–Singapore High-Speed Rail (HSR) project as a lost chance for deepening bilateral ties. He said the 350km railway could have transformed travel and connectivity between the two nations, shortening journey times and enhancing people-to-people exchanges. Although the project was cancelled in 2021, Singh welcomed signals from both governments expressing renewed interest under revised terms. He called for more educational and cultural exchange initiatives, such as increased university collaborations. "Singapore and Malaysia are conjoined at the hip," Singh said, stressing that more meaningful engagement can deliver long-term benefits.