Battle emerges between PAP, WP to shape narrative: How should voters judge the Opposition at GE2030?

SINGAPORE – The post-mortem for the 2025 General Election continues, but already the first battle line has been drawn for the next fight, with a key question that has emerged: How should voters judge the Workers’ Party (WP) come 2030?

During Parliament’s first sitting last week, leaders from the ruling PAP and the opposition WP set out to shape expectations with their own competing takes on what the WP should be doing in the House.

Speaking on Sept 23 during the five-day debate, Coordinating Minister for Social Policies Ong Ye Kung

framed these expectations

as what voters will look for from the WP moving forward as Singapore matures politically.

He said the WP should offer a “real” alternative vision for Singapore with alternative policies. While the WP has done this occasionally before, it needs to present a “principled, consistent and coherent approach” to Singapore’s challenges, he added.

Should the WP “rise to the occasion” and stand and contest the PAP as the Democrats and the Republicans do in the US or the Conservatives and Labour do in the UK, “life will be much harder for the PAP”, he said in a wide-ranging speech on Singapore’s new post-election political landscape.

As a party heavyweight and one of the PAP’s senior leaders, Mr Ong’s outline was more than a reflection of what he said was public sentiment – it was also an appeal to Singaporeans to hold the opposition party to a higher standard than before.

It presents a significant shift in how the ruling party frames the role of the WP to the public.

The PAP has in recent years publicly accepted the WP’s continued presence in Parliament and role in holding the Government to account. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said during the debate that he fully expects the WP to continue what it was doing before – asking questions and scrutinising policy.

Mr Ong went further – framing the WP’s role as similar to the PAP’s: to offer a vision for Singapore and the policies to execute it.

His move could set a standard that the PAP will seek to hold the WP to at the next election.

If voters come to expect something from the WP beyond what it is prepared to do, that will give ample ammunition to the PAP at the next hustings.

The WP leadership largely disagreed with his assessment, and instead put out a vision for the party in line with the role it is already playing and which it campaigned on: a check on the Government.

Leader of the Opposition and WP chief Pritam Singh

said on the first day of the debate

that his party plans to primarily focus on “the function that Parliament demands of us – checking the Government’s policies and actions”.

On the last day, WP chair Sylvia Lim also weighed in and said opposition MPs are expected to take an independent line, question the Government and vote against proposals when they deem it necessary, as that “is our obligation and that is what voters expect us to do”.

It is no surprise the WP held the line – its approach and branding as a check on the Government have led it to become the most successful opposition party since the 1960s.

Both sides are taking the start of the 15th term of Parliament to set these expectations, as the role of the WP is at an inflection point after the

results of the May election

.

It is now the only opposition party in Parliament and has 12 MPs – its largest contingent in the Chamber. Its vote share from the election, averaging just over 50 per cent of the vote across the 26 seats it contested, is head and shoulders ahead of the rest of the Opposition – and many now see it as the only party able to mount a credible challenge against the ruling PAP.

The two parties are also tapping into public discourse that the May election was a moment of political maturity for Singapore. Most other opposition parties lost relevance and vote share, leaving the PAP and the WP standing alone in the House – a result that many interpreted as growing sophistication among voters.

Both sides are trying to shape what this new-found maturity may mean to Singaporeans and what responsibilities are then assigned to their political opponent.

To Mr Singh, the acceptance of opposition MPs and their role in public life is a sign of this maturity and what Singaporeans want.

In response to Mr Ong, he questioned if opposition MPs would be invited to welcome new citizens at ceremonies organised by the People’s Association, “because that would reflect a certain maturity that I believe is where Singapore has arrived”.

“And if I can be so bold, it may well be something that Singaporeans demand of the PAP,” he said.

Mr Ong, on the other hand, framed political maturity as growing expectations from Singaporeans to hear different perspectives and see a good contest of ideas.

He gave examples from what he called mature democracies where a dynamic of parties offering different visions of a nation’s future is “institutionalised” like the Tories and Labour in the UK.

The WP’s role in achieving this political maturity is then to fit Singaporeans’ expectations by providing this alternative – becoming another party with its own vision for Singapore in this system.

But can the WP offer an alternative vision? Mr Singh acknowledged that Singaporeans want an alternative and his party does its best to present one.

But he stopped short of saying that its ability to do more will also depend on the extent to which the Government will extend public resources to it, and reiterated persistent gaps.

Responding to Mr Ong, Mr Singh said the party deals with “significant asymmetries of information”.

He cited the “tremendous resources” that are available to the PAP to reach out day-to-day in the constituencies through the People’s Association, including the new-citizen welcome ceremonies.

Both sides have centred voters’ expectations at the core of how the other side should behave, using what they claim voters want to push the other side to do more.

As arguments develop along these new battle lines, it is now up to Singapore voters to decide which version of the Opposition they want – and the polls in 2030 will tell.