WP wants to be ‘insurance’ for S’pore should PAP suffer ‘major malfunction’: Pritam in Malaysian podcast

SINGAPORE – The Workers’ Party wants to get to a position where it is ready to step in and govern, should the ruling PAP suffer a “major malfunction”, said Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh.

“You want to be in a position where you can say: ‘Look, we’re ready because we’ve got these years of experience under our belt,’” he added.

This would be a “great insurance for Singapore”, said Mr Singh, who has been party chief since 2018.

“I’m not saying me and my colleagues today will be in that position, but we certainly want to put the party in that position,” he added.

Mr Singh, who was making his first podcast appearance, was responding to a question from former Malaysian health minister Khairy Jamaluddin on whether he could see a Singapore without the PAP at the helm. Mr Khairy and former Umno information chief Shahril Hamdan are hosts of popular Malaysian political podcast Keluar Sekejap, which translates into “out for a moment”.

In an almost two-hour-long session uploaded to YouTube on June 24, Mr Singh also said he would not want to be prime minister of Singapore.

“I think my role is to normalise the idea of an opposition in Singapore,” he said. He hopes to bring more like-minded people on board to achieve a “functioning and effective” parliamentary democracy.

His comments – filmed during a family holiday to Malaysia – come about two months after the

2025 General Election held on May 3.

In that outing, the WP held on to its 10 seats in Aljunied, Hougang and Sengkang.

The party also picked up

two Non-Constituency MP seats

for its Jalan Kayu and Tampines GRC candidates, following close fights in those constituencies.

They form the WP’s largest contingent in Parliament, after the party fielded 26 candidates in eight constituencies out of the 97 seats and 33 constituencies available.

The podcast covered a wide range of topics, including Mr Singh’s background and motivation to join politics, the party’s strategy at the recent election and its role in Singapore’s political landscape.

Throughout the podcast, Mr Singh reiterated his view of WP’s role as a check and balance to the ruling party, given the appetite of Singapore voters today.

This came through in his response to comments referenced by Mr Khairy, that suggested Mr Singh’s strategy in the general election showed a “lack of ambition” – for instance, by not contesting outside the “bunker” of Aljunied GRC where he has been since 2011.

Mr Khairy also asked if the party should pivot away from Mr Singh’s medium-term goal, set in 2019, of contesting and winning one-third of the seats in Parliament. The one-third goal is tied to Singapore’s laws, which state that constitutional amendments require two-thirds majority support in the House.

Mr Singh said he has to understand what Singaporeans want and how they respond to language which reflects ambition.

“I have to have a good finger on the pulse of Singaporeans... If that language is not in sync with their broad understanding of what they want out of politics in Singapore, then ambition can be a death knell for any politician in Singapore,” he said.

“If we accept that Singaporeans are pragmatic and there’s no demand for a change of government, then going out there, flying a flag which says ‘I’m your Prime Minister-in-waiting’ is probably, with respect, an act of foolishness.”

The party’s strategy is determined by its sense of the pulse of Singaporeans, he said.

If the public has an appetite for something else, the party should be sensitive to it. “If not, it’s a gamble and gambles don’t work very well in Singapore politics,” he added.

But the party did have a “complete change” of strategy as compared with 2020 – in Tampines and Punggol GRCs and Jalan Kayu SMC, in particular, where the party presented strong cases, said Mr Singh, who did not elaborate on the change. Those three constituencies were the WP’s closest losses.

He said this sense of what Singaporeans want is also why much of the party’s work is done at the margins – to bring the voices of people who fall between the cracks to Parliament – rather than to present a radically different vision of Singapore.

He added that on a day-to-day level, Singapore is a decent place to live, thrive, grow and raise a family, “and that’s not what we are trying to destroy”.

“But in spite of all that, there is a desire amongst many Singaporeans for political balance, and we know that, and we try and tap that.”

Mr Shahril pointed to other opposition political parties in Singapore that appear to have a different view of the opposition’s job, as they offer policy ideas that are “more radical than the WP’s”, which has sometimes been described as a half-step to the left.

Mr Singh acknowledged those views but said that while everyone wants a successful Singapore, the question is how to get there.

“Ultimately, one view will prevail, and I think that’s the view that the public can relate to most naturally. And hence, in comparison to the other opposition parties, we present this particular vision for this moment in time,” he said.

If that view changes, the WP wants to be in a position to pivot very quickly. But the party cannot pivot or talk about change if it does not have a position in Parliament, he added.

Mr Shahril asked if WP had “missed the trick of trying to get into the emotional register” as opposed to being managerial and technocratic, by not raising issues of discontent among Singaporeans such as the cost of living.

Mr Singh said the party had talked about cost of living and housing during the election, but “the PAP didn’t take the bait”.

The PAP ran a “very, very tight campaign” where there were no gaffes, and the strategy was not to talk about the pain points, he said.

“The Singaporean voter is very sophisticated, and accordingly, we have to align our politics in a way which can ensure that the opposition continues to grow and thrive in the Singapore context,” he added.

Mr Singh was also asked about how he dealt with his court case, where

he was fined in February for lying to a parliamentary committee

during its 2021 inquiry into

former WP MP Raeesah Khan’s conduct.

He has appealed against his conviction and sentence.

He said: “When your conscience is clear, and you do not agree with what has been done to you, there’s a certain clarity of mind, clarity of thought, clarity of purpose, that keeps you focused on what you are in this for, and that really has been my lodestar.”

He pointed to a BBC report that said the case had almost no impact during the elections, adding that “without going into details, I did fairly respectably in my constituency”.

Mr Singh was asked how Singapore manages multiracialism and multiculturalism.

The ruling government in Singapore takes this very seriously, he said.

“I cannot think of any other way to manage a society with different races than telling all of them that all of you are important and everybody has a place at the table.”

While it is not perfect, the fundamental building block of any society is to respect one another, he said.

Asked if he would do it any differently, he said: “I wouldn’t, because I am passionately race neutral about things.”

This does not mean he ignores reality, but being race neutral is how he views Singapore and aspires the country to be, he added.

Multiracialism is something Singapore continues to work at, and “as an opposition member, I want to be part of the solution in that”, he said.

Asked if there was data to show electoral support by ethnic groups, Mr Singh said that as residential areas have a mix of people, “you can’t really tell which community voted in which particular direction”.

Whether one is a member of the Singapore government or an opposition politician, the approach to race is that it is not something to be brought into the political realm – not something to score political points on, he added.