WP’s swift refusal of LO role signals unity behind Pritam Singh, say analysts

SINGAPORE – The Workers’ Party

declining Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s invitation

to nominate another MP as Leader of the Opposition shows it has closed ranks around its chief Pritam Singh, said analysts.

The speed of the decision – coming less than a week after

PM Wong removed Mr Singh from the post

on Jan 15 – also reflects party unity and that it is “clear-cut” to the WP that the costs of taking the role outweigh the benefits, they said.

The opposition party had on Jan 21 said it is “unable to accept” PM Wong’s invitation, and it takes the view that the leader of the largest opposition party in Parliament is the leader of the Opposition.

The Prime Minister’s Office said in response that

the Government accepts the WP’s decision

and that the office will remain vacant until the party chooses to nominate someone.

Independent political observer Felix Tan said the WP’s decision was “hardly surprising” as it reinforces the party’s MPs’ ongoing support for Mr Singh.

On Jan 14, all 11 WP MPs present dissented on a motion in Parliament that stated Mr Singh was unsuitable for the role. The House

eventually voted to agree that he was unsuitable

.

Nominating another MP as LO while keeping Mr Singh as party chief could also create factions within the party, said Dr Mustafa Izzuddin, a senior international affairs analyst at Solaris Strategies Singapore.

Agreeing, Dr Tan said the decision avoids turning the LO role into a source of internal rivalry.

The move is also a public signal that the party has managed to reach a decision quickly, even before

internal party processes

on Mr Singh conclude, said Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) senior research fellow Teo Kay Key.

It shows that there are “no compelling reasons for WP to accept the PM’s invitation”, said Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan. “That it was a clear-cut case for them.”

It also “gives us an indication that Pritam Singh will continue as secretary-general”, he added.

The party formed a disciplinary panel in January to investigate if Mr Singh contravened the party’s Constitution following

his convictions for lying to a parliamentary committee

. The WP has said this will take about three months.

The trade-off for the WP in not nominating an LO is that it may forgo certain procedural and symbolic institutional advantages that come with the LO position, such as the right of first response in Parliament and the additional visibility, Dr Felix Tan noted.

Declining PM Wong’s offer is also a comment from the opposition party about the viability of the role in its current form, and a critique on his decision to remove Mr Singh from it, analysts said.

IPS senior research fellow Gillian Koh said the WP has raised the issue of the status of the scheme to the detriment of the PAP and PM Wong.

The WP’s decision also reminds the general public about the reason for Mr Singh’s removal as LO – which could win sympathy for the party, or be to its detriment.

“Citizens want fair play especially where there is large imbalance in power between the dominant (party) and the rest, and the burden seems to rest on the PAP to prove that it has not overplayed its hand against the weak,” she said.

This is why the WP’s trump card is still to “play the victim in this long-running saga”, she added.

“By not providing a nominee for LO, with its arguments about foreign systems of LO, it reminds citizens of this situation.”

In its Jan 21 statement declining the role, the WP said the appointment is conventionally extended to the leader of the largest opposition party in Parliament, or decided by the opposition party in question.

The party cited other Westminster parliamentary systems where the title of the LO is established by law and “is not the prerogative or choice of the government of the day or the prime minister”.

The party’s refusal of PM Wong’s invitation could also prompt more discussion on the role and what it means for Singapore, Dr Teo said.

“It would also raise questions on whether it is a relevant position in its current form, and what the LO should be entitled to in that position.”

If the position is established by law, there would likely be more fixed rules on the criteria for who is a suitable LO, as well as more definitive regulations on the LO’s entitlements and expected contributions, she noted.

Even without a formal LO, the WP remains the largest and only opposition party in Parliament with 12 MPs, observers said.

It is in a similar position to before Mr Singh was first officially appointed to the role by then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong after the 2020 General Election, Dr Felix Tan said.

“Nothing of the structure of power has changed by any of these developments over the past weeks,” Dr Koh said.

Electorally, it is still early in the cycle, Dr Mustafa noted, and other issues may take precedence in voters’ minds by the next polls.

How the lack of an LO will play out in the House is still in question – and a big test is on the horizon.

Singapore is headed into the Budget season, Dr Koh noted. PM Wong is scheduled to

deliver the Budget on Feb 12

, following which MPs will debate the Government’s spending for the year.

It remains to be seen if in actual practice, the WP’s role is diminished in any way by not having an LO and its privileges of the first right of response and extended speaking time, she said.