Singapore — The People’s Action Party’s Indranee Rajah has shared a parallel between the party during the elections in 2015 and this year.
Ms Indranee took to Facebook on Monday (July 6) to share then-and-now photos of the PAP teams in the contests. In her post, she said: “Same same but different!”
A PAP team is contesting in Tanjong Pagar GRC against a team from the Progress Singapore Party (PSP). Ms Indranee is in the PAP team with Mr Chan Chun Sing, Ms Joan Pereira, Mr Eric Chua Swee Leong and Mr Alvin Tan Sheng Hui.
The PSP team comprises Mr Michael Chua, Ms Wendy Low, Mr Harish Pillay, Mr Abas Kasmani and Mr Terence Soon.
Meanwhile, according to todayonline.com, both parties had raised issues with each other’s nomination papers on Nomination Day (June 30). While the PAP argued that the PSP had failed to fill-out the constituency, no amendments could be made as no objections were raised upon the official acceptance of the PSP’s papers.
Ms Indranee told the media that the PAP had made the decision not to object as it did not wish to win the election merely on a technicality: “We feel that the voters of Tanjong Pagar are people who we need not take for granted… We would want to be returned because our voters have said that they have given us the right and the privilege to return.”
On the other hand, the PSP also found an issue with the PAP’s papers, as Mr Eric Chua had written “retired SCDF (Singapore Civil Defence Force) officer” under his occupation. In response to this, the PSP’s Michael Chua said: “That is not an occupation. If we really want to discuss, that would be retired or whatever, unemployed, or something like that, depending on the age… In the spirit of competition, we really want to give Singapore and Tanjong Pagar a choice of two very good teams and for them to cast their vote for the future. It is not about paper, as in very minor technicalities.”
So, the fight between the PAP and the PSP continues.
Among those commenting on Ms Indranee’s post were people who expressed support for the PAP. Others did the opposite, hinting that they would instead vote for the opposition.