Politician’s salvo against WP chief may have backfired, observers say as secret vote looms

SINGAPORE: Political observers are suggesting that former Workers’ Party (WP) member Goh Meng Seng’s latest salvo against party chief Pritam Singh may have had the opposite effect of what he intended, potentially strengthening support for Mr Singh ahead of a crucial internal vote later this month.

WP cadres are expected to convene on Jun 28 for a special meeting where they will cast secret ballots on whether Mr Singh should remain secretary-general if he chooses not to step down voluntarily.

The vote comes after Mr Singh was found guilty last February of two counts of lying to a parliamentary committee. His appeal against the conviction was subsequently dismissed by the High Court on Dec 4.

In the lead-up to the meeting, People’s Power Party (PPP) leader Goh Meng Seng took to Facebook to argue that the outcome of the vote would have significant implications for the WP’s future as a credible challenger to the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).

Mr Goh claimed he had recently spoken to several WP cadres and said that while some continued to support Mr Singh, “most of the veterans” were opposed to him remaining at the helm.

According to Mr Goh, when he asked these cadres whether they wished to see “a peaceful transition of power from PAP to WP,” they allegedly remained silent.

Arguing that electoral success depended on winning over moderate voters rather than satisfying internal party loyalties, Mr Goh wrote that the WP’s prospects as a future governing party would be determined by how it addressed questions surrounding leadership integrity.

“Whether we like it or not, Pritam has been CONDEMNED as a Convicted Liar, and this label will stick on him forever,” he wrote.

Mr Goh also pointed to findings by the WP’s disciplinary committee, which had concluded that there had been a contravention of the party’s constitution in relation to Mr Singh’s case.

“The remaining question is, how would WP deal with errant members with integrity problems!” he said, describing the upcoming vote as one that would determine the party’s future potential as a serious contender for power.

However, the comments triggered swift reactions online, with some political observers arguing that Mr Goh’s intervention may have inadvertently rallied support around the WP leader.

Among them was People’s Voice member Prabu Ramachandran, who suggested that the debate within the WP had fundamentally changed the moment Mr Goh entered the discussion publicly.

“Before Goh Meng Seng publicly called on Workers’ Party cadres to remove Pritam Singh, the upcoming WP internal vote could have been framed very simply: Should a convicted party leader continue as Secretary-General of the Workers’ Party?” Mr Ramachandran wrote.

Describing the issue as a legitimate question for party members to consider privately, he noted that some cadres may already have harboured concerns about the impact of Mr Singh’s conviction on the WP’s credibility and public standing.

However, he argued that public pressure from a rival opposition figure may have altered the dynamics of the vote.

“Now the question is no longer just: ‘Should Pritam stay?’ It may have become: ‘Are WP cadres going to let an outsider tell them who their leader should be?’” he wrote.

Mr Ramachandran suggested that party members generally dislike external interference and may be inclined to close ranks when they feel pressure is being applied from outside the organisation.

“Even those who may have doubts about Pritam Singh may now feel compelled to defend WP’s independence,” he said.

Describing Mr Goh’s move as a possible “major political miscalculation,” he wrote, “If he had stayed silent, some WP cadres may have quietly voted against Pritam Singh based on the conviction and the damage to WP’s public image.

“By publicly pushing for Pritam’s removal, GMS may have made it harder for them to do so.”

Mr Ramachandran added that Mr Goh “may have thought he was applying pressure” but instead “may have handed Pritam Singh a shield.”

While Mr Goh has remained one of Mr Singh’s most outspoken critics, several opposition figures have come forward to express support for the WP chief.

Former Singapore Democratic Party chairman Mohamed Jufrie Bin Mahmood acknowledged that Mr Singh may have erred while attempting to defend a fellow party member but argued that the incident should not define his entire character.

“He shouldn’t be judged solely by this particular mistake,” Mr Jufrie said, adding that he regarded Mr Singh as “an honest person.”

Former NTUC Income chief executive Tan Kin Lian also defended the WP leader on social media.

“I know Pritam to be a person of integrity, and he has provided good leadership to the party, despite the challenges that he has to face regularly,” Mr Tan wrote.

He added that he believed Mr Singh had been “unfairly treated over the matter of the parliamentary committee of privileges.”

Red Dot United secretary-general Ravi Philemon shared a personal anecdote illustrating why he believes Mr Singh is a “man of integrity.”

Mr Philemon said he has known the WP leader since around 2009 or 2010 and recounted an incident linked to fundraising efforts during the long-running Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) legal case.

According to Mr Philemon, he and several friends had raised funds for the cause and intended to hand a cheque to Mr Singh after a lunch meeting. However, Mr Singh declined to accept the donation, explaining that the party had already reached its fundraising target.

“That may sound like a small thing, but it stayed with me,” Mr Philemon wrote, “The easy thing would have been to take the cheque… But there is a difference between what is permissible and what is right. Once the objective had been met, there was no reason to take more money from well-wishers.”

“When leaders take only what is needed, and no more, it tells you something about their character,” he added.