Friday, April 25, 2025
25.7 C
Singapore
Home Blog Page 6

Peoples Voice chief confirms he is fronting three-cornered contest for Potong Pasir

SINGAPORE: Peoples Voice (PV) party chief Lim Tean has confirmed to the press that he intends to contest Potong Pasir Single Member Constituency (SMC) in what will be a three-cornered contest.

He is expected to face off against Alex Yeo, one of the unsuccessful People’s Action Party (PAP) candidates for Aljunied GRC in the 2020 election, as well as longtime Singapore People’s Party (SPP) member Williamson Lee.

Appearing near the nomination centre at Kong Hwa School this morning (April 23), Mr Lim told reporters that he has set his sights on Potong Pasir. He had also written on Facebook:

“Personally, I shall ask the residents of Potong Pasir for the greatest honour to be their elected Member of Parliament. Potong Pasir SMC is a historical constituency in opposition political history, and I hope to live up to the legacy of the legendary Chiam See Tong.”

He, however, does not appear to have Mr Chiam’s blessing to contest his former ward.

Mr Chiam made history in 1984 when he won Potong Pasir and became Singapore’s second elected opposition MP after the late Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam. He held Potong Pasir for 27 years, from 1984 to 2011.

Mr Chiam’s party, the SPP, only lost Potong Pasir SMC to the ruling party in the 2011 general election when Mr Chiam took the risk of leaving his seat to lead a team contesting a Group Representation Constituency (GRC) – a gamble that did not pay off.

Since 2011, the SPP has been faithfully walking the ground and has contested Potong Pasir SMC in every election, including this one. The party plans to field longtime Central Executive Committee (CEC) member Williamson Lee to carry on the fight for Potong Pasir this year.

Given the SPP’s longstanding presence in the ward, Mr Lim’s decision to contest Potong Pasir comes as a shock to some opposition supporters. His party is no stranger to three-cornered contests, although the efficacy of this strategy remains to be proven.

In the 2020 general election, he fielded a team to contest Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC in a three-corner fight, despite criticism over the fact that the Singapore Democratic Alliance had worked the ground there for years. The PV team was the only party to lose their deposit in that race, and some critics criticised the party for splitting the vote share the SDA may have achieved.

‘I feel like an unpaid personal shopper’: Woman fed up with friend’s relentless online order requests

0

SINGAPORE: At her wits’ end, a woman took to social media to ask Singaporeans how she could set boundaries with a friend who has been repeatedly asking her to make online purchases on platforms like Shopee and Lazada on their behalf.

In a post on the r/askSingapore forum, she explained that she had initially agreed to help because her friend claimed they were “extremely wary of digital payment methods”, didn’t have access to services like PayNow or DBS PayLah, and didn’t even have a local bank account (which they supposedly could prove by showing their Singpass).

“At first, I didn’t mind helping once or twice, but over the last few weeks, they even set up a separate WhatsApp group just for these orders. Now they expect me to send them a screenshot of every item—size, colour, products—before and after ‘I buy,’ and they dump multiple bulk orders on me in one go,” she continued.

“I’m a pretty nice person, but this is starting to feel like I’m their unpaid/free personal shopper or purchasing secretary. If I may add on, I have to meet them at their convenient time and place too. I get that they’re worried about scams, but the proof via the Singpass claim seems fishy to me. Especially in this day and age, in Singapore, they don’t have any bank accounts at all, which I find incredibly hard to believe. They’re working full-time, apparently. Even 80-year-olds have bank accounts. Am I overreacting, or am I being taken advantage of?” she wrote.

Worried this might keep happening, she asked fellow Singaporeans, “How can I set a polite boundary but firmly tell them that I can’t keep doing this so often without sounding mean? What can I say? (In a nice, non-judgmental way.) Of course, without making things awkward. It’s getting really time-consuming and a bit exploitative.”

“Simply tell them you don’t want to help them.”

The post quickly gained traction on the platform, with many users sharing their thoughts and advice.

One user threw out the idea of charging a 10% service fee for every item her friend asks her to buy, adding, “If they think that it is unreasonable or a scam, you tell them your time spent on doing such things, especially where money is involved, isn’t worth your time anymore.

If you have a full-time job, calculate how much you make in an hour and charge them for it. I’m sure they eventually will stop. These people, you give them one inch, they take one yard.”

Another commented, “Are you a non-confrontational person? The obvious answer is to simply tell them you don’t want to help them. And you can phrase it however nicely you want.

“But it may be hard if you’re a non-confrontational person. In which case, you simply need to be as unhelpful as you can. Reply to messages late. Don’t send screenshots. Forget to place orders. Place wrong orders. At some point, they will realise they can’t get what they want by asking you and will stop.”

Additionally, some users said that they were doubtful about the friend’s claims, especially the part about not having a bank account. They pointed out that if the friend was indeed working full-time, it seemed incredibly hard to believe that they didn’t have a local bank account. After all, companies typically deposit salaries directly into bank accounts, so it didn’t make sense that someone with a job, especially a full-time one, wouldn’t have one.

One explained, “Are you sure you are not roped into money laundering? How is it possible for full-time employees in Singapore not to have bank accounts? No employers here will pay full-timers in cash. And it doesn’t even need to be a local bank. So many merchants don’t even accept cash now; how do they go around living in Singapore? Either your story is incomplete, or your friends are conning you big time.”

In other news, a Singaporean man has sparked a debate online after sharing that he doesn’t quite understand why people often complain that public housing is “unaffordable for low-income individuals.”

In a forum post that has since drawn widespread attention, he explained that, in his view, public housing is still relatively affordable, especially when compared to private properties.

“One thing I’ve always believed: shouldn’t we buy what we can afford? If someone’s income level only supports a two- or three-room flat, isn’t that the realistic option? I don’t quite understand when people say public housing is unaffordable, but at the same time aim for four-room flats or bigger, then turn around and blame the government when it’s out of reach,” he explained.

Read more: Singaporean man says he’s confused why people keep saying public housing is ‘unaffordable for low-income individuals’

Featured image by Depositphotos (for illustration purposes only)

33 yo woman earning S$15k/month says she’s burnt out and thinking of taking a year off

0

SINGAPORE: Teetering on the edge of burnout, a 33-year-old woman who’s earning S$15,000 per month recently asked netizens if she should quit her job and take a one-year break.

In a post on the r/singaporefi subreddit, she opened up about the immense toll her high-paying job was taking on her mental health.

She said, “I am really struggling mentally. The unbelievable bureaucracy and high-stress environment have got me feeling fatigued and just so ‘done’ all the time. I do not have any joy in life anymore; every day is a battle to get through. I’m on antidepressants, but they are not helping much.”

In terms of her financial situation, the woman said that she isn’t exactly in a bad place, as she has S$450,000 in stocks, S$50,000 in cash, and S$200,000 in her CPF accounts (with S$150,000 in her OA and S$50,000 in her SA).

Given her mental and financial standing, she turned to the online community for advice, asking whether stepping away from her job and taking a year-long break to recharge before resuming her job search would be a “rational choice in today’s economy”.

“It’s really bad out there, and I’d advise you to rethink your next move very carefully.”

In the discussion thread, one netizen shared their support by saying that taking a break for mental health is completely valid. They wrote, “Take the break if you really need to. There’s no point earning S$15,000 a month to be burned out and be on antidepressants for the long term. Go for your 6-month break.”

Another netizen echoed this sentiment, stating, “I strongly encourage you to take a step back. Life is more than work. Put your health first. Bloom and emerge stronger in your future endeavours. I hope you have a trusted group of family and friends to see you through all this. I’m 35 (F), have been through and have healed from clinical depression (because of overwork and over-serving). I hope you will be well soon! It is okay to take on part-time work while you are rediscovering yourself, too.”

However, not everyone agreed with the idea of taking a long break. Some netizens warned that quitting a high-paying job could be risky, especially in today’s job market.

To highlight this, one netizen shared their own experience, saying, “I was in your shoes last year, and I took a leap of faith by quitting to take a break and come back rejuvenated. But after months of not being able to land anything, including roles with half my previous pay, I wish I had managed the situation differently. Maybe a discussion with my boss to reduce workload, or take a sabbatical, or move laterally to another team, or something of that sort, but retain employment.

“I’m not sure which industry you are in, but the near-to-medium-term job market outlook doesn’t look good. There are just too many factors at play – economic downturn and AI automation being the main ones. It’s really bad out there, and I’d advise you to rethink your next move very carefully.”

Plan before you quit

Leaving behind a stable income can bring a lot of uncertainty, and without a financial safety net, making that move can feel like a real gamble.

That’s why it’s important to plan ahead before making such a big decision. Career experts say that, ideally, you should have enough savings set aside to cushion the impact of leaving your job. A good rule of thumb is to have at least three to six months’ worth of living expenses saved up.

Read also: ‘The work just never ended’: Senior auditor feels ‘burned out’ and helpless as her pleas for assistance are ignored by higher-ups

Featured image by freepik (for illustration purposes only)

‘Ageism is real’: Man in his late 30s says employers prioritise young applicants over qualifications

0

SINGAPORE: A Singaporean man in his late 30s took to social media to share that switching careers feels like a lost cause at his age, since employers seem to care more about his birthdate than the skills and certifications he’s worked hard for.

In a lengthy post on the r/askSingapore forum, he explained that for the past few years, he had dedicated his time and energy to completing postgraduate courses, taking up PMP and project management certifications, slogging through project management modules, studying data analytics, and becoming “knowledgeable in all the buzzword skills like Tableau”.

He added that on top of his academic and technical pursuits, he made a concerted effort to strengthen his employability in every way possible. He actively engaged in networking, took on freelance projects to gain hands-on experience, and emphasised his transferable skills in every application. Yet despite his dedication, he said employers seemed to overlook all his efforts and qualifications, focusing instead on one thing: his age.

“I’ve sent out hundreds of customised resumes and tailored cover letters in the past eight months. What did I get in return? Rejection after rejection—or worse, absolute silence,” he wrote.

“Everyone says ‘never too old to learn’ and ‘mid-career switches are possible if you work hard enough.’ But the reality is, once you hit your late 30s or 40s, the job market looks at you differently. Ageism is real, even if nobody admits it. Employers say they want experience, but when you try to pivot, your experience is suddenly ‘not relevant.’ You’re competing with younger applicants who are cheaper and seen as more ‘mouldable.’”

“Certifications and new skills are nice on paper, but they don’t erase the years you spent in a different industry or the fact that you’re not 25 anymore. Every application vanishes into a black hole. It’s hard not to feel like upskilling at this age is just a way to keep hope alive, not to actually get hired,” he said.

The man clarified that he’s not against learning later in life, but in his opinion, upskilling in your late 30s often feels futile because the system is stacked against older candidates.

“The Singapore government and NTUC/e2i career coaches keep pushing courses, but what we really need is for employers to give mature workers a fair chance, not just lip service,” he argued.

“If you’re in the same boat, just know you’re not alone. I’m tired, demoralised, and questioning if all this effort is worth it. Maybe it’s time we talk honestly about the limits of ‘lifelong learning’ in Singapore, instead of pretending that another certificate will magically fix things,” he concluded.

“Paper qualifications are just half the game”

In the comments section, many echoed the man’s sentiment, expressing just how hard it is to get a job these days. Even a fresh graduate with a degree in business analytics from SUSS chimed in, saying, “Similarly, [I have] zero calls or interviews for data analytics roles. It feels horrible after four years of effort and sleepless nights with no results.”

Another commented, “It’s rough out there, man… The idea of upskilling just spawned an industry of courses and certificates, but I am not convinced it benefits anyone outside those providing the courses. I took some NUS courses and honestly, the level was embarrassingly low, total cringe… But we are expected to constantly stack on those courses.”

A third shared, “I don’t disagree with you; ageism is real. When I switched industries, I really started from ground zero at an associate pay of S$2,400, and then in two years, I got the fresh grad pay with a postgraduate certificate. Four years later, the fresh grads’ new salary matched my current salary.”

However, some commenters disagreed, pointing out that while upskilling is admirable, employers are not obligated to hire someone simply because they’ve completed additional courses.

One individual bluntly stated, “Nobody owes you a job just because you took some ‘upskill’ courses. At your age, the value you bring is to be experienced and knowledgeable in a field, to go for an experienced hire role, and not compete with fresh grads for junior roles.

“Ask yourself, what hard or soft skills do you really have that differentiate you from a younger candidate? Any sane hiring manager will choose a fresh grad over a late-30s uncle for the same skillset.”

Another added, “You can be a Harvard grad and not find a job. Paper qualifications are just half the game; the hiring manager has to like you and see you as someone whom they can groom. The latter part is much harder to nail, and especially so when you have more years on you.”

In other news, a man shared on social media that his girlfriend called him “heartless” for refusing to cover the full cost of her dental procedure.

In an anonymous post on the NUSWhispers Facebook page, the man explained that the dental procedure she needed was priced at around S$1,200 in Singapore. Wanting to be financially sensible, he suggested that they look into getting the treatment done in Johor Bahru, where it would cost only about S$400.

However, his girlfriend rejected the idea outright, saying it was “beneath her” to go across the border for medical treatment.

Read more: Man says his GF called him ‘heartless’ for refusing to pay the full S$1.2k for her dental treatment

Featured image by Depositphotos (for illustration purposes only)

GE2025: RDU wins praise for ceding Jalan Kayu after WP requests the ward

0

SINGAPORE: In a surprising shift from its earlier stance, the Workers’ Party (WP) appears to be quietly coordinating with fellow opposition parties—despite public statements suggesting otherwise.

Just days ago, WP chief Pritam Singh told the media that the party does not engage in opposition coordination talks to avoid multi-cornered fights. “It’s an open system, and you can certainly expect more three-cornered fights from here on.” He insisted WP would not step aside for other alternative parties.

Yet, in a quiet reversal, Red Dot United (RDU) has indicated that WP made a request for them to step aside in Jalan Kayu SMC—and RDU agreed.

RDU Secretary-General Ravi Philemon said in a press statement on Tuesday (22 Apr): “After careful deliberation—both with the WP leadership and within our own Election Committee—we have made the difficult decision not to contest in this constituency. This decision was made with one guiding principle: to act in the best interest of the residents of Jalan Kayu, the best interest of Singapore citizens.”

This withdrawal is significant. Kala Manickam, RDU’s ground operations leader, had been working the ward since March, and the party had already invested S$5,000 in its campaign, but RDU stood by its ethos: voter interest above party ambition.

Earlier this month, RDU also exited an opposition coalition it co-founded—again rooted in principle, to avoid three-corner fights. The decision in Jalan Kayu mirrors that principle.

However, the real question is: Why now?

Why would WP—who had not publicly indicated any interest in Jalan Kayu—suddenly move to clear the field just 11 days before Nomination Day?

Connecting the Dots

Rewind to GE2020, when WP clinched Sengkang GRC, defeating a PAP team led by Ng Chee Meng, a Cabinet minister and labour chief. That victory was historic, marking WP’s second GRC and knocking a heavyweight out of Parliament.

Now, in 2025, Ng Chee Meng is eyeing a comeback—this time in Jalan Kayu SMC. WP has not officially declared a candidate, but their request to RDU could indicate that it is not the fight for the ward they want but the fight against the individual being fielded to contest it.

Of course, by stepping into Jalan Kayu so late, WP also opens itself to criticism—of opportunism, of displacing groundwork done by others, or of using backdoor coordination after publicly rejecting it, but perhaps, they’re willing to take that heat for a fight they believe is crucial to their strategy.

But here, another question arises: Just because they defeated him once—can they do it again?

Ng Chee Meng is no lightweight. A former Chief of Defence Force turned Cabinet Minister, he’s now staging a political comeback in Jalan Kayu SMC, a new ward carved from the very GRC he lost in 2020.

However, if the WP thinks they can stroll in unchallenged, they owe a serious debt to Kala Manickam of RDU.

“This is what principled politics looks like”

Kala has done the groundwork. A seasoned opposition figure, she previously ran under the Progress Singapore Party banner in Nee Soon GRC, earning a surprising 38.10% against none other than Minister for Law K. Shanmugam—a PAP stalwart with decades of grassroots clout. That’s no small feat.

Over the past month, she’s led RDU’s outreach in Jalan Kayu, engaging residents face-to-face, identifying concerns, and framing the case for an alternative voice in Parliament.

Both Kala and the RDU leadership have won praise online for not treating politics as a game of chess but as a platform for service. Their decision to withdraw, despite months of groundwork and financial investment, is a principled stand. One guided not by party gain, but by the belief that Singaporeans deserve meaningful, focused representation.

Credit: Red Dot United Facebook

Following their decision to withdraw from Jalan Kayu SMC, RDU has been met with a wave of admiration online. Netizens were quick to take to Facebook, expressing their respect and gratitude for the party’s selfless move—placing the interests of residents above political ambition.

Many praised the Central Executive Committee (CEC) of RDU, recognising the sacrifice they have made. “Your gesture to withdraw, though hard but decisive is much appreciated,” one commenter said. Another wrote, This is what principled politics looks like. RDU has earned my respect.”

Some commenters who reside in the other wards RDU is contesting this election added that the party’s stance has ensured their vote at the ballot box.

In a political landscape often criticised for opportunism, RDU’s choice has resonated and the party has levelled up in the minds of voters. For many Singaporeans, the message was clear: This is a party that’s serious about nation-building, not just seat-winning.

As the election nears, voters ask themselves: What do we truly want in Parliament? Seasoned chess players strategising in silence—or noble servicemen willing to sacrifice their chance at a seat for the greater good?

The answer will shape not just Jalan Kayu, but the soul of our democracy.

Stay tuned to The Independent for unfiltered truths, sharp analysis, and the stories you won’t find anywhere else.

Jamus Lim: I am not a natural-born politician

SINGAPORE: In the run-up to the General Election (GE) on May 3, the Workers’ Party’s (WP) Jamus Lim looked back at the last five years since he was elected Member of Parliament (MP) for Sengkang Group Representation Constituency (GRC) as a newbie to the political arena until Parliament was dissolved last week and the schedules for Nomination Day and Voting Day were announced.

Writing that he has just finished his final meet-the-people session, Assoc Prof Lim added that for him and the other first-time Sengkang MPs, He Ting Ru and Louis Chua, the last GE had been “a heady time, an era where our knowledge of the system was undeterred by the truth of our very long odds.”

He also pointed out that he is “not a natural-born politician.” By day, he is an Economics professor at ESSEC Business School, and he only joined the WP in September 2019, less than a year before the last election, although he had volunteered at grassroots activities before that.

Assoc Prof Lim added that, unlike many politicians who talk about their jobs in the context of their chances of getting re-elected, he “generally think(s) about the work I do from the perspective of taking responsibility for what I had been tasked to do, as a result of the election’s outcome.”

In other words, what voters, whom he referred to as representatives’ principal, want should be at the top of MPs’ minds, and they should consider whether their votes and actions reflect this.

Assoc Prof Lim further described his job as advocating for “sensible, evidence-based policies that will benefit Singapore and Singaporeans, but especially the people of Sengkang.” His guiding principle has been to represent the interests of all his constituents, not just those who voted for the WP. He added that his hope has been to leave behind an improved Sengkang.

“All the policies I espoused, the positions I adopted, and the practical steps I undertook; all were shaped by this underlying philosophy,” wrote the MP.

In this pursuit, Assoc Prod Lim has delivered 145 speeches and has been involved in 456 parliamentary questions since getting elected in 2020, doing so to put forth new ideas for how Singapore’s economy, polity, and society can be made better.

In hindsight, he added that not all of his ideas were “fantastic” as some had been either “too idealistic, or too niche, or could have been further refined,” although he added that this is the essence of why ideas are brought together in Parliament.

“So long as the proposals were credible, well-meaning, and thoughtful, I felt they were worth discussing. That has always been my comparative advantage, and should we be re-elected, that will be what I will continue to do.”

The incumbent also wrote that he and the other Sengkang MPs have endeavoured to consistently address and resolve municipal concerns brought to their attention or pushed for other agencies to act when the situation called for it.

Since the last election, the number of Sengkang’s hawker centres, coffee shops, preschool facilities, bike paths, and covered walkways has increased. Additionally, the longstanding social issues that residents brought to their attention, including pathways, road safety features, and community facilities such as eldercare centers and playgrounds, have been resolved or improved, Assoc Prof Lim added.

He ended his post by writing, “We stand on the shoulders of the giants that have come before us, and I don’t think anyone can claim total credit for the policies that were passed during their time, even if they were ones that they championed vociferously. But I’d like to think that the additional and alternative ideas we put on the table were considered, and even if they were not all accepted outright, we moved closer to a place in between ideal and inadequate. Politics, after all, is the art of compromise. I believe that we have gone further, as a result of the voice of the #workersparty in Parliament.” /TISG

Read also: Jamus Lim saying ‘What we’re trying to deny PAP is a blank cheque’ in 2020 debate emerges again

Not Just Populism: Ravi Philemon Defends RDU’s Vision for a Fairer Singapore

SINGAPORE: When asked to respond to netizens who often dismiss opposition parties in Singapore as “populist” or merely saying things to win votes, Ravi Philemon, Secretary-General of Red Dot United (RDU), didn’t flinch.

Instead, he offered a deeply personal and heartfelt reflection.

“We don’t believe in Depleting our reserves,” he began. “I can’t emphasize that enough—because this is a Singapore where my daughter and son live. This is where my grandchildren will grow up. It’s where they’ll raise their own families long after I’m gone.”

It’s a vision anchored in responsibility, not rhetoric. Far from making empty promises, Ravi stressed that RDU’s proposals are rooted in sound policy that can be made operational if Singapore is willing to make bold but necessary changes.

“It’s about the class divide—not populism”

In particular, he pointed to Singapore’s tax structure, which he feels disproportionately benefits the ultra-wealthy, the elites, and the well-connected, while leaving ordinary Singaporeans behind.

“Our current policies favour the billionaire class,” he explained. “That’s not sustainable, and I cannot stress this enough—inequality is the real fault line we are fighting.”

He carefully clarified that race, language, and religion remain important considerations in Singapore’s social fabric but argued that these issues have been—and can continue to be—managed across generations.

“We’ve navigated those lines before, and we’ll continue to do so, But the bigger fault line now is the class divide. The high SES, the low SES, and the growing distance between them. That’s the gap we urgently need to address.”

At the heart of his answer was a clear rebuttal to accusations of populism: This was not about empty slogans or emotional appeals. It’s about legacy. It’s about what kind of Singapore we want to leave behind.

“Of course, I don’t want our national reserves—our umbrella for a rainy day—to become dysfunctional,” he said. “We are a responsible political party. The proposals we put forward in our manifesto? They are actionable.”

As the noise builds up toward GE2025, it’s easy to dismiss alternative voices as populist or impractical, but if Ravi Philemon’s words are any indication, RDU isn’t chasing applause—they’re chasing answers.

Stay tuned to The Independent for more deep dives into party manifestos, candidate spotlights, and the stories behind the slogans—because Singapore deserves more than just headlines. It deserves clarity.

He Ting Ru on new WP candidate Michael Thng: About time he #SteppedUp!

SINGAPORE: Over the past few days, The Workers’ Party’s (WP) He Ting Ru has been hyping the party’s new candidates in the run-up to the May 3 polls, and on Apr 21, Michael Thng got his turn.

Mr Thng, 37, who was introduced by WP chief Pritam Singh and party chair Sylvia Lim in the final day of candidate introductions on Sunday (Apr 19), has been the recipient of positive buzz, especially since reports have pointed out that he has a master’s degree in public policy from the Harvard Kennedy School.

While this is his first time as a candidate for Member of Parliament (MP), his history with the WP dates back 15 years, which means he and Ms He started volunteering with the party around the same time.

In a social media post, she wrote that when she began with the MP, Mr Thng was one of the first people she met.

“I was always struck by his passion for Singapore, for our democratic processes, and how despite spending much time in the US, he would always fly back to be involved in election campaigns,” wrote Ms He, adding that Mr Thng had gone with her when she contested at Marine Parade for GE2015 and then again at Sengkang for GE2020.

Importantly, he has also been helping the WP with policy work for more than 10 years.

“Passionate about improving policies that ensure no one is left behind—such as housing policy for singles and systematic support for single parents—Michael’s voice is one Singapore needs in Parliament now,” she wrote.

Mr Thng gave the public a glimpse into his journey in a Facebook post on April 19, when he wrote about a moment in 2006 that appeared to have changed his life. He wrote that his worldview shifted when he attended a WP rally, as he saw the faces of attendees showing both hope and hopelessness.

“That moment planted a question I’ve carried with me ever since: How did we get here, and what kind of Singapore must we build to create a more inclusive future?” he added.

In the time that followed, as he volunteered with the WP, he wrote that he “saw firsthand the real burdens many Singaporeans shoulder—and how too often, these challenges go unanswered. Infinitely solvable problems are held back by blind spots in policymaking that stifle progress.

“We’re a generation searching for hope for a different way forward but resigned to the reality we are in. I’ve felt it too—that quiet acceptance: ‘What to do… gahmen like that lor.‘”

Singapore’s society is becoming more complex, with people’s needs becoming more urgent, which is the reason for more participation in Parliament.

“But that won’t happen if 30–40% of Singaporeans who vote opposition continue to be represented by just 5–10% of seats in Parliament. It’s not sustainable. Participation must be inspired, not simply required. That’s why I’m stepping up,” he added.

Mr Thng wrote that he wants to help build a Parliament that is more reflective of the diversity of thought in Singapore and where different policy approaches are valued and not just tolerated, and “where every Singaporean feels they belong in the conversation—and are part of shaping it.”

He added that Singapore has already seen the effect of “meaningful WP representation,” which includes, “building momentum for greater housing access for singles, growing support and recognition for single mothers, and germinating the idea of unemployment insurance that has recently come alive in the form of the JobSeeker Support Scheme—just to name a few.”

“Representation isn’t just symbolic—it does shape outcomes,” Mr Thng wrote, inviting Singaporeans to share their thoughts and tell me what matters to them.

“I’ll be better for it—and so will Singapore.” /TISG

Read also: ‘Solid team’: Singaporeans impressed with calibre of WP’s new candidates for GE2025

How the Workers’ Party plans to address the cost of living crisis

SINGAPORE: Over the years, the Workers’ Party has been addressing rising living costs in Parliament and has focused on it as a key issue in its manifesto as Singaporeans head to the polls on May 3.

The WP published its 122-page manifesto at a press conference at its headquarters at 701 Geylang Road on April 17. The party’s policy proposals to improve the lives of Singaporeans are divided into five sections: affordability and cost-of-living concerns, economic growth and opportunities, inclusion and equality, accountability and democracy, and security and geopolitics. The manifesto can be read in full on the WP’s website here.

On Monday (April 21), the WP highlighted in a social media post what it called not only cost of living “pressures” but the cost of living “crisis”, along with the question, “What can we do about it?”

The party first reiterated its stand that by raising the Goods and Services Tax from 7% to 9% — increasing it by one percentage point each in 2023 and 2024 — the government had added to the cost-of-living burdens.

“Raising the GST turbocharged inflation further, adding fuel to the fire and even fanning it,” the WP wrote.

This is the same language that WP chief and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh used in a speech in Parliament during the Budget debate in February.

Saying that the decision to raise the GST had been a “poor” one, he added, “Why the PAP went headlong and headstrong into raising GST, and thereby turbocharging inflation further, is something only the PAP itself can answer to Singaporeans for.”

“There was no need for the PAP government to add fuel to the fire” and increase inflation further by raiding the GST, he argued.

The WP had voted against the GST hike and even proposed alternatives to it. The government’s rationale for the GST is the need to increase public spending for healthcare for the elderly, education, security, and other concerns.

The alternatives the WP proposed are as follows: Allowing the revenue from the first nine years of land sales to be booked as current revenue in the national budget, increasing the Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) from 50% to 60 %, raising the tax on goods such as alcohol, carbon or tobacco, imposing a net wealth tax from 0.5% to 2% on the assets of the top 1% of wealth holders, and implementing a minimum corporate tax rate of 15%.

FB screengrab/ The Workers’ Party

The party also suggested that more essential goods, including basic food items, be exempted from GST, which would help particularly middle-income households who receive less support from GST vouchers.

“As every Singaporean knows, a 1% rise in GST does not lead to a 1% rise in the cost of a cup of coffee. Increases are incremental as we have experienced in our purchases from the local shop or weekly supermarket trip that cost a good 30% to 40% more for Singaporeans since the GST was hiked in an inflationary environment never seen before in decades,” Mr Singh said in his Budget speech.

“The decision to go ahead with a GST hike with inflation raging was poor. We have seen Assurance packages and CDC vouchers dished out to cushion the GST blow for many Singaporeans, but when these handouts stop, as they eventually will, the 9% GST will remain,” he added. /TISG

Read also: Pritam Singh confirms WP will not take part in negotiations to avoid three-cornered fights, sparking mixed reactions

‘So inappropriate!’ — Poh Li San’s latest dig at Chee Soon Juan gets branded “cheap potshot” online

SINGAPORE: People’s Action Party (PAP) politician Poh Li San is receiving brickbats online thanks to a pointed remark she made about Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan, as she was announced as the PAP’s pick to contest Sembawang West SMC.

Ms Poh and Dr Chee are expected to enter a one-on-one contest at the newly created single-member seat, after Bukit Batok, the ward Dr Chee had been walking for close to ten years, had been subsumed into a GRC when the electoral boundaries review was announced last month.

The SDP pivoted and announced a Northern Strategy, which would see Dr Chee contest Sembawang West SMC and another team contest Sembawang GRC. Dr Chee and his team have been walking the ground at Sembawang since the new electoral map was released but their presence appears to have left the incumbents, who may have expected to face off against the National Solidarity Party (NSP), discomfited.

Earlier this month, some Singaporeans expressed concern over the way Ms Poh responded to the issue of green spaces in the ward that Dr Chee had raised. This week, the ruling party politician has been met with fresh criticism for the way she characterised the veteran opposition leader’s efforts.

Speaking at a press conference on Tuesday (22 Apr), where she was named as the PAP’s candidate for Sembawang West, Ms Poh quipped that while the contest she faces appears daunting, residents can tell who has “done real work” and who “shows up one month before election.”

She said, “I’m confident that the residents of Sembawang West will be fair-minded. They will discern clearly between who has done real work and who is committed to stay here and continue to work for them, versus someone who just shows up one month before the election.”

The barb swiftly drew flak online. Netizens pointed out that Dr Chee isn’t a politician who shows up just in time for elections – he has walked the ground at the former Bukit Batok SMC for close to ten years, since 2016.

Bukit Batok SMC was formed more than fifty years ago, in 1972, but was dissolved last month, sparking speculation that the 45.2 per cent Dr Chee achieved there at the last election was among the reasons it disappeared from the map.

Given the steadfast work Dr Chee has been doing across Singapore, some netizens have branded Ms Poh’s latest remark a “cheap potshot.” One top comment on Facebook, which drew over 70 reactions, said, “Very uncalled for and cheap potshot. Dr Chee isn’t a “reckless populist” and he has been regularly walking the ground, and showed up only shortly before only because BB has been subsumed into a GRC. Voters can see for themselves.”

Another netizen said, “It’s utterly unfathomable that she could utter such repugnant and vile remarks.” Some felt that Ms Poh’s remarks perhaps show that she is not humble. A commenter said, “Bloody disgusting remarks! Be humble!”

Another netizen responding to a video of the MP making the controversial remark said, “Poh Li San’s body language and head tilt give off quite an arrogant vibe. Plus, walking the ground is something you are paid a lot to do, not a voluntary job lol”

“What an unfair statement,” said another commenter, “I have seen Dr Chee putting in effort walking around Bukit Batok, giving out goodies during the festive seasons and meeting with the residents. So he is definitely not those who “shows up 1 month before election” by choice. Lets be clear this is due to Bukit Batok SMC being abolished recently.”

One Singaporean pointed out, “You have an unfair advantage because you were there in the GRC the last five years. Don’t blame opposition party for “showing up” one month before election since nobody know how electoral boundaries were being redrawn, which is ridiculous.”

Others questioned how Ms Poh herself has stood up for Singaporeans. One netizen said, “What is the point of voting someone that keeping so silent in the parliament. Not able to serve and protect the interests of majority sg citizens. Waste of taxpayer’s money.”

One Sembawang West SMC resident claimed, “I am living in your constituency for the past 18 years. Ever since you became my MP, I have never seen you to date. Nothing unique or impactful in particular has been raised or initiated by you in parliament for us(i only recall your bubble tea shop speech). You did not vote against the GST raise which was initiated soon after a pandemic.”

He added, “My vote will never be for you….in the past few weeks I’ve already seen Dr Chee around and the topics he brings out brings some hope to the future.”

Some others urged Ms Poh to continue attacking Dr Chee so that he can win more sympathy from voters.