SINGAPORE: Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh’s confirmation that his party will not negotiate with other parties to avoid three-cornered fights has stirred a lively debate online. While some have praised the party’s stance, the decision has sparked apprehension among some opposition supporters who fear that such an approach could harm the broader opposition cause.
Speaking to the press at one of the conferences the WP convened this week to introduce its election candidates, Mr Singh said that his party would not take part in discussions with other opposition parties to avoid multiple parties contesting the same ward.
He said, “Elections are an open system and multi-cornered battles are to be expected. Some political parties will negotiate to avoid multi-cornered battles, but the Workers’ Party will not participate.”
This position is consistent with the WP’s long-held practice of avoiding collaborating with other opposition parties. The party has typically been absent from past opposition unity meets and horse-trading talks ahead of previous polls.
On one hand, the WP’s decision points to its confidence as a major opposition force and reflects its belief in contesting on its own merit, regardless of other parties’ plans. Some online commentators praised the party’s stand, noting that democracy inherently involves open competition, and that voters should have the full range of choices at the ballot box.
However, others argue that such an approach may come at a steep cost. In Singapore’s first-past-the-post electoral system, three-cornered fights — where two opposition parties face off against the People’s Action Party (PAP) — have historically worked to the PAP’s advantage. The risk of a fragmented opposition vote is real, and critics warn that failing to coordinate could result in unnecessary losses for the opposition bloc as a whole.
Every vote counts, and in tight contests, even a few hundred votes diverted to a third party can make or break an opposition victory and one party’s refusal to even come to the table for talks could send the message that party interests are being placed above the greater cause of challenging the PAP’s dominance, some critics say.
Observers point to past general elections where multi-cornered fights resulted in opposition parties cannibalizing each other’s votes.
In the 2015 general election, the MacPherson SMC saw the PAP’s Tin Pei Ling win with 65.6% of the vote — but the combined vote share of her two opposition challengers, the NSP and WP, amounted to 34.4%, effectively splitting the anti-PAP vote. Some pro-opposition voters fear a repeat of such scenarios in key battleground wards could derail opposition momentum.
In recent years, newer parties have shown willingness to coordinate to avoid head-on clashes. The Progress Singapore Party (PSP), for instance, engaged in talks with other parties ahead of GE2020, and such efforts were largely credited with giving voters clearer, more focused opposition choices in many constituencies.
On social media, opposition supporters appear divided. Some expressed frustration, urging the WP to reconsider what they see as a need for opposition unity in the face of the PAP’s entrenched dominance. Others defended the WP, asserting that they have earned their credibility.
As Singapore heads towards what many expect to be a highly contested General Election, the stakes for the opposition — and for Singaporean voters — have never been higher. With economic uncertainty, cost-of-living issues, and governance questions on the minds of many, opposition parties will be closely scrutinised not just for their policies, but for their strategic acumen.
In this climate, the WP’s decision to eschew cooperation may set the tone for a more fragmented contest, with Singaporeans watching keenly to see how this approach will play out at the ballot box.