GE2025: You don’t need a strongman date when a normal date will do
This is a We, The Citizens’s GE2025 special issue. While WTC’s special issues are usually only emailed to Milo Peng Funders and are sometimes paywalled, all GE2025 special issues will be made publicly accessible. Please support this work by sharing this newsletter widely and subscribing/tipping if you can!
April is WTC's birthday month—which means birthday discounts! Click on the preferred button below to get 25% off the first month of a monthly subscription, or 25% off the first year of an annual subscription.
What can you give a political party that has everything? According to the People’s Action Party, the answer is a “strong mandate”.
They said this in 2022:
And in 2024:
And in 2025:
These are just results of cursory Googling; I’m sure if I put in more effort I’ll find more. But you get the idea. Even when Lawrence Wong says it isn’t about a strong mandate, it basically is:
“I would say, it's not about the PAP needing a strong mandate, but Singaporeans recognising that much is at stake for Singapore in this new environment. Because in order to survive, in order to thrive, in order for us to navigate a very challenging global environment, we will need a strong and united Singapore.”
What does a “strong and united Singapore” mean in the PAP’s book? Yes, you guessed it:
STRONG. MAN. DATE.
In the PAP’s telling, a strong mandate is important and necessary for them to lead the country with confidence and competence. It’s contrasted with weakness, chaos and stalemate, as if these are the only options available to Singaporeans. The more uncertain the world—and there’s always some threat—the more the PAP insists we need “unity” and “strength” that apparently can only be delivered by making sure they win big, so big that political contestation is kept to a minimum.
This is an excerpt from a CNA report on Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong's speech to union leaders that popped up as I was writing:
The senior minister said a strong, effective government was needed to take care of Singapore, and for the country to be strong internationally.
“When you say on foreign policy, Singapore must speak with one voice, I think everybody will agree. Even the opposition agrees,” he said.
“But the opposition go one further. They say well, overseas, we stand together. Domestically, let's challenge. Now that is a problem.”
Mr Lee said that countries assess whether they can “make a deal” with other countries: “Will you still be here in five years time? Will your policy still be here in five years time? Can I do business with you?”
Other countries can come to the view that “this (prime minister) makes very good speeches, but actually, there’s a lot of political problems at home”.
“When you meet them, you'll be received with the courtesies, but I think you're not carrying the same weight, and you will not be able to defend and advance Singapore’s interest in the state,” he said.
“On the other hand, if they know you are on top of your situation at home; if they know you have strong support, good support, they know you are in touch with your population and you have got your domestic issues well under control – then they take you seriously.”
Oh, please. Other countries are aware of how politics, elections and democracy work. They’re aware that governments can change—in democracies, an eventual change in government is the norm, not a risk factor to avoid.
Votes and seats
In a two-part explainer on Academia SG's social media pages, Chong Ja Ian breaks down what a political party needs to be able to form government and get shit done. (Watch part one and part two. For those who prefer reading, there's a text explainer from GE2020.) Spoiler: it's not about "strong mandates". It's about parliamentary seats.
There are 97 elected parliamentary seats up for grabs in GE2025. Any party that wins at least 49 seats—a simple majority—will get to form government. Once we factor in Non-Constituency Members of Parliament and Nominated Members of Parliament, the lowest number of seats in Parliament will be:
97 elected seats + 0 NCMP seats (in the event that opposition parties win at least 12 seats) + 9 NMP seats = 106 seats
A simple majority of more than half the MPs present (quorum being a quarter of the total number of MPs) is enough for a law to be passed. If we assume that all 106 MPs and NMPs show up in Parliament, a party would need 54 seats (50% + 1 seat) to pass a bill. While NMPs can participate in debates on amendments to the Constitution, they can't vote on them, so a party would need at least 65 seats (two-thirds of 97 elected seats) to have the supermajority required to make changes to Singapore's supreme law.
If my maths is mathing correctly—and please reply to this email or contact me here if it isn't!—this means that, if all the MPs always show up, the lowest number of seats the PAP needs to maintain its tight grip on Parliament is 65 out of 97 elected seats. In this scenario, opposition parties win 32 seats in GE2025.
The highest number of seats won by the opposition thus far in Singapore's independent history is *checks notes*... 10. Although Lee Hsien Loong described this as "significant opposition", this number isn't enough to stop (or even really delay) the PAP from passing laws and amending the Constitution.
I think the PAP can afford to calm down with its ominous warnings of instability, weakness and "political problems". As long as they have enough PAP butts in parliamentary seats, they can still pass laws and craft policies. There's no indication right now of a big enough political earthquake to deny the PAP a simple majority. It'd be a miracle if they lost their two-thirds supermajority, which wouldn't actually even be a bad thing, because maybe it shouldn't be so easy for a single political party to make changes to the highest law in the land!
Just play nicely with others
When a simple majority is all that's needed for a mandate to form government and pass laws, a "strong mandate" of an overwhelming number of parliamentary seats—like what we have right now—mainly just gives the ruling party bragging rights while reducing the effectiveness and political weight of the opposition. It's not like you can pass laws extra hard; there are either enough numbers to pass bills or there aren't.
I don't think the PAP is in any danger of losing its ability to govern Singapore—and if I'm wrong, then I and every other political journalist, political scientist and taxi driver in the country are going to have a lot more to discuss—so really, the only potential impediments to effective governance are their own competence and fixation on "fixing" the opposition. Those are problems for the PAP to address, not for Singaporean voters to avoid by indulging the party's desire for minimal opposition and dissent.
Thank you for reading this special issue! Please help me get the word out about WTC by sharing this newsletter.