Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chair Dr Paul Tambyah on 3 November 2025 reaffirmed the party’s commitment to cultural diversity and inclusion, rebutting criticism from the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) over SDP’s stance on race-related political issues.
In a video message posted on social media, Tambyah cited the party’s long-standing record of supporting minority representation and multiracial harmony.
He emphasised that the SDP had previously taken a case to the Court of Appeal to defend the right of residents in Marsiling–Yew Tee Group Representation Constituency (GRC) to have a minority Member of Parliament.
He said the case demonstrated SDP’s consistent advocacy for guaranteed minority representation in Parliament, even as the government’s legal representatives had argued otherwise.
Response to PAP’s questions
Tambyah’s remarks came after the PAP released a video posing three questions to the SDP concerning its position on race, representation, and housing integration.
He described the questions as “very good” and addressed them point by point.
On the first question — whether the SDP supports guaranteeing a minimum number of minority MPs — Tambyah reiterated that his party had already acted in support of such guarantees, referring to the Marsiling–Yew Tee case following Halimah Yacob’s resignation from Parliament.
Preserving cultural heritage and rejecting rigid classifications
The second question focused on whether communities should have the right to preserve their cultural heritage.
Tambyah affirmed that the SDP “strongly believes” in protecting Singapore’s diverse traditions, arguing that the long-standing CMIO (Chinese–Malay–Indian–Others) classification, inherited from British colonial rule, was outdated.
He said the system overlooked the historical contributions of smaller communities such as the Jews, Arabs, and Armenians, who had “made tremendous contributions to Singapore’s cultural heritage.”
Tambyah called for the CMIO model to be “assigned to the dustbin of history” in favour of a more inclusive approach to national identity.
Call for racial balance in housing
On the third question — whether the SDP agrees that public housing estates should be free from racial enclaves — Tambyah voiced strong support for maintaining balanced ethnic representation across all residential areas.
He argued that “no ethnic group should probably make up more than 80% of any neighbourhood,” including private and public estates alike.
Such balance, he said, would strengthen social cohesion and prevent divisions between communities.
Accusations of “divide and rule” politics
Tambyah went on to accuse the PAP of engaging in “divide and rule” politics reminiscent of the colonial era.
Quoting author Toni Morrison’s reflection that “race and racism are a distraction,” he argued that ordinary Singaporeans, regardless of ethnicity, shared far more in common with one another than with the “billionaires and millionaires who rule over us.”
He said Singaporeans should “come together as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion.”
Tambyah also reiterated that the SDP’s offer to publicly debate Minister for Home Affairs and Coordinating Minister for National Security K. Shanmugam “still stands.”
Origins of the online exchange
The latest exchange followed a video posted by Senior Minister of State for Law and Transport Murali Pillai on his Facebook page.
Murali’s remarks were in response to comments by SDP chief Dr Chee Soon Juan, who had earlier criticised Shanmugam’s ministerial statement in Parliament on 14 October 2025.
In that statement, Shanmugam urged political actors to “resist the destructive temptation” of using race and religion for electoral advantage.
He also cautioned against exploiting identity politics to win votes.
Murali rejected Chee’s characterisation of PAP policies, arguing that Chee’s portrayal “disregarded Singapore’s historical approach to racial harmony.”
He defended long-standing measures such as the Group Representation Constituency (GRC) system and ethnic-based self-help groups, stating that these structures were designed “to preserve social cohesion, not fracture it.”
Murali defends PAP’s multiracial framework
Murali emphasised that Singapore’s policies “recognise the existence of different races” and “safeguard their equality by standing against crude majoritarian rule.”
Responding to Chee’s criticism that the government “institutionalises race,” Murali described the suggestion that race could be omitted from public policy as an “ostrich dream.”
He recounted his experience during the 2020 General Election, when his campaign poster was defaced with racist imagery, saying it was a reminder that “race is never absent in politics.”
Murali also referenced examples from the United States and parts of Europe, where efforts to move beyond racial identity had at times led to increased tension. He warned against “naïve” approaches that ignore racial realities, arguing that Singapore’s framework of minority representation remains vital.
Dr Chee: PAP is the one practising identity politics
Chee, in his original video, had argued that it was the PAP that practised identity politics.
He questioned why the government continues to emphasise race through official documents like the National Registration Identity Card (NRIC) and through state-supported community organisations such as CDAC, Mendaki, Sinda and the Eurasian Association.
He also referenced the 2017 presidential election reserved for Malay candidates, as well as the requirement for minority candidates to be “certified” before contesting in GRCs, calling these policies evidence of institutionalised racial division.
Chee contended that history disproves the PAP’s assumption that minority candidates cannot win on merit alone.
He pointed to the electoral successes of David Marshall, J.B. Jeyaretnam, and more recently, Tharman Shanmugaratnam in the 2023 presidential election.
In his challenge to Shanmugam, Chee proposed a live public debate “anytime, anywhere,” to allow Singaporeans to decide who is truly engaging in identity politics.
Despite being the target of Chee’s challenge for debate, Shanmugam has yet to issue a direct response.
Meanwhile, Damanhuri Abas, the SDP candidate at the centre of the controversy, issued a statement clarifying his position.
He denied inciting racial division and argued that his remarks on “Malay dignity” were intended to highlight systemic inequities and call for inclusive, transparent policymaking.
He also proposed reforms such as depoliticising ethnic-based organisations and rethinking minority representation frameworks like GRCs. His upcoming socio-political podcast is intended to further these discussions.
The post Dr Paul Tambyah rebuts PAP’s race stance, urges unity, tells Shanmugam public debate offer still open appeared first on The Online Citizen.
