In a recent episode of the Politically Speaking podcast, host Terry Xu joined Dr Thum Ping Tjin and Sean Francis Han to discuss the fairness and transparency of Singapore’s electoral system.
They explored concerns around the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC), gerrymandering, short campaign timelines, and the ruling government’s control over election timing, questioning why Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has not provided clarity on when the general election (GE) will be held, despite the constitutional deadline being less than 10 months away.
The current Singapore Parliament must be dissolved by 23 August due to its five-year constitutional term, and an election must be held within three months of its dissolution.
Terry Xu began by framing the discussion in light of the recent announcement of the EBRC’s formation, a signal that elections are imminent.
He noted that Singapore Prime Ministers’ discretion over election timing often creates unpredictability, historically favouring the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) by limiting the time opposition parties have to campaign.
According to Dr Thum, Managing Director of New Naratif, this strategy reflects a pattern of control embedded within Singapore’s electoral structure.
Dr Thum described the EBRC as a “gerrymandering committee,” claiming that its boundary redrawing often undermines opposition efforts.
“One-fifth of Singaporeans woke up in different constituencies between the last two elections,” Dr Thum said, attributing this unpredictability to politically motivated boundary changes.
Xu also referenced a 1997 admission by then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong that he instructed the EBRC to create a Single-Member Constituency (SMC) specifically for a “straight fight” between Singapore Democratic Party leader Dr Chee Soon Juan and a People’s Action Party (PAP) candidate.
“So to say that the EBRC redraws its boundary without an influence from the PAP is really a tall tale for everyone to believe,” said Xu.
Dr Thum also argued that Singapore’s nine-day official campaigning period, combined with the sudden announcement of election dates, limits voters’ ability to understand the policies and platforms of all parties.
By contrast, democracies such as Taiwan, the United States, and South Korea provide months or even years of lead time before elections, allowing political parties and voters to prepare.
“The PAP’s flexibility in calling elections is a built-in advantage,” Dr Thum remarked. In extreme cases, elections have been called just one day after the EBRC report’s release such as in the GE2011.
Han expanded on this, describing the election process as part of a “systemic strategy” to suppress opposition voices.
He explained that while no single act of suppression is blatantly authoritarian, the combination of gerrymandering, media control, and unpredictable elections creates a structural disadvantage for opposition parties.
“It’s a cocktail of constraints,” Han said. “When you piece them together, it becomes clear that the system is set up to entrench the ruling party’s dominance.”
Xu returned to the topic of Lawrence Wong’s reluctance to disclose the election date, offering a critical perspective on Wong’s leadership.
With less than 10 months before the deadline, the refusal to announce the election date raises questions about whether Wong prioritises party advantage over national transparency, Xu said.
He argued that this secrecy undermines trust in Wong’s leadership.
“if he can’t even be transparent with the election date, can we trust him to be honest about more significant issues, such as whether or not the new citizens or the foreign workers are displacing [existing] Singaporeans from the job market if it means losing votes in the election,” said Xu.
A similar question was posed by Progress Singapore Party’s NCMP Leong Mun Wai to Manpower Minister Tan See Leng, who sidestepped the question in Parliament.
The panel further discussed the implications of the Group Representation Constituency (GRC) system, which was initially introduced to ensure minority representation but has since been criticised for serving as a mechanism to protect the PAP’s dominance.
Dr Thum noted that racial representation in Parliament peaked before the GRC system’s introduction and argued that better alternatives exist, such as designating specific Single-Member Constituencies (SMCs) for minority candidates, and Xu suggested replacing Nominated Members of Parliament (NMPs) with minority representatives.
Han also emphasised the psychological impact of the short campaign period on voters.
“Nine days is too short for voters to fully engage with policies,” he said, adding that this limited time frame forces many to vote based on familiarity rather than a deep understanding of candidates’ proposals.
“It becomes a choice between sticking with the familiar PAP or taking a perceived risk with the opposition.”
The discussion then turned to the challenges opposition candidates face, especially when boundary changes negate years of ground efforts.
Xu had earlier cited the example of Workers’ Party candidate Yee Jenn Jong, who contested Joo Chiat SMC in 2011 but saw his constituency absorbed into Marine Parade GRC in 2015, erasing years of groundwork.
Dr Thum noted that the media’s portrayal of opposition figures has also hindered their progress, but he acknowledged that social media is beginning to shift this dynamic.
“Social media platforms like TikTok have allowed figures like Dr Chee Soon Juan to reshape their public image,” he said.
Despite the structural disadvantages, Han expressed cautious optimism, urging Singaporeans to take an active role in shaping political discourse.
“Elections are not just about casting a vote—they’re about engaging in conversations, discussing policies, and holding leaders accountable,” he said. Dr Thum agreed, highlighting that democracy is built on dialogue.
“Talk to your family, talk to your friends, and educate yourselves on the issues. That’s the core of democracy,” Dr Thum added.
The podcast concluded with a call for greater transparency from the PAP and for Singaporeans to remain vigilant. “The refusal to disclose the election date reflects a larger issue of prioritising party interests over the public’s right to know,” Xu said.
