Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam on 5 February 2025 launched a pointed, one-sided attack on Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Leong Mun Wai, accusing him of making racist remarks and undermining Singapore’s multiracial values.
The attack occurred during a parliamentary session where Leong had asked about the government’s review of the Chinese-Malay-Indian-Others (CMIO) framework, which underpins race-based policies in Singapore.
Leong’s question was initially directed at Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong, who had recently commented on the need for ongoing reviews of the CMIO model during a conference organised by the Institute of Policy Studies on 20 January 2025.
CMIO framework: Key to multiracial harmony, Shanmugam argues
In his initial response, Shanmugam acknowledged that the government periodically reviews the CMIO framework and highlighted its role in maintaining racial harmony.
He cited several policies derived from the CMIO framework, such as the Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP), Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs), and partnerships with racial self-help groups. These policies, Shanmugam argued, help safeguard minority rights, ensure targeted interventions, and prevent the formation of ethnic enclaves.
While acknowledging criticisms that the CMIO model can be overly simplistic, Shanmugam defended its necessity, noting that racial identity remains important to many Singaporeans.
“An IPA study in 2021 found that 87% of Singapore residents considered race important to their identity,” Shanmugam said. “A 2021 CNA-IPA survey also found that over 60% of residents believed CMIO policies helped preserve racial harmony and should be retained.”
He warned that eliminating the framework could lead to worse outcomes, citing France’s 1978 ban on collecting race-based data, which he argued had not reduced racial tensions but instead coincided with a rise in race-related issues.
Leong clarifies his query
Leong clarified that his question was intended to seek clarification from Edwin Tong on whether the government was considering a major review of the CMIO framework to address its limitations, particularly its inability to accommodate mixed or complex racial identities. Tong had previously acknowledged the need for regular reviews but emphasised that the framework remained essential for fostering social cohesion.
Leong stated that he had no further questions after receiving clarification, indicating that his focus was on policy, not a confrontation over past remarks.
However, Shanmugam then pivoted to Leong’s previous comments on sensitive topics such as public housing and the Singapore-India Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA).
Shanmugam shifts focus to past remarks
Shanmugam referenced a 2023 Facebook post by Leong in which he suggested that Singaporeans would not be “condemned to living in HDB flats” under his proposed housing policies. The minister claimed that this statement implied Leong’s disregard for public housing and the government’s integration efforts.
He then shifted to Leong’s remarks on CECA, a trade agreement between Singapore and India, which Shanmugam alleged had stoked anti-Indian sentiment. The term “CECA” has become associated with xenophobic undertones in online forums, where it is often used as a reference to Indian nationals living as expatriates in Singapore.
Quoting from a 2021 parliamentary session, Shanmugam reminded the House that Leong had admitted some of his CECA-related statements could be interpreted as having racial undertones. He further noted that even some members of Leong’s party, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP), had viewed those comments as racist.
“If his own party members can think like that, it is entirely possible for other Singaporeans to take a similar view,” Shanmugam said.
He summarised his argument: “If you look at his comments—the 80 per cent of Singaporeans who live in HDB flats are condemned—and if you combine that with his racist comments, Mr Leong may not put much value in our multiracial approach or in the ethnic integration in our housing estates.”
Shanmugam distributed printed handouts containing quotes from Leong’s past remarks to reinforce his accusations.
“We are not against the EIP at all”: Leong responds
Leong responded by rejecting Shanmugam’s accusations of racism and clarifying his party’s stance on the Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP), which sets quotas on the number of flats owned by each racial group in public housing estates to prevent ethnic enclaves.
“PSP supports the EIP,” Leong said. “What we take issue with is that the EIP has caused economic disadvantages. There’s an economic cost to the minorities. So, we have recommended in this Parliament that we should compensate the minorities for that economic cost they’ve incurred.”
Leong emphasised that his criticisms of CECA were rooted in concerns over job security and the economic welfare of Singaporeans, not racial animosity.
Shanmugam presses on
Despite Leong’s clarifications, Shanmugam continued to argue that the NCMP had not denied making the “condemned to HDB” comment or the implication that his CECA-related statements carried racial undertones.
“I note that Mr Leong doesn’t deny saying that 80 per cent of Singaporeans who live in HDB flats are condemned, and that his comments were racist,” Shanmugam concluded.
A deliberate strategy?
Netizens noted that Shanmugam’s approach appeared calculated, with the prepared quotes of Leong serving to frame the discussion as more than just a response to Leong’s question.
By highlighting past remarks on sensitive issues like housing and CECA, Shanmugam sought to paint a broader picture of Leong as a politician whose rhetoric could undermine Singapore’s racial harmony.
Leong’s clarification that his question was initially directed at Minister Tong suggested he had intended to focus on policy rather than engage in a confrontation over past remarks.
However, Shanmugam’s speech in Parliament shifted the discussion, turning it from a defence of the government’s multiracial policies into an attack on Leong’s character—an attack amplified by the mainstream media.
