In every election, someone brings up “opposition unity” — usually right after we see a multi-cornered contest. The implication is that too many parties spoil the vote, and that opposition parties should make way for each other to avoid splitting support.
After GE2025, I heard that refrain again.
But let me be clear: multi-cornered fights are not the problem. The real problem is when voters are given poor options, then told to support them “for the sake of the cause.”
Yes, smaller parties like the People’s Power Party (PPP) and the National Solidarity Party (NSP) lost badly in this election.
In Tampines GRC, NSP polled just 0.18% and PPP 0.43%. Both lost their deposits. But as I said on our TOC live stream on polling night — and I stand by it — they had every right to contest.
Democracy means that any Singaporean who qualifies can stand for election.
No one should be barred just because their chances look slim. But rights come with consequences — and in a first-past-the-post system, where you either win the most votes or you don’t get a seat, representing niche interests or running weak campaigns doesn’t get you anywhere.
“The system is not designed to reward parties who can’t win,” I said during the stream.
“You can represent a minority interest, but if you can’t build majority support, you’re not going to make it.”
The GE2025 results say it all
Let’s look at the numbers.
A total of four parties — Singapore United Party (SUP), PPP, People’s Alliance for Reform (PAR), and NSP — lost their deposits in GE2025, with a combined loss of S$364,500, based on the number of candidates and constituencies contested.
| Party | Vote Share | Constituency | Type | No. of Candidates | Deposit Lost (S$) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SUP | 10.84% | Ang Mo Kio GRC | GRC | 5 | S$67,500 |
| PPP | 10.21% | Ang Mo Kio GRC | GRC | 5 | S$67,500 |
| PAR | 8.35% | Potong Pasir SMC | SMC | 1 | S$13,500 |
| PAR | 7.36% | Radin Mas SMC | SMC | 1 | S$13,500 |
| NSP | 2.32% | Sembawang GRC | GRC | 5 | S$67,500 |
| PPP | 0.43% | Tampines GRC | GRC | 5 | S$67,500 |
| NSP | 0.18% | Tampines GRC | GRC | 5 | S$67,500 |
To lose a deposit, a candidate must receive under 12.5% of valid votes.
NSP has contested Tampines GRC since 2011. After more than a decade, they resurfaced weeks before polling, with no national messaging, and barely any ground presence. That’s not a strategy. That’s just turning up.
“Let the parties contest. If they lose badly, they’ll drop out themselves,” I said. And that’s what we saw — political self-correction through voter clarity.
Multi-cornered fights don’t destroy opposition — poor options do
Some will argue that multi-cornered contests split the opposition vote and “helped the PAP.” But I disagree.
What really harms the opposition is not the number of choices, but when those choices are meaningless. Voters can see through parties with no plan, no presence, and no message. Contesting isn’t about printing a flyer the night before Nomination Day. That’s not participation — it’s performance art.
We already saw what happened in Tampines — as I noted earlier, PPP and NSP together pulled in only 0.61% of the vote. Technically, that could affect a close race. In reality, it proved voters already know who the serious contenders are.
Let’s not kid ourselves. Strong opposition parties like WP and SDP earned their credibility the hard way — through years of persistence, policy, and people. If smaller parties want that kind of respect, they have to do the work, not ask for cover under the banner of “opposition unity.”
“We shouldn’t shy away from multi-cornered fights,” I said during the stream. “Voters must not be given a single option just for the sake of unity.”
The system is already stacked — first-past-the-post makes it hard enough for diverse voices to break through. Forcing artificial unity just to accommodate symbolic candidacies doesn’t strengthen democracy. If anything, it insults it.
The way forward: clarity, not choreography
Multi-cornered fights are not something to fear. If anything, they are how the electorate learns. Let voters choose from the full spectrum, and let those who fail read the signs.
Singapore needs opposition politics that are mature, credible, and consistent. If we want to be taken seriously by the electorate, we need to start by taking ourselves seriously. That means:
- Fielding candidates with track records
- Running year-round ground campaigns
- Speaking up on national issues
- Building policy platforms
And yes—knowing when to step aside.
If a party polls under 1%, that’s not a fluke. That’s a message. And if they keep coming back without improving, then yes — we have a right to ask why.
So let’s stop hand-wringing over “opposition unity.” Let’s focus instead on opposition credibility. If you want to contest, do the work. If you can’t win, step back. And if you think voters owe you support just because you’re “not PAP,” think again.
Opposition politics isn’t charity. It’s earned.
The post Why fringe parties don’t need to be excluded — the voters are doing it themselves appeared first on The Online Citizen.
