Politics: The opposition takes on the Budget

Singapore’s spiralling cost of living is the key issue in the upcoming election. Which party will best help address it? If last week’s bumper budget from the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) was its appeal to the electorate, this week’s debates were a likely prelude to the opposition’s general election (GE) sloganeering. 

Jamus Lim of the Workers’ Party (WP) argued the government “routinely trots out numbers for how measured real median household incomes are high”, but in reality the number refers to a dual-income household, whereas in other countries often a single breadwinner is sufficient. “More importantly, the dual-income household is not always the result of how both father and mother would like to work, but because they feel that they must, if they hope to make ends meet.” Lim also said wage growth had lagged productivity growth; wage growth of native-born households has likely been overstated because the overall number is combined with new, higher-earning immigrants; and that the wage growth in the top decile was three times greater relative to those in the middle. 

Pritam Singh, WP chief, went for the jugular by attacking the hikes in the goods and services (GST) tax. Singapore has consistently run massive surpluses, including in 2021-22 when the government predicted deficits, he said. And yet the PAP went “headlong and headstrong into raising GST, and thereby turbo-charging inflation further”, Singh said. “Increases are incremental, as we have experienced in how purchases from the local shop or weekly supermarket trip have cost a good 30 to 40 percent more for Singaporeans since GST was hiked in an inflationary environment never seen before in decades.” 

Shorn of the media coverage those in Parliament enjoy, Paul Tambyah of the Singapore Democratic Party has taken to TikTok to broadcast his views, and his explainer on the budget is worth watching. The government can easily afford to cut the GST, he said, and still enjoy a surplus. “This would benefit all Singaporeans in the long term, far more than the piecemeal handouts being drip-fed to us…as Singaporeans say, ‘Watch out when the PAP government gives you a chicken wing, as they will take back the whole chicken before you know it.’”

Finally, the WP’s He Ting Ru repeated a longer-term suggestion she first made in 2022, about the need for a more holistic approach to human development. This will be facilitated through a “development dashboard”, which would “measure how well we are doing as a society and economy”, including on aspects like “poverty reduction, social mobility and wealth distribution”. Even as we deal with today’s urgent issues, let’s keep contemplating tomorrow’s possibilities.

Politics: The ‘Doc’ is back

Tan Cheng Bock, chairman of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP), has effectively confirmed that he intends to run in the next GE, which must be held by this November. He had hinted at this last February: “If you believe in active ageing, I shouldn’t retire, right?” the then 83-year-old told the media, in a cute twist of a government leitmotif. Following his West Coast team’s narrow loss to the PAP in GE2020, Tan declined to take up the non-constituency member of Parliament (NCMP) seats offered to the “best losers”. They went to his colleagues Hazel Poa and Leong Mun Wai, who’ve since won the admiration of many Singaporeans for their willingness to challenge the PAP, even in the face of shocking, elitist denigrations.

Tan’s return will please his fans and worry the PAP. A scandal (and jail term) has already ended the political career of S Iswaran, its anchor minister there. Tan, a medical doctor, has had a long and storied political career. He joined the PAP and entered Parliament in 1980, going on to earn a reputation as a backbencher unafraid to speak his mind. Having left Parliament in 2006, Tan lost the presidential election (PE) to the PAP’s preferred candidate in 2011. In 2017 he could not even contest in the PE, for the government had controversially amended the Constitution to limit that year’s election to Malays. (“Tan Cheng Block,” some cried.) He formed the PSP in 2019, arguing that while Lee Kuan Yew’s administration worked “for the many”, today’s PAP works “for the few”. He attracted many disillusioned ex-PAP followers, notably Lee Hsien Yang, the elder Lee’s second son who’s estranged from his brother, the senior minister. (The current PSP is the closest embodiment of a PAP “split”.)

The PSP’s growth has vanquished early concerns that Tan’s comrades would struggle to break away from his cult of personality. After Leong stepped down as party chief, the party appointed Poa, a Public Service Commission scholar, to the post, making her Singapore’s only female party leader—in the process, similarly, vanquishing some concerns that the party’s run by “Chinese unkers”. Poa this week endeared herself to ethnic minorities (and sybarites) by suggesting that Singapore should have three more public holidays every year: two more on Chinese New Year and Hari Raya Puasa, and a new one for Thaipusam. The PAP faces a dilemma. Any heavyweight it drafts in to head off Tan’s challenge, wherever he stands, risks losing. “Doc” is popular not only with the opposition—but many of the PAP’s own.

Some further reading: Jom’s “Q&A with Leong Mun Wai of the Progress Singapore Party”

Society: Shan and Tan versus Bloomberg

Forget Jom, and forget all the others who’ve thus far been issued correction directions under Singapore’s controversial Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA). We were the sideshows; the main event is here. K Shanmugam and Tan See Leng, two ministers, have sued Bloomberg and Low De Wei, its reporter, for his article, “Singapore Mansion Deals Are Increasingly Shrouded in Secrecy”, in which he details their alleged multi-million dollar bungalow transactions. It all began with a POFMA order last December to Bloomberg (and others who’d reproduced the piece). In a move cheered by the journalistic community, Bloomberg responded defiantly, two days before Christmas, saying that it’s complying under threat of sanction. “Bloomberg respectfully disagrees with it, and reserves its right to appeal and challenge the Correction Direction. We stand by our reporting.” 

Perhaps the “Westerners” should have grovelled more. On January 6th, Shanmugam and Tan followed through on earlier threats and filed defamation lawsuits, which will be heard in chambers next Monday, with a possible trial next year. It’s a fascinating case. Though the government loves to spar with liberal newspapers and advocates—like Richard Branson on the death penalty—this is the first time in recent history that Singapore, a financial hub, has challenged this bastion of global business and finance, whose founder is often fêted here. (In 2002, Bloomberg apologised and paid damages to Lee Kuan Yew, Goh Chok Tong, and Lee Hsien Loong for an article on Ho Ching’s ascent through Temasek.)

Related, the notion that the “foreign media” is “sowing discord” in Singapore, as Calvin Cheng, PAP cadre suggested last year, is so passé. Low, after all, is also a Singaporean. The global city, which fosters and incentivises the footloose, transboundary nature of the multinational corporation, draws a convenient line with journalism. The Economist is a tool of the Brits, so it goes, and Bloomberg presumably of the Americans. (Perhaps Singaporean writers should only dream of working for The Straits Times?) Meanwhile, one positive interpretation of POFMA is that it offers the PAP a mellower way to deal with its critics, when compared with the litigious era of Lee Kuan Yew. This lawsuit (and a previous one against Lee Hsien Yang) debunks the notion. The party will deploy the heavy firepower when it feels necessary. 

What’s the endgame? Bloomberg, lawyered up and clearly digging in its heels, may not apologise and pay up as easily as it did 23 years ago. This could complicate the path to a settlement. A trial could see the event that observers of Singaporean politics have long been craving: Shanmugam being cross-examined, about the transparency of multi-million dollar property dealings, no less. 

Some further reading: There’s a lot of confusion about POFMA. Yes, you can (and should) read Bloomberg’s original article. It’s now fronted by a link to the government’s correction notice—also worth reading.

Society: Caveat emptor to caveat tempter?

Aircons, plumbing, and now even your mental health can be fixed via Carousell. That’s the promise of numerous people listing their counselling services on the e-commerce platform. The motley collection includes a former psychology undergrad, an “ordinary teenager”, and, remarkably, “an average salaried joe who enjoy [sic] talking to kids” offering to help your children for S$50 a session.

In 2022, there were 16,000 job openings for counsellors across the nation; the Singapore Association for Counselling (SAC), a non-governmental body that aims to share knowledge and establish standards for the unregulated industry, has around 2,000 members. Little surprise that teenagers and average joes are bridging the yawning gap. It’s not just Singapore though, that’s teeming with the unqualified and the unscrupulous. An Indian High Court has in the past called upon the government to regulate mental health gurus advertising their services on social media. And the state of Western Australia still allows anyone to brand themselves a counsellor despite a well-publicised case of fraud in 2020. The implications of this laissez-faire approach are troubling when considering that one in two people is expected to suffer from a mental health disorder in their lifetime.

The rise of the self-professed mental health pundit is of a piece with a cultural shift enabled by the decentralisation of information, the ability to hawk one’s services—such as they may be—at scale and the ease with which these services can be accessed. It’s an alluring cocktail for the vulnerable, the desperate, or those simply keen to exercise greater control over their lives. If you’re active on social media, chances are that you’ve come across finance wizards promising to bestow on you the secrets of becoming a millionaire. All you need to do is pony up the course fee. Then there are the fitness (distinct from health) experts, who can get you jacked, ripped and shredded if you just download the app with their 21-day workout programme, and maybe buy some dubious supplements. None of which is to say that resources which allow people to better manage their mental health, personal finance or physical fitness are a bad thing. Neither are all service providers acting in bad faith; some of the folks on Carousell were simply offering a listening ear, for free. But amidst a surfeit of options, how to tell a prophet from a charlatan? One could start by learning from the memoirs of those who’ve overcome challenges. “Mental health: my journey and our life’s foundation”, by Tsen-Waye Tay, Jom’s co-founder, also includes a list of resources at the bottom.

Society: Life and death by asphalt

The number of people killed (142) and injured (9,302) in road accidents (nearly 7,200) reached a five-year high, according to the Traffic Police (TP). Speeding violations rose 64.8 percent year on year, contributing to one in three deadly crashes in 2024. Other offences linked to fatal accidents included drink-driving and running the red light. It’s a “bleak situation,” said Daniel Tan, TP’s commander, noting that despite increased enforcement efforts, there was still a general lack of speed compliance. “We’re talking about somebody’s husband, wife, father, mother, child…it’s not a statistic. We’re talking about lives and families.”

Traffic collisions also place a massive burden on a state’s health, insurance and legal systems. With 1.19m people dying yearly due to road traffic crashes globally, road safety represents a critical component of both public health and developmental agendas for governments. It’s also the focus of two UN Sustainable Development Goal targets. In supposedly law-abiding Singapore, sustained efforts to control and improve driver/rider etiquette and behaviour appear to have hit a roadblock. To combat this, heavier penalties—higher fines and demerit points—await errant motorists from January 1st next year. But beyond the stricter and speedier enforcing of law and order, a broader look at urban mobility will be essential, one that prioritises “active transport, public transit and climate resilience”. 

Transport mobility maps out an individual’s volition and autonomy beyond their home to access essential services and goods; and engage in social and community life. In this regard, Singapore is miles ahead in both planning and execution. Expanding the public transport network; better walk and cycle connectivity; more pedestrianised streets; repurposed roads; improved first and last mile options, and the Friendly Streets Initiative are just some of the steps being taken to build a safer, more liveable, inclusive and sustainable city. But travelling securely from A to B requires more than affordable world-class transport options and a well-built infrastructure. It demands that each of us remains cognisant and respectful of our fellow commuters’ right to freedom of movement, whether on road, foot or personal mobility device. In this regard, we still have a way to go.

History weekly by Faris Joraimi

How many ways can you define a historical neighbourhood? At the opening of the annual Ramadan food fair in Kampong Gelam, Desmond Lee, minister for national development, announced that the Kampong Gelam Association (KGA)—a voluntary coalition of residents, businesses, cultural institutions and property owners in the area—has been incorporated into a company limited by guarantee (CLG). This isn’t the type of company that often comes to mind. CLGs are not business entities, as they carry out non-profit making activities serving “national or public interest”, and do not have share capital. More familiar ones include Esplanade and the Arts House, as well as Singapore Press Holdings, which became a CLG in 2021 funded by taxpayers. KGA will ostensibly give greater say and representation to the community in decisions concerning the precinct, the latest in the continuing negotiation over who has authority over Kampong Gelam and the ability to determine its identity. In the 1980s, many of Kampong Gelam’s residents enjoyed little to no input when they were told to make way for a themed tourist attraction. 

Sultan Hussein’s residence, together with the Sultan Mosque, remained focal points of political, cultural and religious activity there throughout the colonial period. Both were inseparable from Kampong Gelam’s existence as a place of trade and commerce. Somehow, some remnant of Malay sovereignty and its trading world—no matter how dilapidated—lived on in old Kampong Gelam. Since the eviction of the sultan’s descendants in 1994, and the hundreds who considered them neighbours, concerns about maintaining Kampong Gelam’s status as a “Malay-Muslim quarter” have remained, if not grown. Because Kampong Gelam has always been a commercial quarter, I don’t think these fears relate to the area being “over-commercialised”, but rather what kinds of businesses get to take up space and define its character. 

Routine market pressures (rising rent, falling demand) threaten the important cultural services long provided by Kampong Gelam: pilgrimage paraphernalia, religious publications, ritual aromatics, and kebaya fabric, among others. A new Inter-Agency Task Force has been set up to support these trades, which I greet with cautious optimism. A purely profit-driven, free-market pragmatist will think: if these traditional businesses can’t retain their viability, then they should make way for the more competitive hipster cafés, IPA breweries, pilates studios and coworking spaces. They’ll complement the beautiful shophouses: another Katong! Who needs tradition when you can buy a lifestyle of latté-fuelled self-improvement and digital productivity? Cultures, worldviews, ways of being are shaped by spaces, and what kinds of material exchanges you find in them. The Inter-Agency Task Force and the KGA perform the sort of maintenance work that allows a cultural landscape to persist. The ways of Kampong Gelam may continue in the shade of a royal parasol, albeit one with a different colour and design.

Arts: Get a free pass

The Ministry for Culture, Community and Youth is in its Oprah era. Their big giveaway? The SG Culture Pass, a S$300m arts version of ActiveSG credits and CDC vouchers. Come September, every Singaporean aged 18 and up will get S$100 of credits to spend on local arts and culture programmes, from theatre productions to heritage walking tours. Artists and groups can start proposing programmes to the ministry for consideration from March 10th. Terms and conditions apply, of course. Among other things, these programmes must feature Singaporeans or permanent residents in “key roles”, must abide by prevailing regulatory demands, and mustn’t already be supported by other initiatives like SkillsFuture. Still, the ministry insists that it will maintain “an open-minded approach” to these proposals, so reported The Straits Times (ST) from a ministerial town hall for the arts and culture sector last week. Other initiatives announced here included expanded arts education programmes for students, new apprenticeships for freelancers, and long-term studies on what arts spaces are needed here. Edwin Tong, who leads the ministry, sounded a lot like he was rallying politicians for reelection. He told the artists present: “I encourage all of you to take up this challenge, put up compelling offerings to attract new audiences, [and] find different ways of using the culture pass to retain them.”

Arts lovers remain a small constituency here, and it’s often hard for artists to make headway with the unconverted. One big stressor is the worry about funding cessation if box office and other financial targets aren’t met, distracting artists from simply making art. While Singapore has long shed its reputation for cultural sterility, the state has often vacillated between cheering on acceptable forms of artistic expression and clamping down on themes it can’t tolerate, which has stunted generations of artistic growth. The arts also gets a bad rep here as a luxury good, when really it’s a public good—necessary for making sense of our collective identity, and reflecting on communal challenges and hopes. Many artists and groups were buoyed by the incentive, though practical questions remain as to how the Culture Pass will be rolled out, including the three-year timeframe for using up credits, how arts entertainment licensing might affect programme eligibility, and exactly which art forms qualify. Kenny Chan, former Books Kinokuniya Asia-Pacific senior store and merchandising director, wondered aloud if book vouchers for local publications were part of the plan. “Culture should include the literary arts,” he told ST. And smaller groups fretted over being elbowed out of the way by larger institutions. Gallerist Low Sok Leng argued that big players like the Singapore Art Museum or National Gallery Singapore “should not be fighting with commercial entities for this little pie”. Like all other election season freebies, the Culture Pass is a helpful handout that also shouldn’t be regarded as a one-pass-fits-all solution to audience woes. 

Tech: Singapore enters star wars with laser based satellites

If you’re working from a poorly-connected part of the world, one of the ways to get online would be to use a terminal—like SpaceX’s Starlink dishes—to communicate with a satellite. Usually, the satellite would then connect you to the internet using Radio Frequency (RF), a reliable albeit slow and expensive technology. Lately though, laser-based systems have emerged as a promising solution for global connectivity challenges. They are faster, and can beam more data, making them ideal for developing markets with poor connectivity.

Among the companies leading the laser charge is Singapore-based Transcelestial. In 2026, the start-up will launch two laser-connected satellites with funding from Singapore’s Office for Space Technology (OSTIn) The mission aims to achieve 10 Gbps optical links between satellites and ground stations. This initiative marks Singapore’s maiden entry into the space-based laser communication sector. 

Instead of competing directly in the consumer satellite internet market, which is what Starlink does, Transcelestial aims to provide backbone connectivity to telecom providers in underserved regions, leveraging existing ground-based 5G and 4G infrastructure for last-mile distribution. This model could offer a more cost-effective alternative to traditional fibre-optic infrastructure. The collaboration between Transcelestial and ST Engineering Satellite Systems shows Singapore’s growing capabilities in space technology. The government has already committed an additional S$60m to boost the space industry and research ecosystem via the Space Technology Development Programme (STDP), bringing the total commitment to S$200m. While the timeline for final deployment remains undisclosed, this initiative could significantly impact global internet infrastructure, particularly in regions where traditional connectivity solutions are economically unfeasible.

Tech: DBS to trim thousands of contract roles with AI 

The days of having to move through a morass of numbers and options before speaking to a rational entity on the DBS hotline may be over. Singapore’s largest financial institution will deploy more than 800 Artificial Intelligence (AI) models in nearly 4,000 roles over the next three years. The bank expects AI to deliver more than S$1bn worth of economic benefits in 2025 alone. The move aligns with broader industry trends. A recent Bank of England survey showed that AI adoption in financial firms jumped from 58 percent to 75 percent between 2022 and 2024. While fraud detection and risk management currently lead AI applications, customer service is the next frontier. Currently, only 12 percent of financial institutions use AI tools in this area.

In the short term, DBS will trim contract and temporary roles with high natural attrition, which will leave its large permanent Singaporean workforce unscathed. Yet, longer-term implications must be considered. Permanent staff will have to be more adept and productive with AI tools, with the resulting efficiency leading to an inevitable decline in fresh graduate roles over time. This is particularly worrying given that university graduate employment is declining, from 84.1 percent in 2023 to 79.5 percent last year. As tech disruptions ripple through society, it is past time we started considering how the benefits accrued from greater efficiency in an AI-suffused economy might help the average person.

If you enjoy Jom’s work, do get a paid subscription today to support independent journalism in Singapore.