GE2025: Murali warns against populism, polarisation taking root in S'pore politics
Follow our live coverage here.
SINGAPORE - The dysfunctional political systems seen in some bigger and more advanced countries must never take root in Singapore, Minister of State for Law and Transport Murali Pillai said on April 28.
He said he heard a commentator in a podcast attributing such dysfunctional systems to three reasons - populism, polarisation and post-truth.
Speaking at the PAP rally at the Jurong East Stadium, he cited an example of how one opposition MP had highlighted the plight of local businesses and how they are suffering from high costs during the Budget debate in February.
Another MP from the same party said workers' wages are too low and should be higher, he added, without naming either MP or their party.
'Now, if both messages were said by the same person, the audience will be confused. If the cost is too high, how can wages be too low?' said Mr Murali, a PAP candidate in the new Jurong East-Bukit Batok GRC.
'It can, if you are a populist.'
One statement will sound good to small and medium enterprise bosses, while the other would appeal to workers, he said.
'These are not hard truths. These are half-truths, and they create a house of cards at the end of the day,' added Mr Murali, who has been the MP for the Bukit Batok ward since 2016. The SMC was absorbed into the new GRC following the revision of the electoral boundaries in 2025.
A 'more nuanced speech', which would be difficult, would be needed if one 'really wants to make a difference', he said. This would require acknowledging that not all businesses are struggling, and not all workers are underpaid.
'The right thing to do' would be to identify the businesses and workers who are struggling, and take steps to resolve their issues, he said.
Mr Murali added: 'What would be irresponsible is to turn workers against businesses. That is polarisation.'
The 57-year-old also spoke about the 'dramatically changed' world order, brought on by the trade war between the US and China, and how this may affect jobs and livelihoods.
For Singapore to survive, its political leaders must work hard on the ground on national affairs and in the international arena, he added.
The 'highest standards of behaviour', as well as values like honesty, integrity and character are non-negotiable for politicians, Mr Murali said. Responsibility is also important, he stressed.
'In life, things can go wrong. When they go wrong, politicians should not duck. They should accept responsibility, square with Singaporeans and make the system stronger.'
He recounted how he 'took political responsibility' for a fire in a rental flat in Bukit Batok in 2019. A woman died, and it was discovered that the water riser had been accidentally switched off. The riser was managed by a town council contractor.
Mr Murali said his team helped to take care of the woman's funeral expenses and found the family lawyers to claim compensation, among others.
An employee of the contractor was eventually fined for negligence, while the riser system has since been modified such that an alarm goes off if the system is switched off, Mr Murali added.
His GRC teammates - Minister for Sustainability and the Environment Grace Fu, Minister of State Rahayu Mahzam, newcomer David Hoe, and PAP's former Hougang candidate Lee Hong Chuang - also spoke at the rally. So, too, did Mr Xie Yao Quan, the PAP candidate for the new Jurong Central SMC.
Mr Xie acknowledged that 'the PAP is not perfect. It has never been'.
'It does not have all the right answers all the time, and it does not get everything right every time. But it has done well, and it has done right by Singaporeans,' the 40-year-old said.
He cited 'important policies' from the PAP government, such as the Silver Support Scheme and Workfare Income Supplement.
'And while it is not perfect, I can tell you that the PAP is determined to keep becoming better, and do ever better for Singapore and Singaporeans.'
The PAP's Jurong Central candidate Xie Yao Quan speaking at the rally at the Jurong East Stadium on April 28.
ST PHOTO: ARIFFIN JAMAR
The PAP candidates all spoke of specific incidents where they have helped residents in the area.
For example, Ms Rahayu, who has overseen Bukit Batok East for the last decade, said she helped a retrenched father get support with his career transition and interim assistance with utilities and household expenses. He eventually bounced back on his feet, she said.
Ms Rahayu added: 'Residents of Bukit Batok East, you know me. You have seen me. I may not be everywhere every time, but you know what I have been doing. You know my heart. You have seen me work and walk with you.'
The PAP candidates spoke of plans for infrastructural improvements if they are elected, such as sheltered walkways and barrier-free access, and opportunities for residents there to connect with one another.
These are in addition to more community help schemes, with the likes of study awards and active ageing programmes already implemented there.
Mr Xie said: 'I deeply respect the opposition candidates for stepping forward as loyal Singaporeans and presenting themselves as a choice to fellow Singaporeans.
'But I must also say, all the candidates in the PAP… are loyal Singaporeans too.'
He asked voters to choose the candidates who would best serve and represent them.
Mr Xie said: 'The PAP has always been with you, and the PAP will always continue to be with you.'
Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AsiaOne
2 hours ago
- AsiaOne
Singapore urges 'restraint' in Thailand-Cambodia border dispute; calls for immediate ceasefire in Gaza, Singapore News
Singapore has urged both Cambodia and Thailand to exercise restraint and cease hostilities, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said in a statement on Thursday (July 24). "Singapore is deeply concerned by the clashes… We call on them to de-escalate tensions through diplomatic means and ensure the safety of all civilians," an MFA spokesperson said. Thailand and Cambodia have been in conflict for decades over jurisdiction of multiple points along their 817km border, specifically regarding the ownership of ancient temples Ta Moan Thom and Preah Vihear, Reuters reported on Friday. Both sides have blamed each other for starting the most recent clash on Thursday, which has escalated from gunfire to heavy shelling. Thailand has since bombed targets in Cambodia using an F-16 fighter jet following artillery volleys that have killed at least 11 civilians, according to Reuters. As at Friday morning, there are no reports of Singaporeans injured from the border clashes, the MFA spokesperson stated. "Singaporeans are advised to defer all travel to the border regions," the spokesperson added. "Singaporeans in Cambodia and Thailand are advised to monitor the news closely, heed the local government's advice and remain vigilant for personal safety." The ministry also advised Singaporeans travelling to Cambodia or Thailand to e-register with MFA if they have not already done so. Those in need of consular assistance should contact respective Singapore embassies in Phnom Penh or Bangkok. [[nid:720588]] 'Unconscionable' suffering in Gaza MFA also released a statement on the conflict in Gaza on Thursday, calling for an immediate ceasefire. "The prolonged suffering of innocent civilians in Gaza arising from the excessive Israeli military reaction to the terror attacks of Hamas since Oct 7, 2023 is unconscionable," an MFA spokesperson said. "Israel must comply with its international humanitarian obligations." The spokesperson also explained that the denial of humanitarian aid has caused mass starvation and a lack of medical services. Additionally, reports of people being shot while trying to access food are "shocking", the spokesperson said. "This is a violation of international humanitarian law. The Israeli government must immediately lift all restrictions on the delivery of urgently needed humanitarian assistance." The ministry also called for the resumption of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East as mandated by the UN. "All civilians must be protected, especially those accessing humanitarian supplies," the MFA spokesperson asserted. "Permanent forced displacement is a further violation of international humanitarian law. "Hamas must release all the remaining hostages — immediately and unconditionally." MFA also stressed that a negotiated two-state solution is the "only viable path" for both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace. "The current trajectory of events will only make this eventual goal even more difficult to achieve, and condemn both Israelis and Palestinians to an endless cycle of mutual hatred and violence." [[nid:720593]] khooyihang@
New Paper
3 hours ago
- New Paper
'Should CDC vouchers be per pax or per household?': Scheme sparks debate on fairness
A new batch of Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers was rolled out in May, with Singaporean households receiving an additional $500 to help with daily expenses. But public response to the long-running scheme has been mixed, sparking renewed debate online over whether its distribution model is fair and effective. While many households welcomed the payouts amid rising costs, others argued that the current system, which allocates vouchers per household, disadvantages larger families. A Reddit post by Dizzy_Boysenberry499 in May titled "Opinion: CDC vouchers should be per pax and not per household" quickly gained traction on r/singapore, garnering over 1,400 upvotes and more than 300 comments. This was before the announcement that the one-off SG60 vouchers - meant to recognise all Singaporeans' contributions in the nation's 60th year of independence - would be given to individuals in July. These vouchers are also usable at all CDC voucher-accepting merchants. Netizens express scepticism "Imagine if a household has 5 people living in one address. This household is taking up less 'space' and yet they are being 'punished' because they get less voucher support per capita," wrote Dizzy_Boysenberry499. Redditor Auph agreed: "We vote as individuals, not by households. CDC vouchers should also be given to individuals, not by households. It doesn't make sense when $500 is shared among five house members vs $500 shared by a married couple." Some users went further, suggesting that wealthier households should receive less, and that financial assistance should be more targeted. "People that are doing well actually don't need it as much as the less well off," commented Redditor Ok_Set4063. Netizen CommieBird agreed: "This can't be emphasised enough. I'm okay with the principle of distributing vouchers and GST relief to those who need it the most. "Eventually the tax revenue has to come from somewhere, and the government shouldn't be building a society reliant on handouts." Questions were also raised about the long-term sustainability of the scheme. Some view it as a symptomatic response to the larger issue of rising costs of living, without actively preventing costs from skyrocketing further. Netizen ZaroPauper asked: "How sustainable is this voucher handout scheme that's touted to be a long-term plan?" "These vouchers are a band aid and lack proper targeting mechanisms," added Redditor ceddya. "No one's saying we should rush it, but I don't see why we can't have more discussion around other ways, like wealth taxes or making our income tax more progressive, to address the funding gap." Responsive measures are timely and effective Others, however, had a more positive take. Some defended the payouts as timely support that helps alleviate immediate pressure from inflation and strengthens local businesses. One user, InspiroHymm, suggested that the CDC vouchers are in fact a long-term measure to curb cost of living, by funnelling more money into the economy. "People always say 'do something permanent about cost of living'. In modern economics the only permanent measure is economic (GDP) growth, which boosts wage growth." "There is value in using band aids, especially when the source of the wound is by and large out of your control," quipped Reddit user vecspace. Government's decisions are for the benefit of Singaporeans In a press release issued on April 15, the Ministry of Finance announced that each household will receive $800 in CDC vouchers in FY2025 - $500 in May and $300 in January 2026 - on top of the $300 disbursed in January 2025. At the scheme's launch event in May, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said the Government was committed to helping Singaporeans cope with rising costs. He also addressed concerns about sustainability and such financial assistance as temporary measures. "I assure all of you that this is not a one-off exercise. The Government will provide the help for as long as it is needed. "We want to make sure that when we spend more, we are doing it for the benefit of Singaporeans, but the spending is also sustainable over the medium to longer term."
CNA
6 hours ago
- CNA
Commentary: As cyber threats grow, Singapore walks a careful line on identifying state actors
SINGAPORE: The recent disclosure that a cyber threat group, identified as UNC3886, was attacking critical infrastructure in Singapore took many by surprise. The announcement was made by Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam during a speech at the 10th anniversary of the country's Cyber Security Agency (CSA) last Friday (Jul 18). He warned that Singapore was actively dealing with a "highly sophisticated threat actor" capable of conducting espionage and 'major disruption to Singapore and Singaporeans'. UNC3886 has been described by Google-owned cybersecurity company Mandiant as a group with a China nexus. Understandably, the Chinese embassy in Singapore was dissatisfied that UNC3886 was described as being linked to China. One question that may intrigue readers more was why the minister did not link UNC3886 to a particular country. Was this a perfunctory attempt to publicly attribute a cyber threat, or was it a policy decision by Singapore based on careful strategic calculations? In his announcement, it was apparent that Mr Shanmugam deliberately focused on only naming the threat group, rather than directly pointing to any country. When he was asked the following day about UNC3886's alleged links to China, he said this was "speculative". "What Mandiant does is what Mandiant does ... Who they (UNC3886) are linked to and how they operate is not something I want to go into," he said. TECHNICAL VS POLITICAL ATTRIBUTION Past cases suggest that when it comes to cyberattacks, Singapore prefers technical attribution over political attribution. The former is based on forensic evidence of tactics, while the latter is based on intelligence to name and shame a country. Without direct state attribution, it is often the media and analysts who examine potential links and broader implications as part of their reporting and analysis. For example, when Singapore telecommunications company Singtel disclosed a malware attack in November 2024, it was a Bloomberg report that attributed it to Volt Typhoon, a group allegedly sponsored by China. Similarly, when Singapore blocked roughly 100 social media accounts for circulating disinformation in July 2024, including those linked to a right-wing group created by former Donald Trump adviser Steve Bannon, it made no mention of the United States. During peacetime, technical attribution offers a more pragmatic way to deter cyber threats. Cyberspace is a complex environment, and non-state threat groups, which may or may not act on the behest of a state, are the dominant actors there. This method allows authorities to expose threat groups without directly shaming the country from which they may be operating. Arguably, not shaming the country where the threat group operates from could risk emboldening future attacks and invite scrutiny from security partners who expect transparency. More importantly, it may make public education about the seriousness of cyber threats more challenging. The public may not understand the full context, for example, of the motivation or geopolitical implications of an attack. WHY NAMING WITHOUT SHAMING While Singapore avoids attributing cyber threats to specific states, naming and shaming is the preferred approach for many Western countries and some of their Asian allies, particularly those that view China as a preeminent threat. For countries not directly involved in adversarial relations or those that pursue a foreign policy of non-alignment, it may be more prudent to deter cyber threats without exacerbating geopolitical animosity. The cost of escalation may be too high a risk to bear. Moreover, it remains debatable whether naming and shaming helps to curb cyber threats in a meaningful way. In Singapore's context, there could also be other plausible strategic considerations. First, Singapore is a cosmopolitan country made up of locally born citizens, naturalised citizens and foreigners. Social cohesion is the glue that keeps its people together and maintains communal harmony. Publicly identifying another country as a threat carries the risk of fuelling racism and xenophobia, including Sinophobia. For example, in 2021, the fear that the Singapore-India Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) posed a threat to the livelihood of citizens raised the ugly head of xenophobia. Second, there is an observable trend in which Western cybersecurity companies often attribute cyber threat groups to China following incidents involving Western digital networks. Even if there is forensic evidence to link these groups to China, these companies often hold contracts with the US government, creating both commercial and political incentives to focus blame on China. If Singapore is seen as endorsing these companies' attributions, it risks making the impression that Singapore has shifted its foreign policy of non-alignment and is siding with the US in the strategic rivalry with China, which involves cyber contestation. Third, while Singapore and China may have differing views on certain issues, both countries at the political level are keen to deepen their bilateral relations. During an official visit to Beijing in September 2024, Singapore Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan described Singapore-China relations as a 'very bright spot' in a more volatile and less predictable world. Such a world is even less black and white, and similar to dealing with the US tariff threat, countries must find a balance between resisting compulsion and promoting cooperation. It is prudent not to let one issue define the overall state of bilateral relations. Furthermore, Singapore is a member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and China is a dialogue partner of ASEAN. One essential area where ASEAN and China are cooperating is the signing of the ASEAN-China Free Trade Area (ACFTA) 3.0 in October 2025, aimed at building economic resilience. ASEAN countries, therefore, need to consider both national and regional interests. In the same vein, the overall state of bilateral relations - as well as factors such as motivation, attack impact and international law - would determine how Singapore responds to cyber threats originating from other countries. The world is witnessing a growing militarisation of cyberspace where countries in the West, Middle East and Asia are developing military cyber capabilities. Some may be more willing to conduct offensive cyber operations if their interests with Singapore diverge. WHEN NAMING MIGHT BE NECESSARY However, these considerations do not necessarily preclude non-aligned countries like Singapore from naming and shaming any country as a cyber threat actor should the situation justify it. A careful examination of what constitutes Singapore's most vital national interests may provide insight into how and when such a shift in posture might occur. Plausible scenarios could include external military threats operating in both physical and cyberspace domains, as well as a cyberattack that is not for espionage purposes but creates a disruptive impact that endangers the lives of people in Singapore. For example, imagine a scenario where Singapore faces military coercion and concurrently a cyberattack by a state-linked threat actor that shuts down the digital infrastructure and electrical systems of hospitals nationwide, resulting in deaths. These are extreme scenarios that, hopefully, Singapore will never have to deal with but must prepare for in the unlikely event that they occur.
