Latest news with #NominationDay
Straits Times
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Straits Times
‘Japanese First': PM Ishiba must address anti-foreigner sentiment ahead of Upper House poll
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox – The last thing a country's leader is expected to do is to publicly slag off the proud traditions of their nation. But Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has caused a stir by seeming to have done just that on July 2, when he described the Japanese language and customs as 'very tedious'. The remark was made in the context of helping foreigners better assimilate into society and recognising the need to ease immigration policies to plug Japan's growing labour shortfall, given its falling birthrates and an ageing population . 'We want foreigners to properly learn the 'very tedious' Japanese language and customs – even at the expense of the Japanese government – and only allow in those who follow Japan's laws,' he said, stressing that there is a place for foreigners who respect Japan's traditions. He was speaking at a debate of the leaders of contesting political parties, held on the eve of Nomination Day for the July 20 Upper House election. Perhaps it was a backhanded attempt to seem relatable, but it has led to the piling of even more heat on a beleaguered leader who is already facing pressure from all sides. Veteran lawmaker Ichiro Ozawa of the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP) criticised Mr Ishiba, saying: 'I cannot sense any reverence for the Japanese language, traditions, or culture. These remarks will offend many citizens and are completely unbecoming of a prime minister.' Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore 193ha of land off Changi to be reclaimed for aviation park; area reduced to save seagrass meadow Business More Singapore residents met CPF Required Retirement Sum when they turned 55 in 2024 Singapore PAP questions Pritam's interview with Malaysian podcast, WP says PAP opposing for the sake of opposing Singapore 1 in 4 appeals to waive HDB wait-out period for private home owners approved since Sept 2022 Sport A true fans' player – Liverpool fans in Singapore pay tribute to the late Diogo Jota Singapore Healthcare facility planned for site of Ang Mo Kio Public Library after it moves to AMK Hub Singapore $500 in Child LifeSG credits, Edusave, Post-Sec Education Account top-ups to be disbursed in July Business 60 S'pore firms to get AI boost from Tata Consultancy as it launches new innovation centre here But worse, Mr Ishiba's gaffe plays directly into the hands of the young upstart party Sanseito, which has made 'Japanese First' its campaign slogan and struck a chord with the Japanese public in directly taking a leaf from the playbook of United States President Donald Trump's Make America Great Again movement. Its 47-year-old leader Sohei Kamiya, who has a juris doctor degree in law, is known for a history of anti-vaccine propaganda but is now fast gaining attention for his anti-foreigner rhetoric. His party wants to curb foreigner numbers – both immigrants and tourists – and levy heavy taxes on foreign purchases of Japanese land and real estate to prevent Japan from 'becoming an economic colony'. It has also accused foreigners of fostering crime in Japan. The party's nationalistic stance has won it backers including former Air Self-Defence Force chief of staff Toshio Tamogami. 'The Trump administration is defending the national interests of Americans, and this wave is spreading to Europe and other places,' Mr Kamiya said at the debate on July 2. 'The Prime Minister does not believe this applies to Japan. People say this as 'far-right' but we do not think so. And since the global trend is changing, Japan should keep up with the times,' he added. The problem with such rhetoric, even as Mr Kamiya insists the party is 'not xenophobic but just anti-globalism', is that it easily plays to the gallery in Japan, a generally inward-looking nation where just 17.5 per cent of its citizens have passports. The unfortunate reality is that many Japanese are taught from a young age that their country is 'homogenous' and an 'island nation'. And Mr Kamiya's statements feed into an us-versus-them mentality, at a time when many are suffering from rising costs of living. Juxtapose that against the ills associated with overtourism and foreigners swooping in to snap up land and real estate assets that have driven up prices . This is as only 60 per cent of Japanese possess their own homes. Sanseito has enjoyed a meteoric rise since its establishment in 2020, leveraging the power of social media and controversy. On YouTube, it has the distinction of being the most-followed political party in Japan, with 353,000 subscribers, where it spews allegations of foreigners getting 'preferential treatment'. Sanseito leader Sohei Kamiya is now fast gaining attention for his anti-foreigner rhetoric. PHOTO: REUTERS According to media surveys, Sanseito now ranks as the third- or fourth-most popular political party in Japan, behind the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), CDP and, sometimes, the Democratic Party for the People. Mr Kamiya has cited the examples of Singapore and Dubai in saying how his party will prioritise foreign talent as well as transient workers in areas where there is a manpower shortage. 'We want to rebuild Japan so that we can make this country great again,' he said. Sanseito may still be a small party – it has five lawmakers across the lower and upper houses of Japan's bicameral legislature – but more established parties like the LDP are sitting up and taking note. Rather than ignoring its statements as inconsequential hot air, the LDP wrote into its campaign manifesto a pledge for 'zero illegal foreigners'. Under Mr Ishiba, the LDP has vowed to clamp down on foreigners who fail to pay medical bills, taxes and social insurance premiums. The party's more hawkish camp wants to abolish duty-free shopping for tourists altogether, among other things. Under Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, the Liberal Democratic Party has vowed to clamp down on foreigners who fail to pay medical bills, taxes and social insurance premiums. PHOTO: REUTERS While the battle for votes on July 20 is largely centred on the cost of living, with the LDP promising cash handouts and opposition parties pledging temporary cuts to the sales tax , immigration remains an emotive flashpoint that has drawn supporters and protesters alike to rallies. Much is at stake, and the ruling coalition of LDP and Komeito is trying to defend its majority in the 248-seat chamber. A total of 522 candidates are vying for the 125 seats up for grabs. Lawmakers serve a fixed six-year term in the chamber which, unlike the Lower House, cannot be dissolved. A poll is held every three years, for half the chamber's members whose tenures are expiring. There is an additional seat up for election in this cycle to fill a vacancy. The ruling coalition has 75 uncontested seats, and Mr Ishiba has said his goal is for the bloc to secure a majority by winning at least 50 seats. If it fails to do so, Japan will face the spectre of a political stalemate – or worse, upheaval – given that Mr Ishiba leads a minority government after the coalition lost its majority in the Lower House in an October 2024 snap election . Mr Ishiba has shown remarkable staying power despite his limp Cabinet support ratings, but he has struggled to tame inflation at home. Mr Trump's recent broadsides of Japan as 'very spoiled' in tariff negotiations cannot come at a worse time for him. Sanseito is fielding 55 candidates and aims to secure a total of six seats in the Upper House. While this election will not unseat the incumbent government, the risk is that the seeds of anti-globalisation are being planted, to be sown in future elections. That is something Mr Ishiba can combat by better conveying how Japan should be a vanguard for globalisation and an accepting place for all, and demonstrate to its voters how that would be a far better option than isolationism. Japan had gone down that route during the feudal era, which stunted its technological, economic and social progress.
Online Citizen
03-06-2025
- Business
- Online Citizen
PAP's Goh Pei Ming tops spending so far as 35 candidates declare S$884,978 from 3 May General Election
SINGAPORE: A total of 35 candidates who contested the General Election on 3 May have declared their election expenses, with combined spending reaching S$884,978. These figures were made publicly available on the Elections Department's (ELD) website on 28 May. Under Singapore's election laws, candidates must declare their expenses and the nature of spending. This process aims to ensure transparency and accountability in campaign financing. Candidates have until 16 June to file their election returns. PAP's Marine Parade–Braddell Heights team spent S$388,756 in sole walkover victory Among those who have submitted so far, People's Action Party (PAP) candidate Goh Pei Ming topped the list with S$104,085 in declared spending. More than half of his expenditure went towards non-online election advertising, including printed materials and physical displays. Goh, a former chief of staff in the Singapore Armed Forces, was part of the PAP team in Marine Parade–Braddell Heights GRC. His team was the only one to win in a walkover on Nomination Day. Their collective campaign expenditure stood at S$388,756 — the highest recorded among the teams that have declared their finances so far. In total, the 35 candidates represented a range of parties, including the PAP, Progress Singapore Party (PSP), National Solidarity Party (NSP), People's Alliance for Reform (PAR), Red Dot United (RDU), and Singapore People's Party (SPP). One candidate each from the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), People's Power Party (PPP), and Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) also submitted their expenses. Additionally, independent candidates Darryl Lo and Jeremy Tan have declared their financial statements. No candidates from the Workers' Party (WP) have submitted returns to date. This leaves 176 candidates either yet to file or whose submissions are pending announcement in the Government Gazette. According to the data released, the average expenditure per candidate came to S$25,285. However, spending varied significantly. While some candidates incurred no expenses, others spent over S$100,000. The PAP led the average spending per candidate at S$77,751. This was followed by the PSP with an average of S$32,303 and the NSP at S$24,378. At the lower end, RDU averaged S$1,297 per candidate, while PAR had the lowest average at S$898. Seven candidates report zero spending Seven candidates declared zero expenditure. These included Sharad Kumar, David Foo and Pang Heng Chuan from RDU; Alec Tok from SDP; Harminder Pal Singh from SDA; and Lim Rui Xian and Muhammad Norhakim from SPP. PPP's Samuel Lee reported S$100 in 'other expenses'. He announced via TikTok on 27 May that he had resigned from the party, effective 23 May, to pursue other opportunities. Among independent candidates, Jeremy Tan, who contested Mountbatten, spent S$16,075. His largest cost was for his solo rally at the Home of Athletics on 1 May. Darryl Lo, contesting Radin Mas, spent S$12,213, with most of it going towards printed materials and other non-digital promotional tools. The only other full team to have submitted expenses was NSP's Sembawang GRC team, which reported a total of S$121,888 in spending. In addition to spending, candidates are required to declare any donations received. Among the 35, only RDU's Ben Puah, who contested Jurong East–Bukit Batok GRC, declared donations. He received S$280 from anonymous donors, via six PayNow transactions ranging from S$10 to S$100. Puah spent S$109 in total on his campaign. RDU's Kala Manickam submitted disputed claims Another RDU candidate, Kala Manickam, submitted disputed claims amounting to S$1,365. These included S$404 in food expenses for campaigners, S$66 for transport, and S$895 for printing extra campaign fliers. According to the ELD, such claims are filed when election agents dispute or fail to settle expense claims within the 28-day window. Kala, who contested in Jurong Central SMC during 3 May poll, told The Straits Times that her claims were not reimbursed by the party. She explained that she was advised to submit them as disputed. 'The party told me to raise petty cash to claim back my money, but when I submitted it after the election, they said the spending was not endorsed by the party,' she said. She added that the party also cited her lack of fundraising as a reason for the rejection of her reimbursement request. Kala said she would personally absorb the cost, stating her campaign was driven by a desire to serve Singapore. The ELD allows members of the public to view candidates' declared expenses by logging into its digital service with their Singpass credentials. Further updates are expected as the 16 June deadline approaches.
Business Times
29-05-2025
- Business
- Business Times
First tranche of GE2025 candidate expenses published, with highest spending being over S$100,000
[SINGAPORE] A total of 35 candidates who contested the May 3 General Election have declared their election expenses so far, with their combined spending coming up to S$884,978. On May 28, their election returns were made available on the Elections Department's (ELD) website. Election candidates here are required under the law to declare how much they spent and what the money was used for, to ensure accountability and transparency of campaign finances. Candidates from the 2025 General Election have until Jun 16 to do so. Among those who have submitted their election expenses, average spending worked out to be S$25,285 per candidate. But individual candidates' expenses ranged widely – some did not spend a single cent, while one spent more than S$100,000. The 35 candidates who have submitted their returns include those from the PAP, PSP, National Solidarity Party (NSP), People's Alliance for Reform (PAR), Red Dot United (RDU) and Singapore People's Party (SPP). Candidates – one from each party – from the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), People's Power Party (PPP) and Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) have submitted their election expenses, as have the two independent candidates – SMU law graduate Darryl Lo and retired businessman Jeremy Tan. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up So far, no WP candidate has submitted his or her returns. This means there are 176 candidates who either have not submitted their election expenses, or whose submissions have not yet been announced on the Government Gazette. From this initial batch of returns, the PAP topped the list of average amount spent per candidate at S$77,751, followed by the PSP at S$32,303, and the NSP at S$24,378. At the bottom of the list were RDU at S$1,297, and PAR at S$898. There were seven candidates who declared no election expenses – RDU's Sharad Kumar, David Foo and Pang Heng Chuan, the SDP's Alec Tok, the SDA's Harminder Pal Singh, and the SPP's Lim Rui Xian and Muhammad Norhakim. The PPP's Samuel Lee declared election spending of S$100, under the category of 'other expenses'. In a TikTok post on May 27, Lee said he had resigned from the PPP effective from May 23 to pursue new opportunities. Meanwhile, Tan, who contested Mountbatten, spent S$16,075, while Lo, who contested Radin Mas, spent S$12,213. More than half of Tan's spending was on his sole rally at the Home of Athletics on May 1, while the bulk of Lo's spending went to non-online election advertising, which covers things like pamphlets, posters, banners and flags. The top spender for now is the PAP's Goh Pei Ming at S$104,085. More than half of this was spent on non-online election advertising. The former Singapore Armed Forces chief of staff and his PAP Marine Parade-Braddell Heights GRC teammates were the only ones to win in a walkover on Nomination Day. In all, they spent a total of S$388,756 this election. The only other full team which has submitted its expenses is the NSP's team for Sembawang GRC, which spent S$121,888. Besides their expenses, candidates also have to declare how much they received from donors. Among the 35, only RDU's Ben Puah, who contested Jurong East-Bukit Batok GRC, has declared donations received. He received a total of S$280 from anonymous donors, who gave the money via six separate transactions on the PayNow digital payment platform that ranged from S$10 to S$100. He spent S$109 this election. Meanwhile, the RDU's Madam Kala Manickam has declared disputed claims of S$1,365, consisting of S$404 in food expenses for candidates and volunteers, S$66 in transport charges for volunteers, as well as S$895 for the cost of printing additional fliers during the campaigning period. According to the ELD's website, such claims occur when 'an election agent disputes any claim in respect of election expenses incurred by the candidate, and refuses or fails to pay the claim within the specified time period of 28 days'. The Straits Times has sent a query to the ELD. When contacted, Madam Kala said the disputed claims were for expenses that the RDU declined to reimburse. She added that her election agent had advised her to file it under disputed claims. 'The party told me to raise petty cash to claim back my money, but when I submitted it after the election, they said the spending was not endorsed by the party. They also said I didn't manage to bring in donations, so they did not reimburse me,' she said. She added that she would bear the costs herself since she had run for elections to serve the country. As with previous elections, candidates generally spent the most on non-online election advertising, which includes things like posters, banners and flags. The total spending in this category across the 35 candidates amounted to S$516,761, or more than half of all declared election expenses so far. Other big-ticket items included online election advertising expenses as well as election meeting expenses, which covers costs to hold rallies. People who wish to inspect candidates' election expenses can do so by logging into the ELD's digital service using their Singpass. THE STRAITS TIMES
AsiaOne
29-05-2025
- Business
- AsiaOne
First tranche of GE2025 candidate expenses published, with highest spending being over $100,000 , Singapore News
A total of 35 candidates who contested the May 3 General Election have declared their election expenses so far, with their combined spending coming up to $884,978. On May 28, their election returns were made available on the Elections Department's (ELD) website. Election candidates here are required under the law to declare how much they spent and what the money was used for, to ensure accountability and transparency of campaign finances. Candidates from the 2025 General Election have until June 16 to do so. Among those who have submitted their election expenses, average spending worked out to be $25,285 per candidate. But individual candidates' expenses ranged widely – some did not spend a single cent, while one spent more than $100,000. The 35 candidates who have submitted their returns include those from the PAP, PSP, National Solidarity Party (NSP), People's Alliance for Reform (PAR), Red Dot United (RDU) and Singapore People's Party (SPP). Candidates – one from each party – from the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), People's Power Party (PPP) and Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) have submitted their election expenses, as have the two independent candidates – SMU law graduate Darryl Lo and retired businessman Jeremy Tan. So far, no WP candidate has submitted his or her returns. This means there are 176 candidates who either have not submitted their election expenses, or whose submissions have not yet been announced on the Government Gazette. From this initial batch of returns, the PAP topped the list of average amount spent per candidate at $77,751, followed by the PSP at $32,303, and the NSP at $24,378. At the bottom of the list were RDU at $1,297, and PAR at $898. There were seven candidates who declared no election expenses – RDU's Mr Sharad Kumar, Mr David Foo and Mr Pang Heng Chuan, the SDP's Mr Alec Tok, the SDA's Mr Harminder Pal Singh, and the SPP's Mr Lim Rui Xian and Mr Muhammad Norhakim. The PPP's Mr Samuel Lee declared election spending of $100, under the category of 'other expenses'. In a TikTok post on May 27, Mr Lee said he had resigned from the PPP effective from May 23 to pursue new opportunities. Meanwhile, Mr Tan, who contested Mountbatten, spent $16,075, while Mr Lo, who contested Radin Mas, spent $12,213. More than half of Mr Tan's spending was on his sole rally at the Home of Athletics on May 1, while the bulk of Mr Lo's spending went to non-online election advertising, which covers things like pamphlets, posters, banners and flags. The top spender for now is the PAP's Mr Goh Pei Ming at $104,085. More than half of this was spent on non-online election advertising. The former Singapore Armed Forces chief of staff and his PAP Marine Parade-Braddell Heights GRC teammates were the only ones to win in a walkover on Nomination Day. In all, they spent a total of $388,756 this election. The only other full team which has submitted its expenses is the NSP's team for Sembawang GRC, which spent $121,888. Besides their expenses, candidates also have to declare how much they received from donors. Among the 35, only RDU's Mr Ben Puah, who contested Jurong East-Bukit Batok GRC, has declared donations received. He received a total of $280 from anonymous donors, who gave the money via six separate transactions on the PayNow digital payment platform that ranged from $10 to $100. He spent $109 this election. Meanwhile, the RDU's Madam Kala Manickam has declared disputed claims of $1,365, consisting of $404 in food expenses for candidates and volunteers, $66 in transport charges for volunteers, as well as $895 for the cost of printing additional fliers during the campaigning period. According to the ELD's website, such claims occur when 'an election agent disputes any claim in respect of election expenses incurred by the candidate, and refuses or fails to pay the claim within the specified time period of 28 days'. The Straits Times has sent a query to the ELD. When contacted, Madam Kala said the disputed claims were for expenses that the RDU declined to reimburse. She added that her election agent had advised her to file it under disputed claims. 'The party told me to raise petty cash to claim back my money, but when I submitted it after the election, they said the spending was not endorsed by the party. They also said I didn't manage to bring in donations, so they did not reimburse me,' she said. She added that she would bear the costs herself since she had run for elections to serve the country. As with previous elections, candidates generally spent the most on non-online election advertising, which includes things like posters, banners and flags. The total spending in this category across the 35 candidates amounted to $516,761, or more than half of all declared election expenses so far. Other big-ticket items included online election advertising expenses as well as election meeting expenses, which covers costs to hold rallies. People who wish to inspect candidates' election expenses can do so by logging into the ELD's digital service using their Singpass. This article was first published in The Straits Times. Permission required for reproduction.
Straits Times
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Straits Times
Red Dot United to pay $900 removal fee for election posters found within 50m of polling stations
The Elections Department will consider waiving the fee if the posters prove to have been tampered with, as Red Dot United had earlier claimed. ST PHOTO: BRIAN TEO Red Dot United to pay $900 removal fee for election posters found within 50m of polling stations SINGAPORE - Opposition party Red Dot United (RDU) will have to pay $900 to the Elections Department (ELD) for 18 election posters removed on Cooling-off Day. But ELD will consider waiving this fee if the posters prove to have been tampered with, as RDU had earlier claimed. On May 9, Ms Liyana Dhamirah, one of RDU's candidates for Jurong East-Bukit Batok GRC, posted a video about how some of her party's posters in the constituency had been moved without their knowledge. She said the posters had been deliberately taken down and re-tied in places that would breach guidelines, so the party would be fined. Traditional election advertising material, like election posters, are not allowed within 50m of polling stations to avoid unduly influencing voters. RDU told The Straits Times on May 9 that Ms Liyana's post was 'a personal reflection of her own frustration', but added that tampering seemed likely from its preliminary checks. In her post, Ms Liyana said she spent most of Cooling-off Day taking down posters. 'When we put them up, we used black zip ties. But when I went to take them down? White zip ties held them in place. That's not a coincidence,' she added. In response to ST's queries, ELD said on May 26 that it has advised RDU to make a police report if it suspects sabotage or mischief. It is prepared to consider waiving the $50 removal fee for each poster, if police investigations find the claims to be true. RDU said it will consult its central executive committee before deciding if it will pursue the matter. ELD also said it had continued to get complaints about RDU's posters in prohibited areas between 9pm on Cooling-off Day and the early hours of Polling Day. Between Nomination Day and 9pm on Cooling-off Day, parties have three hours to remove any posters that break the rules. On Polling Day, they have one hour to do so. If such breaches are not rectified within the given time, Aetos Security Management (Aetos) will remove the materials. ELD added that the Returning Officer waived the removal fee for posters removed on Polling Day, due to heavy rain that morning. The weather would have hampered parties' ability to rectify all breaches within an hour, and posed safety concerns for those doing so, ELD said. But the fee was not waived for the 18 posters Aetos removed on Cooling-off Day, it added. ST understands that RDU's deadline for paying the $900 removal fee is May 27. Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
