Singapore votes with new PM seeking strong mandate amid tariff turmoil

Update Singapore votes with new PM seeking strong mandate amid tariff turmoil
Singapore's Prime Minister Lawrence Wong takes part in a meeting with Vietnam's Prime Minister at the Government Office in Hanoi. (File/AFP)
Short Url
Updated 03 May 2025

Singapore votes with new PM seeking strong mandate amid tariff turmoil

Singapore votes with new PM seeking strong mandate amid tariff turmoil
  • PM Wong urges voters to stick with his team in face of US tariffs, US-China tensions
  • Last day of campaigning ahead of May 3 election

Ҵʰ鷡:

Singaporeans cast their votes Saturday in an election where Prime Minister Lawrence Wong faces his first major test against a rejuvenated opposition in uncertain economic times for the trade-centered nation.
Wong’s ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), which has steered the island to prosperity while using an iron hand to suppress dissent, is expected to easily retain a clear majority in parliament.
Popular after leading Singapore’s Covid task force, Wong took over last year from his predecessor Lee Hsien Loong, the son of founding premier Lee Kuan Yew who ruled the island state after its bitter break-up with Malaysia in 1965.
Wong has repeatedly said he needed a strong mandate to navigate heavily trade-reliant Singapore through economic uncertainty in light of tariffs levied by US President Donald Trump.
He has warned Singapore would be hit hard if Trump went ahead with the tariffs he announced and then paused for most countries, except China, and needed to stay open and competitive to counter their effects.
“So I say to all Singaporeans, please consider carefully. This is not a gamble. This is your family, your future, our Singapore,” he said during the campaign.Political analyst Nydia Ngiow said the PAP had long been seen as Singapore’s steady hand in crises but that the recent tariff turmoil may not be a big factor for voters yet.
“Given that general elections in Singapore tend to focus on local issues, it is unlikely that geopolitics will shape voters’ decisions — unless Singaporeans feel a direct and tangible impact on their cost of living, job security or the broader economy,” she told AFP.
Muhammad Nazri bin Hadri, a 25-year-old voter, said he was finding it “very difficult” to buy a house.
“I hope there are some changes to (public housing) rules,” he told AFP after casting his ballot.
The overwhelming PAP majority in Singapore’s unicameral legislature is such a norm in the wealthy island’s political landscape that the opposition and its supporters will consider a few more seats gained as a significant victory, observers said.
But the PAP’s dominance is increasingly being challenged by a more vocal electorate, especially among younger voters who appear open to alternative political voices.
“Young voters will be a factor in some wards. Unlike the older voters they are prepared to listen to both sides and make an informed decision,” said veteran former news editor and political observer P.N. Balji.
One voter told AFP she had been impressed by “refreshing and exciting” new candidates from across the political spectrum.
“Whether or not they get elected, I hope we see and hear more of them, and get to know them better,” said 40-year-old Shi’ai Liang.In 2020, the country’s largest opposition group, the Workers’ Party (WP), made historic gains, winning 10 of the 93 seats at stake — a significant jump from its previously held four seats.
The WP — which has become politically slicker — is hoping to build on that momentum with a slate of charismatic candidates, including a top lawyer.
The party pulled in massive crowds at its rallies during the campaign, just like in previous elections, but those big numbers have seldom translated into electoral wins in the past.
WP candidates have lambasted the government for raising a goods and services tax amid rising inflation and insist the government has not done enough to curb rising costs in one of the most expensive countries in the world.
They also say more opposition MPs are needed in parliament so that the PAP does not have a “blank cheque” and can be held accountable.
The PAP, however, points to the billions of Singapore dollars it has spent in helping citizens cope with rising costs, including via cash handouts and grocery vouchers.
Singapore has around 2.75 million eligible voters who will elect 97 members of parliament.
Polls opened at 8:00 am (0000 GMT) for 12 hours of voting, with some results expected to stream in around midnight.


Palestinian-American author sues Oxford Union over censored speech on YouTube

Palestinian-American author sues Oxford Union over censored speech on YouTube
Updated 5 sec ago

Palestinian-American author sues Oxford Union over censored speech on YouTube

Palestinian-American author sues Oxford Union over censored speech on YouTube
  • Susan Abulhawa describes the edited version of her remarks as ‘politically motivated censorship’
  • She wants an apology, damages and for the union to restore the full version of her speech

LONDON: Palestinian American author Susan Abulhawa is suing the Oxford Union in the UK, seeking an apology and compensation for damages after parts of a speech she gave during a debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were removed from a video posted by the union on YouTube.

The Pennsylvania-based author of the best-selling book “Mornings in Jenin” was one of eight speakers who took part in the debate in November 2024. The Oxford Union uploaded her speech to YouTube but deleted it from the platform a week after the debate, then replaced it in December with an edited version that omitted remarks she made about Zionism and Israel’s actions in Lebanon.

The union said that it removed parts of Abulhawa’s speech because of “legal concerns” about certain aspects of it, The Times newspaper reported, including comments about Zionists encouraging “the most vile of human impulses,” and Israeli booby traps in Lebanon.

When contacted by Abulhawa’s legal team, the union argued that the cut remarks constituted racial hatred in violation of Section 17 of the UK’s Public Order Act 1986. The author uploaded the full version of her speech to her own YouTube channel in April.

In one part removed by the union, Abulhawa addresses Zionists directly, saying: “You don’t know how to live in the world without dominating others. You have crossed all lines and nurtured the most vile of human impulses.”

She also highlighted atrocities carried out by Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip, including the bombing of hospitals and schools, and the killing of women and children, which a number of UN and Western officials have described as amounting to genocide.

Israel’s military campaign in Gaza has resulted in the killing of more than 65,000 Palestinians since October 2023, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, and the displacement of the entire 2 million-strong population of the territory.

Abulhawa, whose family hails from the Mount of Olives, a Palestinian neighborhood overlooking the walled city of occupied East Jerusalem, described the edited version of her speech as “politically motivated censorship.”

She said: “They talk about freedom of expression, free discourse and free debate, exchange of thoughts, exchange of ideas, however uncomfortable, but when it comes to this one issue … there’s a different set of rules.”

Abulhawa said the actions of the Oxford Union, one of Britain’s oldest university unions, had damaged her reputation by implying her remarks were criminal, The Times reported. She wants an apology, damages, and for the union to restore the full version of her speech. She is suing the union on various legal grounds, including copyright infringement, discrimination and breach of contract.

“I prepared a speech that I labored over for quite a while and I chose my words carefully for content,” she said. “The suggestion was I said things that were unlawful, that were malicious or substandard. It was definitely disparaging to me.”

The debate resulted in approval of a motion that proposed “Israel is an apartheid state responsible for genocide.” The union did not comment on Abulhawa’s legal challenge.