TR EMERITUS

The walkover in the newly formed Marine Parade-Braddell Heights GRC is, to many observers, a regrettable outcome — but one that is, upon closer reflection, entirely understandable.

At the heart of this issue lies the absence of a functioning opposition coalition framework. Without a structured mechanism to coordinate and commit the various parties to a unified front, it is unrealistic to expect seamless coverage across all constituencies. The political landscape in Singapore does not currently support the kind of cooperation needed to ensure that every seat is contested. Until such a framework exists, we cannot fault individual parties for making tactical decisions that prioritise their viability and sustainability over symbolic challenges.

Moreover, strategic ambiguity is sometimes essential for opposition parties. Revealing their contesting plans too early can undermine their effectiveness, exposing their candidates to targeted counter-strategies or distractions. In a high-stakes political environment, such prudence is not only understandable but often necessary for survival.

Layered on top of this is the constant redrawing of electoral boundaries — a phenomenon that has long made forward planning difficult for opposition parties. Years of groundwork in a particular area can be rendered moot by abrupt and arbitrary changes in constituency lines. Such boundary adjustments, frequently seen as lacking transparency, complicate the already uphill task of contesting in a system skewed heavily in favour of the incumbent.

Let us not forget the resources and reach of the ruling party. The machinery behind the government is vast, well-funded, and deeply entrenched. Against such odds, every opposition victory — even a single seat — is almost a political miracle.

Could there be a better way to level the playing field? Realistically, it’s difficult. Any government in power is incentivised to maintain its dominance and may be tempted to tilt the system to its advantage. But history has shown us that unchallenged power rarely results in optimal outcomes for the people. Since the Workers’ Party’s historic win in Aljunied GRC in 2011, we have witnessed more rigorous debates and increased accountability in Parliament. That alone shows the value of a viable opposition presence.

Ultimately, self-auditing and unchecked power cannot be relied upon to safeguard the public interest. The notion that laws can be changed at will — potentially for or against the people — is unsettling. A single-party dominant government, no matter how competent, may not be the best arrangement for a maturing democracy like Singapore.

A better future might lie in a more balanced political landscape — perhaps even a dual-party system — where competition compels all parties to work harder for the public good. Concerns that opposition-led town councils might lead to falling property values have not been borne out by reality. In fact, opposition wards have generally managed well, proving that alternative governance can be both competent and accountable.

In the end, a walkover — especially in a newly configured GRC — does not serve the electorate. But until systemic reforms are in place, we may have to accept that such outcomes, while regrettable, are part of a deeply skewed political game.

CWC-AI