The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) launched its election manifesto on Sunday (Apr 6) with the slogan “Progress For All”, as it gears up to contest the upcoming General Election and continue championing issues on behalf of Singaporeans.
In its 78-page election manifesto, PSP outlines 61 policy proposals across six key areas: cost of living, housing, employment and wages, social safety nets, education, and governance.
At its core, the manifesto is built on four main principles:
-
Building a more equal society – PSP believes public policies should not be based solely on economic efficiency but must also consider broader social objectives, ensuring the benefits of growth are shared fairly with all Singaporeans.
-
Dignity for hardworking citizens – The party emphasises the need for a stronger social safety net to better protect people. As society evolves, PSP argues that creativity and interpersonal skills — things machines can’t replicate — will become increasingly important. Hence, Singapore must embrace a more diverse education model to prepare its people for the future.
-
Freedom to discuss and debate ideas – The party advocates for a culture that encourages open dialogue and constructive debate, with the goal of making Singapore a better home for all.
-
Strong political checks and balances – PSP stresses the need to strengthen Singapore’s political system to guard against abuse of power and ensure that citizens continue playing a key role in shaping the country’s future.
At the press conference held at PSP’s headquarters in Bukit Timah, Secretary-General Leong Mun Wai said that many of the policy ideas in the manifesto were already raised by him and First Vice Chairperson Hazel Poa in Parliament, where they sparked intense debate.
“That’s why it’s unfair for the government to say the opposition never offers alternative policies,” Leong said.
Also present at the event were Chairman Dr Tan Cheng Bock and other party members.
The PSP contested West Coast GRC in the 2020 General Election. Although it did not win, its team achieved the highest vote share among all losing opposition parties, resulting in Leong Mun Wai and Hazel Poa being appointed as Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMPs).
Can PSP’s Promises REALLY Hold Up?
At first glance, PSP’s bold proposals may sound appealing, especially during a time of rising costs. However, some analysts and observers have raised serious questions about feasibility and fiscal sustainability. Here are some of the proposals by the PSP we think are quite questionable…
Key Policy Proposals:
-
Lower GST from 9% back to 7%
↳ This rollback may sound like a big win for consumers — but it’s worth asking: why only roll back 2%, instead of scrapping GST entirely like some others propose? Could it be that even the PSP recognises that GST plays a critical role in funding long-term needs like healthcare, ageing population, and infrastructure? If so, this feels more like a populist middle-ground move to score points, rather than a serious rethinking of the system. -
No GST on basic essentials
↳ This sounds good in theory, but defining what counts as a “basic necessity” can be tricky — and creates complexity in the tax system that may benefit retailers more than consumers. -
Cap hawker stall rent at $500 or 3% of gross income
↳ Fixed rent controls might sound helpful to hawkers, but could reduce incentives for upgrading or fair stall allocation. Who absorbs the costs — town councils? Government? or consumers? or would PSP like to volunteer to absorb the costs? That would be awesome! - Government to fully pay MediShield Life and CareShield Life premiums for all citizens
↳ This would be a massive fiscal commitment. Without clear costings or funding sources, it risks being seen as populist rather than practical. - Set a minimum living wage of $2,250/month
↳ But hor, under the current Progressive Wage Model, some workers like full-time security officers already earn $2,650 in basic salary — so why suggest a “living wage” that’s actually lower than what they’re already getting? You call this progress or downgrade?
On Housing:
-
Let single Singaporeans aged 28 and above buy 3-room BTOs
↳ A popular proposal among younger voters, but it could strain an already tight BTO supply — and affect the ability to prioritise families. -
Launch Millennial Apartments Scheme in CBD
↳ Renting public housing in the Central Business District sounds trendy — but is it the best use of prime land? And at what cost to taxpayers?
While the PSP’s manifesto includes plenty of headline-grabbing promises, what’s still missing is a clear, detailed plan for how these proposals will be funded (same like PPP’s election manifesto), and also what trade-offs Singaporeans will need to accept.
As the General Election approaches, voters may welcome new ideas. But voters are not gullible one leh… They’ll also want to know: can the opposition walk the talk? Don’t just say say only ah.
