Ex-Workers’ Party Cadre says he can no longer support the party he once believed in ahead of Cooling-Off Day

Ex-Workers’ Party Cadre Says He Can No Longer Support the Party He Once Believed In Ahead of Cooling-Off Day

In the lead-up to GE2025, former Workers’ Party (WP) cadre Yudhishthra Nathan has publicly announced that he will not be voting for WP, despite once being deeply involved in the party’s inner circle.

In a heartfelt Facebook post before Cooling Off Day, he wrote:

“This isn’t the WP I knew growing up.
It’s not the WP I joined.
And I never thought I’d say this – but it’s not the WP I’ll be voting for on the 3rd of May.”

Who is Yudhishthra Nathan?

For those who don’t follow the news, Yudhishthra is no ordinary voter. He was a long-time WP volunteer, member and cadre, serving in roles across grassroots, youth wing, policy, and media.

He was also heavily involved in Punggol East SMC and later Sengkang GRC.

Most notably, he was the official Proposer of the Sengkang GRC WP team in GE2020 — the person who formally nominated Jamus Lim, He Ting Ru, Louis Chua, and Raeesah Khan to contest the ward.

He joined WP during his National Service days, after moving into Punggol East following WP’s by-election win in 2013. Over time, the party became a big part of his life and identity.

Until things changed.

Why did he leave WP?

Yudhishthra’s decision to leave the party didn’t happen overnight. It was shaped by a series of developments that made him question the WP’s current direction and leadership.

The Raeesah Khan incident and how WP handled it

After the WP team won Sengkang GRC in 2020, Raeesah Khan, one of the MPs, admitted to lying in Parliament.

This led to:

  • A Committee of Privileges (COP) investigation,
  • A police probe, and
  • A court case where WP leader Pritam Singh was found guilty of lying under oath (he is currently appealing the verdict).

Yudhishthra did not comment in detail due to the ongoing legal case, but it’s clear this was the first major turning point that broke his trust in WP’s leadership and internal accountability.

Party now using sensitive issues for political gain

He also criticised WP’s approach in this GE, saying the party seems willing to poke at sensitive issues like race, religion, and even global tragedies, just to win votes.

He warned that some foreign actors have openly called on Singaporeans to vote along racial and religious lines, something that hasn’t happened in decades. In his post, he said:

“Is this the kind of politics we want in Singapore?
One where sensitive matters become tools to gain votes?”

To him, this kind of political tactic goes against WP’s earlier values of being a constructive and responsible opposition.

Economic proposals that don’t hold up

Yudhishthra also questioned WP’s continued opposition to the GST hike, saying the party:

  • Didn’t properly explain why its stance is better than the current system, where rebates and vouchers offset the GST impact for low- and middle-income families,
  • Proposed corporate tax hikes could hurt workers, chase away MNCs, and reduce job opportunities,
  • Claimed public spending needs don’t kick in until 2026, suggesting the GST hike was premature, which he says is not responsible planning.

“Is this rational policymaking, or is it just populism to win votes?” he asked.

New party gag order during GE2025

After Parliament was dissolved, WP’s Central Executive Committee passed a rule empowering the party’s leaders to instruct any member to delete social media posts or comments until after Polling Day.

Yudhishthra revealed this rule in his post, saying:

“Which other political party in the world has a rule like this?”

To him, this was yet another sign that the party had become more top-down and controlled, rather than open and principled.

Neglect on the ground in Compassvale

Despite the Sengkang win in 2020, Yudhishthra said WP neglected Compassvale, leaving volunteers in limbo and residents with unresolved municipal issues like rodent infestations and broken lifts that were left unattended for months.

For someone who worked the ground tirelessly for years, this was personal.

“How can I vote for a party that let residents and volunteers down like this?” he asked.

No longer the same Workers’ Party he knew

For years, Yudhishthra believed in WP’s mission, specifically the one that was under Low Thia Khiang’s leadership.

He wanted to be part of a constructive opposition that would improve Singapore through responsible debate and policy ideas.

But today, he says the party has strayed from that path.

“Many Singaporeans still think they’re voting for checks and balances.
But what if they’re actually voting for a party more focused on self-preservation than public service?”

After nearly a decade of serving the party, his final decision is clear:

“This isn’t the WP I knew.
It’s not the WP I joined.
And it’s not the WP I’ll be voting for on the 3rd of May.”

You may read his post in full text below:

“But, why is she called paati?” I remember asking as a toddler, growing up on the outskirts of Hougang in the late 1990s. You see, there was Indian aunty, an ardent supporter of JBJ, whose nickname was “Workers’ Party” who lived in a block not far from mine. At 3, I mistakenly thought people were calling her “paati”, which means grandmother in Tamil. She was awfully young to be a grandmother, I thought.
By 7, I attended my first WP rally in Hougang SMC. By 12, I had gone to several. Mr Low Thia Khiang’s clarion call to the people of Hougang was deeply inspiring – he called on them to return him to Parliament for they had a special role to play in our democracy, to prevent a PAP monopoly. In those days, there were only 2 elected Opposition MPs. As I grew older, my understanding of Singapore politics was shaped by the politicians who inspired me the most – Mr Low, Ms Sylvia Lim and Ms Indranee Rajah.
By JC, the WP had won its very first GRC – Aljunied. By NS, as fate would have it, I moved into Punggol East SMC (a misnomer as it was really Sengkang East), weeks after WP’s Lee Li Lian won the seat in a by-election. With more time on my hands, I took the step to volunteer with Li Lian. Instead of waxing lyrical about politics online, I could now do my own little part to help the WP. The WP was never a perfect party. But its approach, shaped by Mr Low, was clear. It believed in “rational, responsible, respectable” Opposition politics. A constructive Opposition.
By uni, GE2015 came about. The Punggol East team campaigned hard, just as we worked hard on the ground prior to the polls. But, alas, we lost to the PAP. It was the first time the WP had lost an incumbent MP in an election. Soon after, I immersed myself in different aspects of party work – grassroots, policy, youth wing and, of course, the media team. The WP became a big part of my life, my identity. I became a card-carrying member and then, a cadre member.
By end-2018, those of us who held the fort in Punggol East under Li Lian suspected that a new GRC could be formed in Sengkang. We requested the party leaders to send a team to walk the ground with us. Half a year later, they sent Jamus, Louis and Raeesah. Another half a year went by and before we knew it, we were in the midst of the hustings in a new Sengkang GRC which we unexpectedly won.
Then, Raeesah lied. Members of the public will know what happened next. The COP, a police investigation and, eventually, a court case – where Pritam was found guilty on both charges he faced. The verdict is available online for anyone to read. At present, it would be improper for me to comment further on the case because the matter is being appealed before the Court.
Now, we come to the present election before us.
What is most worrying to me, this GE, is the WP’s approach to sensitive matters. The party’s playbook this GE is plain to see. It seems like the WP is willing to poke at sensitive issues – even arguably co-opting people’s opposition to a genocide – if it means propelling people to vote for it, nevermind the cost. To be clear, you can’t fault voters with genuine concerns from voting one way or another. Politicians who claim to be rational, responsible stewards of our democracy but who resort to poking at sensitive issues should be held to account. Singaporeans of all walks of life should ask – is this the kind of politics we want in Singapore – one where sensitive matters become fodder to play political games at the ballot box?
To make matters worse, other actors, including foreign ones from across the Causeway, have openly asked voters to vote along racial and/or religious lines. It’s probably the first time in decades that this has occurred.
On fiscal policy, the WP continues to oppose the GST increase. However, there are three key problems with its approach. Firstly, the WP has not provided a good counter-argument to the government’s explanation that after transfers (e.g., the permanent GST vouchers) are accounted for, the GST system becomes a progressive one which does not “turbocharge” inflation and where low- and middle-income households get back more than they give. Secondly, the WP’s newly proposed alternative sources of revenue will harm Singaporean workers more than they will help. What the party isn’t telling Singaporeans is that you can only raise corporate taxes (one of its new proposals) by so much before we become less competitive and MNCs either move jobs overseas or engage in cost-cutting measures that will make it harder for workers to become employed, stay employed or enjoy higher wages. Thirdly, WP candidates have indicated publicly that there was no need to raise the GST at the time the government did. One WP MP even recently said that Singapore’s public spending needs for which the GST was raised do not kick in until 2026. Is this a rational, responsible approach to public finances? Or is this populism at play?
Meanwhile, since Parliament was dissolved and the Writ of Election was issued, the WP Secretary-General and Chair have been empowered by the party’s CEC to direct any party member to remove any online post, comment or interaction. This new resolution is in effect until the day after Polling Day. Which other political party in the world has a rule like this?
Five years ago, I was proud to have been in the team of residents who nominated Jamus, Ru, Louis and Raeesah as our Workers’ Party candidates in Sengkang GRC as their Proposer and to have campaigned for them. But how can I vote for a party which neglected Compassvale for so long, leaving volunteers in limbo? How can I vote for a team that let municipal issues – from rodent infestations to lifts left broken for weeks to months – go unresolved for so long?
Many Singaporeans continue to believe that they will be voting for checks and balances if they vote WP. But what if they’re unknowingly voting for a party more interested in its self-preservation than in channelling the people’s voice as Mr Low intended and envisioned?
This isn’t the WP I knew growing up.
It’s not the WP I joined.
And I never thought I’d say this – but it’s not the WP I’ll be voting for on the 3rd of May.

Share this post :

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest

Create a new perspective on life

Your Ads Here (365 x 270 area)