Pritam Singh deemed unfit to be Leader of the Opposition by Parliament, all WP MPs dissent

House passes motion to deem Pritam Singh unfit to be Leader of the Opposition

Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh has been deemed unfit to be Leader of the Opposition (LO)  by Parliament after a three-hour debate on Wednesday (14 Jan).

The motion was passed after a majority of MPs approved of it, except for the WP MPs in the House, who stood up to record their dissent.

Indranee Rajah says Pritam Singh told ‘too many lies’

The motion was tabled by Leader of the House Indranee Rajah, who noted on Wednesday that Mr Singh had been convicted on two counts of lying to the Committee of Privileges (COP).

This conviction was upheld by the High Court on 4 Dec, with Mr Singh fined S$14,000.

Ms Indranee accused Mr Singh of telling “too many lies”, including:

• guiding former Sengkang MP Raeesah Khan twice to maintain her lie to Parliament
• lying twice before the COP
• lying before the court
• lying to the public
• concealing material information from his own party

This case thus shows a “failure of leadership” on his part, she added.

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

Up to PM Wong to decide whether Pritam Singh remains as LO

Ms Indranee brought the motion to Parliament as an MP lying “strikes at the trust Singaporeans place in us” and undermines Singapore’s “high standards of integrity and incorruptibility”.

Thus, Parliament must decide whether such conduct is acceptable for an MP and the LO, she said.

However, MPs were not being asked to impose further penalties on Mr Singh, but to express their views on his suitability to continue as LO.

She noted that it is up to Prime Minister Lawrence Wong to decide whether he remains in the role.

Mr Singh was designated LO after the 2020 General Election (GE2020) by then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

After GE2025, he was redesignated to the role by PM Wong.

Pritam Singh says his conscience remains clear

Responding to Ms Indranee, Mr Singh said while he accepted the court’s verdict, he did not agree with its findings.

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

In fact, he stated that his conscience remains clear with regard to the conviction, and that “a criminal conviction does not negate one’s right to assert innocence”.

He referred to President Tharman Shanmugaratnam’s criminal conviction in 1994 for negligence, with Mr Tharman saying in 2023 that “they got the wrong man”.

He did, however, take full responsibility for not responding quickly enough to correct Ms Khan’s lie in Parliament.

During the debate, Mr Singh attempted to submit a police statement made by ex-WP cadre Loh Pei Ying under oath, saying it was inadmissible in court.

However, its use in the parliamentary motion was rejected by Speaker of Parliament Seah Kian Peng.

WP MPs ask whether motion was politically motivated

During the ensuing debate, some WP MPs disagreed with the motion, including WP chair Sylvia Lim.

She asked whether the move was a “political exercise” and questioned whether it was necessary for Parliament to initiate Mr Singh’s removal as LO, describing it as a “further punishment” beyond that meted out by the courts.

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

Fellow Aljunied GRC MP Gerald Giam also suggested that the motion seemed to be “imposing a further political penalty” on top of Mr Singh’s fines.

But Ms Indranee rejected this, saying the motion was not a “political punishment”.

Rather, she compared the situation with that of a company CEO who has been charged and convicted of dishonesty.

Not many companies would let him continue as CEO, she said, adding:

Because those companies value their reputation. They know that every time they go and do business, people look at them and wonder, ‘You’re a company and your CEO has been convicted for lying or dishonesty. What sort of company are you?

WP MP compares case with that of Tan Chuan-Jin

Another Aljunied MP, Mr Kenneth Tiong, compared the case with that of former Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin, who resigned after an affair with a fellow MP.

Mr Tiong pointed out that Mr Tan had been Speaker for nearly three years while having an affair with another MP, but “Parliament was never asked to judge” him.

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

But Ms Indranee said the two examples were not equivalent as Mr Singh took responsibility and apologised to Singaporeans, while Mr Singh had not.

Nee Soon MP says LO trusted to act with integrity

Four MPs from the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) spoke or sought clarifications on the motion, as well as three Nominated MPs, who were sworn in last week.

Nee Soon GRC MP Syed Harun Alhabsyi, who is Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education and National Development, said the office of LO comes with “great responsibility”, which arises out of the position of trust that he will act with integrity.

Mr Singh “fell short” and the House should therefore record its “regret and dismay” at such “unacceptable and unbecoming” actions, he added.

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

But Ms Lim subsequently pointed out that Dr Syed had resigned as an NMP less than three months before GE2025.

Thus, she asked him “how he sees his own position” given that background, adding:

Does he see any issue with that, in terms of integrity and institutions?

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

Given the choice to reply, Dr Syed Harun reiterated the Speaker’s assertion that it had no relevance to the motion being discussed.

Noting that the circumstances are on public record, he said he was “very clearly” non-partisan when he was an NMP, adding:

I disagree unequivocally with regards to any questions of my integrity about what has happened in the past… At this point in time I am quite clear in terms of my thoughts about intergrity.

3 NMPs back the motion

NMP Kuah Boon Theng, a senior counsel, called on Mr Singh to voluntarily step down as LO as this would be the “clearest sign” that he has “learnt the error of his ways”.

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

Mr Mark Lee, a businessman in his second term as NMP, said that no MP is above the law, with honesty before Parliament “non-negotiable”.

If an NMP were to lie to Parliament and be convicted in a court of law, they should step down from a position of responsibility “as a matter of integrity”, thus lower expectations should not apply for the LO, he noted.

NMP Neo Kok Beng, an engineer, said it was “just not really tenable” for the LO to carry on in this role.

In Mr Singh’s case, he relied on the court findings as these are factual and not disputable, he added.

All MPs agree with motion except WP MPs

At the close of the debate, all PAP MPs and NMPs who were present agreed with the motion to express regret at Mr Singh’s conduct and deem him unfit as LO.

Mr Singh lifted the party whip for the WP MPs, but all of them who were present stood to express their dissent.

That included the 10 elected WP MPs and Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) Andre Low. NCMP Eileen Chong was not present.

Source: MDDI Singapore on YouTube

Pritam Singh says he will continue working in Aljunied

With the motion passed, the decision on whether Mr Singh will continue being LO lies with PM Wong.

In his speech earlier, Mr Singh said he had never hankered for the LO role, pointing out that it was not written into Singapore’s Constitution nor laws.

Thus, whatever the decision is, he will continue his work on the ground in Aljunied GRC as long as he is an MP, he added.

Also read: The Workers’ Party convenes disciplinary panel following Pritam Singh’s conviction

The Workers’ Party convenes disciplinary panel following Pritam Singh’s conviction