PAP, WP continue to clash over opposition party’s economic proposals

Economic Debate Yields Broad Consensus and Adds to Ongoing Discussion on the Opposition’s Role

The debate between the PAP and WP over the opposition party’s economic proposals has continued online following criticism by former senior minister of state Lee Yi Shyan. Lee said the Workers’ Party seemed to present a fundamentally different approach from the Government in a motion in Parliament on Aug 5.

The WP had tabled a motion on the future of Singapore’s economy and its MPs sought to present the party’s alternative “economic playbook” for the country. Lee, who was Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry from 2012 to 2015, retired from politics before the 2020 General Election.

His post was shared by sitting ministers such as K. Shanmugam, Chee Hong Tat, and Ng Chee Meng. Shanmugam said the WP had put forward its views on the economy and then changed positions while Chee said he agreed fully with Lee’s views.

Lee’s comments drew a response from WP MPs Kenneth Tiong and Jamus Lim, who moved the motion. Tiong, who is an MP for Aljunied GRC, responded in social media posts on Aug 16 and said that Lee had mischaracterised the WP’s arguments and presented a “false binary” of the trade-offs involved.

A central contention between the PAP and the WP during the debate on the motion was the opposition party’s position on the role of multinational corporations (MNCs) in Singapore’s economy. Lee, in his post, said Tiong had called for an economic engine driven by dynamic local companies and healthy domestic demand, while Lim had said Singapore should “wean ourselves” from foreign MNC-led growth and “pivot towards small and medium enterprises (SMEs) as our home-grown economic engine”.

Lee said he was “taken aback” by these arguments, and while Singapore wants dynamic local companies and healthy domestic demand, neither can substitute for foreign investment and global markets. He added that as the debate progressed, the WP’s arguments were put to the test and both Tiong and Lim “eventually backed down”, and the WP accepted the PAP’s amendments to the motion affirming the importance of both global companies and local enterprises, and both external and domestic demand.

The WP on Aug 5 accepted three of four amendments tabled by PAP backbencher Edward Chia, but eventually voted against the amended motion after dissenting to the first amendment which aligned the motion to the Government’s Economic Strategy Review.

Tiong said on Aug 16 that the WP did not suggest choosing between local enterprises and multinationals, and that Lee had mischaracterised the opposition party’s positions. Tiong reiterated WP’s clarification in the House to Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow – who responded to the WP’s speeches then – that the party had not drawn this “false dichotomy”.

“What we suggested was to supercharge local enterprise: automatic support for new registrants, seconded experts, wider R&D tax deductions, grants to match MNC starting salaries, German-style internships. None of it, a zero-sum policy,” said Tiong.

Tiong added that the WP did not say that domestic demand alone can power Singapore’s economy, and pushed back against Lee’s statement that the WP had “backed down”. Lee added in his post that the WP’s agreement that Singapore must continue attracting MNCs means the disagreement is largely over what should be done for SMEs and how existing schemes can be improved.

“Those are perfectly legitimate issues to debate,” said Lee. “But they do not amount to a fundamentally different economic strategy. After all the rhetoric about a ‘pivot’ and a ‘shift’, it was much ado about nothing.” Lee also said the WP was “taking the politically easier position at every turn”.