Election fever is in full swing, and you've probably been bombarded with rallies, social media posts, and those awkward candidate visits to the hawker center. But beyond all the handshakes and fancy slogans, what are these parties actually promising to do if they get your vote?
We dug through the manifestos of all the major parties – PAP, WP, PSP, SDP, RDU, SPP, and NSP – so you don't have to.
This isn't about telling you who to vote for. It's about giving you the facts so you can decide what matters most to your wallet and your future. Forget the political theatrics – let's get to what each party is actually putting on the table.
We cover:
If there's one thing every Singaporean feels, it's the pinch in their wallet. With inflation and the GST hike to 9%, parties are scrambling to show they understand your pain. Here's what each is proposing:
| Party | GST Policy | Cost Relief Approach |
|---|---|---|
| PAP | Maintain at 9% | Targeted subsidies and vouchers |
| WP | Exempt essentials | Alternative revenue sources, tiered utility pricing |
| PSP | Reduce to 7%, exempt basics | Control hawker rents, centralize management |
| SDP | Eliminate for essentials, reduce overall | Rent reductions, structural changes |
| RDU | Not explicitly stated | Citizens Dividend (cash transfer) |
| SPP | Freeze increases | Distribute budget surpluses as vouchers |
| NSP | Remove for essentials | Township Fair Price Committees |
The Coconut Take:
Almost every opposition party wants to do something about GST, while the PAP is sticking to its guns. But here's the thing – GST is a reliable revenue generator. Any party that wants to cut it needs to explain where that money will come from instead. WP and PSP at least try to address this with alternative revenue proposals. Universal cash transfers (like RDU's Citizens Dividend) sound nice, but the devil's in the details – especially the funding mechanism.
Whether you're waiting years for a BTO, worried about your aging flat's value, or a single hoping to move out before 35, housing policies affect nearly every Singaporean. The parties have vastly different approaches:
| Party | Flagship Housing Policy | Singles Policy | Lease Decay Solution |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAP | Prime/Plus models with subsidy clawback | Maintain age 35 limit | VERS (details pending) |
| WP | 70-year BTOs with top-up option | Lower to age 28 | Universal buy-back scheme |
| PSP | Affordable Homes Scheme (no land cost) | Lower to age 28 | Pressing for VERS details |
| SDP | Non-Open Market scheme ($90k-$270k flats) | Not explicitly stated | NOM structure prevents decay issues |
| RDU | Universal SERS eligibility | Expanded rental options | Universal SERS eligibility |
| SPP | Expanded SERS | Lower to age 30 | Expanded SERS |
| NSP | HomeFirst model (cost-based pricing) | Not explicitly stated | Progressive tax on multiple properties |
The Coconut Take:
Now we're getting to the heart of Singapore's fundamental tension – HDB as affordable housing vs. HDB as an investment asset. PSP, SDP, and WP are all pushing versions of removing or reducing land cost from public housing, which would make flats much more affordable but potentially impact long-term appreciation. Whether you like these ideas probably depends on whether you already own property (and how much of your retirement is tied to it) or are still trying to get on the property ladder. The singles eligibility age reduction is gaining widespread support among opposition parties – this could be a vote-winner with the growing single population.
The jobs landscape is changing rapidly with AI, global competition, and an aging workforce. How do the parties plan to protect Singaporean jobs while ensuring fair wages?
| Party | Minimum Wage Proposal | Foreign Worker Policy | Worker Protection |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAP | Progressive Wage Model | Current framework with incremental tightening | Existing protections |
| WP | $1,600 universal | EP renewals tied to skills transfer | Redundancy insurance, mandatory retrenchment benefits |
| PSP | $2,250 ($1,800 after CPF) | EP quotas, $1,200 monthly EP levy, $10,000 minimum | 40-hour work week, retrenched exemption from non-compete |
| SDP | National minimum wage (unspecified) | Talent track with rigorous verification | Retrenchment insurance through CPF |
| RDU | Fair wages (unspecified) | Citizens-first hiring policy | Citizens Dividend as safety net |
| SPP | Living wage policy (e.g., $1,500) | Tax breaks for hiring locals, higher quotas | TAFEP guidelines codified into law |
| NSP | Not explicitly stated | Skills verification, NS for new citizens | Not explicitly stated |
The Coconut Take:
Foreign worker policy is where we see the biggest divide. The opposition parties are uniformly pushing for stricter controls on EPs and better protection for local workers, while PAP maintains that overly strict policies would harm Singapore's competitiveness and economic growth. PSP's proposed EP salary of $10,000 would be a massive shift from the current ~$5,600 threshold. The minimum wage debate continues, with most opposition parties supporting it while PAP sticks with the Progressive Wage Model. If you're concerned about foreign competition for PMET jobs, you'll find more aggressive policy proposals from the opposition.
With an aging population and rising healthcare costs, Singapore's healthcare financing model is under pressure. How do the parties propose to keep healthcare affordable while maintaining quality?
| Party | Healthcare System Approach | Cost Control Measures | Special Focus Areas |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAP | Current 3Ms framework | Healthier SG (preventive care) | Not explicitly highlighted |
| WP | Enhanced 3Ms system | Remove MediSave caps for over-60s | Disability support, cancer treatment access |
| PSP | Government-paid insurance premiums | Centralised drug procurement | Maternal support ($3,000 gift) |
| SDP | Single-payer universal system | Unified public healthcare sector | Free maternal and pediatric care |
| RDU | Redesigned MediSave | Not explicitly detailed | Not explicitly highlighted |
| SPP | Enhanced current system | Increased MediSave withdrawal limits | Mental health, telehealth, elder care |
| NSP | Current system with cost caps | $10 GP visit cap | Affordable primary care |
The Coconut Take:
There's a clear split between parties proposing tweaks to the existing system (WP, PSP, SPP, NSP) versus those wanting wholesale reform (SDP). PSP's suggestion that the government pay everyone's MediShield Life premiums would be expensive but game-changing for many families. The $10 GP visit cap from NSP would be popular but needs a clear funding mechanism. The most financially significant proposal is SDP's single-payer system, which would fundamentally change healthcare financing in Singapore. As with many proposals, the key question is always: who ultimately pays for it?
Can Singaporeans retire comfortably? How robust should our social safety nets be? These questions are becoming increasingly important with our aging population and changing economy.
| Party | CPF Policy | Retirement Age | Social Support |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAP | Current framework | Current structure | Targeted assistance |
| WP | Co-investing with GIC, special dividend | Abolish statutory retirement age | Not specifically highlighted |
| PSP | CPF Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme | Not specifically stated | Double Silver Support, caregiver allowance |
| SDP | Abolish minimum sum scheme | Not specifically stated | Expanded Silver Support to 80% of low-income elderly |
| RDU | Not specifically stated | Not specifically stated | Citizens Dividend (universal) |
| SPP | Not specifically stated | Abolish statutory retirement age | Parent-care leave, elder-friendly housing |
| NSP | Not specifically stated | Not specifically stated | Not specifically highlighted for seniors |
The Coconut Take:
Singapore's been traditionally cautious about welfare, fearing the "slippery slope" of welfare dependency. But we're seeing several parties push for more robust safety nets. The CPF remains controversial – WP wants to enhance its returns through GIC co-investment, while SDP wants to abolish the minimum sum entirely. Both WP and SPP want to scrap the retirement age, which makes sense given our aging population and labor shortage. The most comprehensive retirement security plan comes from PSP, with its combination of doubled Silver Support and caregiver allowances. RDU's Citizens Dividend is the closest thing to a Universal Basic Income being proposed, but the details are still fuzzy.
Singapore's education system is world-renowned, but is it still producing the right skills for the future? And is it putting too much pressure on our kids? The parties have different visions:
| Party | PSLE Policy | Class Size | Special Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAP | Maintain with ongoing refinements | Current sizes | Skills-based education |
| WP | Optional 10-year through-train | Cap at 23 students | Later school start times, SPED fee equality |
| PSP | Optional with through-train option | Reduce (unspecified target) | Preserve small schools, non-academic university paths |
| SDP | Abolish completely | Cap at 20 students | Dedicated teacher system, nationalized preschools |
| RDU | Not specified | Not specified | Not detailed in available information |
| SPP | Less exam pressure (unspecified) | Reduce (unspecified target) | AI mastery, mental health resources |
| NSP | Not specified | Not specified | Nationalized preschools, financial aid |
The Coconut Take:
The opposition parties are coalescing around similar education reforms: smaller class sizes, less emphasis on PSLE (with some wanting to scrap it entirely), and more diverse pathways to success. There's also growing consensus on the need for nationalized or heavily subsidized preschool education. Parents frustrated with academic pressure might find these proposals appealing. SDP's dedicated teacher system is an interesting idea that would provide more continuity for students, though implementation would be challenging. The PAP has been gradually reforming education but seems to favor incremental changes to the existing system rather than the more dramatic overhauls proposed by opposition parties.
With recent MRT fare hikes and record COE prices, transportation costs are hitting Singaporeans hard. Here's what the parties propose:
| Party | Public Transport Structure | Fare Policy | Vehicle Policy |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAP | Current model | Current framework with periodic adjustments | Current COE system |
| WP | National Transport Corporation (non-profit) | Free off-peak for seniors and disabled | Reformed COE system with multiple categories |
| PSP | Not specifically stated | Not specifically stated | Not specifically stated |
| SDP | Not specifically stated | Not specifically stated | EV adoption focus, higher fossil fuel taxes |
| RDU | Not specifically stated | Not specifically stated | Not specifically stated |
| SPP | Current with improved maintenance | Higher subsidies for low-income and seniors | Accelerated bus electrification (2033) |
| NSP | Current model | Expanded discounts, free for certain groups | Not specifically stated |
The Coconut Take:
Transport is getting less attention than other policy areas, but there are still some significant differences. WP's National Transport Corporation would be a major structural change, essentially nationalizing public transport operations and removing the profit motive. The free transport proposals for seniors and other groups from WP and NSP would be popular but costly. SPP's focus on reliability reflects the frustration many commuters feel with disruptions. Surprisingly, despite record COE prices, only WP has detailed specific COE system reforms. If transport costs are your key concern, look closely at the subsidies and fare structures being proposed.
Beyond bread-and-butter issues, the parties also differ on how Singapore should be governed. Here are their proposals for political and electoral reform:
| Party | Electoral System | Transparency | Special Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAP | Current system | Current framework | Team renewal |
| WP | All SMCs, lower voting age to 18 | Freedom of Information Act, Ombudsman | Parliamentary Select Committees |
| PSP | Reform EBRC, abolish GRCs | Freedom of Information Act, MP asset declaration | Reform ministerial pay, GIC/Temasek accountability |
| SDP | Not specifically detailed | Freedom of Information Act | POFMA/POHA reform, remove NRIC race ID |
| RDU | Not specifically detailed | Freedom of Information Act | Not specifically highlighted |
| SPP | Proportional representation, fixed elections | Freedom of Information law | Independent elections commission |
| NSP | Fixed election dates | Freedom of Information Act | Youth representation in advisory councils |
The Coconut Take:
There's remarkable consistency among the opposition parties on governance reforms – all support some version of a Freedom of Information Act, most want electoral reforms, and many want to reform POFMA. These issues typically animate a segment of voters concerned with democratic freedoms, though they often take a backseat to bread-and-butter concerns. The PAP's position is essentially that the current system works well and doesn't need major structural reforms. Your view likely depends on whether you think Singapore needs more political contestation or whether you prioritize stability and continuity over democratic reform.
After reviewing all these manifestos, here's what becomes clear:
And here's what stands out:
As you decide who gets your vote on May 3, consider:
No manifesto is perfect, and all contain trade-offs. The party with the most appealing housing policy might not have the best approach to healthcare or education. You'll need to decide which issues matter most to you.
Whatever your choice, make it an informed one. And no matter which party wins your vote, holding them accountable after the election is just as important as the vote itself. That's how we build a better Singapore together.
In many cases, these manifestos read more like wish lists than detailed implementation plans. It's easy to promise cheaper housing, better healthcare, and higher wages – it's much harder to actually deliver them when faced with real-world constraints and trade-offs. As you evaluate these manifestos, consider not just what sounds good, but what's realistically achievable without compromising Singapore's long-term stability and success.
Don't forget to bring your NRIC and poll card. Polling stations are open from 8am to 8pm.
Find your polling station: Electoral Department Website
Let us know what you think about this topic, and what do you want to hear next.
Read more on these party policies breakdown on:
You can now be our community contributor and make a pitch to have your favourite personality be on our show.
Join our community group and drop us your insights on this topic.