As Singapore approaches the next General Election, I find myself reflecting deeply on my journey as a young working adult and how much of it has been shaped by a system that, for the most part, has worked in my favour. Before I share my thoughts on GE2025, I think it’s only fair to first acknowledge the immense privilege and luck that have coloured so much of my life so far.
This will be the third General Election I can vote in. The first, I missed because I was away on an overseas exchange. The second time, I voted while I was still a PhD student, when, truthfully, not much felt at stake for me personally. This time, however, things feel different.
Until this election, when I moved to Tengah from my parents’ place, I had always been in Jurong GRC. Having Tharman Shanmugaratnam as the anchor minister meant that a vote for the PAP never felt particularly conflicted. After all, how often do you get to cast your vote for someone so widely respected and capable? It always felt less like a partisan decision and more like the apparent choice for competent leadership. This election required more thinking on my part. Not only because I am now in a constituency where there are parties with sound manifestos, but also, I am not thinking only of myself, as I am now a parent of one, and soon, two.
In previous election cycles, cost-of-living issues have also never loomed large in my life. I consider myself a naturally frugal person, and even when GST rose from 7% to 8%, and then to 9%, I barely batted an eye. Even if prices had been inflated by 10%, it likely wouldn’t have changed my financial behaviour much. I now realise that’s not because life is affordable for everyone, but because my fiscal conservatism, and I was only living for myself under my parents’ roof, cushioned me from feeling the full effects.
As a PhD student, I had the rare privilege of “job security”, especially during the COVID years. I received a generous stipend throughout my candidature, for which I am thankful, and because I had technically $0 assessable income, I qualified for the highest tier of many government benefits. It didn’t escape me then, and it certainly doesn’t now, that many needed that help far more than I did. I remember telling my then-girlfriend (now wife) that although I received more per month in stipend than her full-time job, I was somehow seen as more “needy” by the government, qualifying for whole tranches of GST Vouchers each time they were announced.
When my spouse and I applied for our first flat as a newly married couple, we struck gold on our first try through the Sale of Balance Flats exercise in Tengah. We secured a new flat with minimal waiting time. Because I had no assessable income, we were eligible for the maximum grants and an HDB loan without needing to fork out a single cent upfront (except some option fee if I remember correctly). Until today, I have not taken a single cent to finance my mortgage. In my opinion, my flat is so reasonably priced that I still have money in my CPF compounding, even though I am taking the full load of mortgage repayments, as my wife has now stopped working.
Now, as a parent, I’m benefiting from evolving policies again. Although I missed out on the extended paternity leave when my first child was born, with my second, I could potentially enjoy up to 14 weeks of leave, between paternity and shared parental leave, not counting childcare and annual leave. That’s nearly 18 weeks in total, an amount of time off that few around the world can imagine having as new parents.
When I look back at all these milestones—education, housing, parenthood—it’s clear that I’ve been incredibly fortunate. The system, in many ways, has been designed with a specific population in mind, but somehow, I am the beneficiary of many of these policies, and the odds have consistently been tilted in my favour. Pretending this privilege doesn’t inform how I view this election would be dishonest. It absolutely does. But privilege, when recognised, should also come with responsibility, and that is the spirit in which I am approaching my vote this year.
As I prepare to cast my vote in GE2025, two issues weigh heavily on my mind: the accessibility of infant and child care, and the escalating Certificate of Entitlement (COE) prices.
1. Infant and Child Care: Navigating the Challenges
With two young children ont he horizon, childcare is not just a convenience; it’s a necessity. However, living in Tengah, one of Singapore’s newest estates with many younger families has exposed a different problem: not the cost of childcare, but the lack of available spots.
As more young families move into Tengah, the demand for infant care and childcare services has surged. Yet, supply has not caught up fast enough. Many centres are fully subscribed, with long waiting lists. For parents like me, this means uncertainty, not knowing if we will be able to secure a spot near our homes, or if we will have to make inconvenient, long commutes just to drop off and pick up our children each day.
Accessibility of childcare isn’t just about physical proximity either. It’s about being able to reasonably secure a spot when you need it, without having to compete fiercely or make compromises that strain the delicate balance between work, family, and rest.
For these reason, my wife is also currently not working and is a full-time stay-at-home mom. We also happen to live reasonably close to my parents, so they are good supports on days when we are slightly busier, especially with doctors’ appoints for our second unborn child. That said, there will come a time when this phase will past, but the current socioeconomic decisions we make today, like my wife not working, I having to support the entire family on a single income, these have longer term implications even though we are getting by today.
The Ministry of National Development and the Housing Development Board often boast about tha rates of key distribution for BTOs. Honestly, while I acknowledge the effort they have put in to bring us back to pre-COVID projections, the feeling of settling down in an estate has so much more that hinges on it. Again, socioeconomic factors that really cannot be put in plain figures and performance indexes.
2. COE Prices: The Rising Cost of Mobility
The COE system, designed to control vehicle ownership and manage traffic congestion, has seen premiums reach record highs, making car ownership increasingly unattainable for the average Singaporean. My estate is currently served by three bus services. The inconvenience is unimaginable. When I had to send my car in for servicing for a week, I really dreaded going to work because of the commute time. Instead of sending my daughter to my parents’ place, they had to take bus to come over to my house instead.
For families with young children, the flexibility and convenience of a personal vehicle can be invaluable. However, the prohibitive costs associated with COEs make this option increasingly out of reach, pushing families to rely solely on public transportation, which may not always be practical or efficient for their needs. With my family now up-sizing, up-sizing my current car is top of my priority list. Yet, there is no financially responsible way of doing that, because the value of cars depreciate so fast, while the cost of COE continues to increase.
I believe that economic forces should control the price of goods. But the current COE system is so rigged that people who need one car are being outcompeted by those who can easily afford two or more. What’s worse, companies are in the same bidding war with consumers. If there is ever anything that can make me feel what being outcompeted feels like, it is the ability to buy the convenience of a car for my family.
Coward’s Way Out…
This election, I can no longer cowardly vote for the incumbent on the pretext that my vote is just for Tharman. I am in Chua Chu Kang GRC. With Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong moving to Punggol and unpopular Manpower Minister Tan See Leng being parachuted last minute into this constituency, I am left with a choice to make. Vote for the incumbent’s unpopular minister and three backbenchers, or vote for the Progress Singapore Party’s (PSP’s) four unknown figures.
I would like to give Tan See Leng the overwhelming benefit; the civil service drives a lot of the policy proposals. Perhaps he is just the target board for which much of the anger is directed, substantiated or not. However, an overhaul of policies does not always start from the top; it starts from the statutory boards and civil service, which many of my friends are a part of, and many of the top brass would eventually be in the PAP.
These issues—childcare accessibility and COE prices—are not just policy points; they directly impact the daily lives of families like mine. Many others are in greater agony over other, more pressing issues, and when each election comes and goes, they see the incumbents win in a landslide number of seats, but not in the number of votes; it compounds that agony. As I consider my vote in GE2025, I am looking for parties that:
- Propose comprehensive solutions to make childcare more affordable and accessible for all income levels.
- Address the escalating COE prices with policies that balance vehicle ownership needs with sustainable urban planning.
Recognizing my own privileges, I feel the greatest responsibility to vote for my family’s interests. At the same time, I have to acknowledge my own inadequacies. I am neither an economist nor an expert in governance or public policy. I do not always have the tools to fully assess the long-term economic impacts of the various policy proposals, like the deferment of land cost for HDBs on a national scale, or minimum wages on the individual level by PSP.
Because of that, my default instinct is often to be cautious, to not rock the boat unnecessarily. It is not because I believe everything is perfect, nor because I think alternative voices are unimportant. Rather, it is a recognition that change, while sometimes necessary, also carries risks, and if I am not entirely confident in my ability to weigh those risks properly, prudence feels like the responsible choice. Additionally, I am not fully convinced that any party, other than the People’s Action Party (PAP), can form the government. Therefore, regardless of my policy positions and how aligned they are with the PSP, it’s almost impossible for them to be tabled in Parliament for discussion.
One thing is for sure: after this election, Lawrence Wong will be Prime Minister; he might lose one or two ministers, but the PAP, being PAP, will continue like clockwork. I wish, one day, we would have a few more political parties bold enough to form a team to ensure we do not see the PAP back in power before the contest begins. But till that day, what is the point if each opposition party contests in fewer than half the seats? Actually, there is a possibility if we tweak the way members are allotted seats in Parliament.
Until then, real political competition feels more symbolic than substantive. It is hard to talk about a valid “alternative government” when no single opposition team even aspires to contest a full slate of seats, let alone presents a unified platform or shadow Cabinet. I am not asking for perfection; no party will ever have all the answers, but I hope for a day when the contest is not just about checking the ruling party, but about presenting a genuine, cohesive vision for Singapore’s future. Until that happens, the practical reality is that the PAP’s dominance will continue, not simply because of inertia, but because the alternatives have yet to fully step up. Opposition party manifestos continue to be paperwork that will never see practical implementation unless some PAP Minister finds it good.
Still, that does not mean I am voting blindly. It simply means I am approaching this election with a mindset of measured responsibility: listening carefully, asking questions, and trying to make a choice considering my circumstances and what can practically drive the broader future of Singapore.
Joel Lai's Webpage 