Singapore’s government supports further steps to formalize the role of the Leader of the Opposition (LO), but believes it is prudent to allow parliamentary practices surrounding the office to mature before codifying it in law.
Institutionalizing the Office of the Leader of the Opposition
Coordinating Minister for Public Services Chan Chun Sing stated on Feb. 3 that the government is generally in favor of further institutionalizing the office of the LO. However, he noted that as a relatively new institution, the roles, responsibilities, and operating arrangements of the LO are still evolving through parliamentary practice and the conduct of those who hold the position.
“It would therefore be appropriate to allow these conventions to further develop and mature, so that any eventual codification in statute is informed by established and sound practice,” Chan said, who also serves as Defence Minister.
The comments came in response to a parliamentary question from Nominated MP Neo Kok Beng, who inquired about the potential for enshrining the office in Singapore’s Constitution and the criteria for an MP to assume the role.
Recent Changes and Considerations
The discussion follows the removal of Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh from the position of LO by Prime Minister Lawrence Wong on Jan. 15. Wong cited Singh’s criminal convictions and Parliament’s assessment of his unsuitability for the office as reasons for the decision. More information on the removal can be found here.
Chan, responding on behalf of Prime Minister Wong, highlighted that the People’s Action Party (PAP) government first formalized the office of the LO in 2020, with Leader of the House Indranee Rajah outlining the duties and privileges of the position in the 14th and 15th Parliaments.
Regarding the qualifications for an MP to serve as LO, Chan indicated several factors are relevant. Typically, the LO should be the leader of the main opposition party in Parliament, assuming a predominant opposition party exists with a significant number of MPs.
He added that the LO must demonstrate high standards of honesty and integrity and command the trust and respect of Parliament to effectively fulfill the office’s responsibilities. If the leader of the main opposition party does not meet these criteria, another opposition MP could be considered.
Future Outlook
Should the office be institutionalized, some of these requirements may be explicitly defined. However, Chan emphasized that certain conventions of conduct and responsibility are difficult to fully codify but remain essential for maintaining high ethical standards among MPs and political leaders.
Addressing the possibility of no elected opposition MP meeting the criteria for the role, Chan described this as a hypothetical and unlikely scenario, citing Singaporeans’ desire for diverse representation in Parliament and the existing rules ensuring at least 12 non-ruling party MPs in the House.
“I therefore have little doubt that there will always be opposition voices in this House, and among them, members in good standing who are able to meet the requirements of the (LO’s) office and discharge its responsibilities with integrity and responsibility,” Chan concluded.
Discover more from Archyworldys
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
