SEPTEMBER 13 — So we had an election. As I type, the final results are yet to come in but the outcome is clear. The winner — of course — was never in doubt but what’s key here is the ruling party has managed to increase its share of the vote.

In the 2010 general election, the PAP secured just 60 per cent of the popular vote while this year it looks like the party will reach 70 per cent.

The opposition, on the other hand, has seen both its share of votes and the number of seats it holds decline. This defies the opinions of dozens of pundits and international commentators who predicted the toughest challenge yet for the PAP.

Major news outlets — the Wall Street Journal, the BBC, Al Jazeera, among many others — held that a further deterioration of the government’s vote base was inevitable. Social media seemed to be awash with dissatisfaction over a range of issues; slowing GDP growth, the influx of foreigners, the ailing MRT system.

And yet when the dust settles, the men in white will be back and as strong as ever. 

Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of the People’s Action Party celebrates after winning the general election in Singapore on September 12, 2015. — AFP pic

So what happened?

1. The international media got it quite badly wrong. They seemed to be extrapolating from Malaysia where Umno’s share of the popular vote has steadily declined and placed too much emphasis on an economic slowdown that clearly isn’t hitting Singaporeans hard enough to turn them away from the government.

2. An opposition that doesn’t want to win, isn’t going to win. For too long, Singapore’s opposition has been just that — an opposition. Not a government and not really trying to make a government. They have relied on a protest vote — and sold themselves as a necessity — something that is required to check the incumbent government but not as an actual viable alternative government. And unsurprisingly this pitch is never going to lead them to power.  

3. An opposition that isn’t united isn’t going to get very far. While it is called a multiparty democracy, most countries have two or sometimes three dominant political parties. A two-party system is tried and tested — but here we have a pond with one whale and various tiddlers — from the mullet-sized Workers Party  to the little sprats of the PPP and SDA.

We need one opposition party to contest every seat — with a single leader, a single platform and shared resources.  Not a bunch of cliques with disparate identities holding the vague umbrella opposition. 

4. Blogs and online comments are not accurate predictors of public sentiment. This should have been obvious but given the sheer weight of moaning online, you could be forgiven for imagining Singapore was on the verge of regime change. The reality though is that these opinions tend to be from an aggressively vocal minority who also often express more extreme positions than they actually hold online. So screaming about the excesses of the government is fine when you’re bored at work but not when you’re actually casting your vote. Maybe it is time for more comprehensive opinion polling.

5. The much vaunted idea that there’s a generation gap between older and younger Singaporeans regarding voting sentiment appears to be false. It has long been argued that older Singaporeans who experienced first-hand our leap from Third World to First are likely to be fiercely loyal to the government while the younger generation, born comfortable, are more likely to take a pro-opposition stance. However, in reality, across the generations we see support for the government. Opposition partisans seem to underestimate how deeply apolitical Singapore’s youth are. With no strong affinity to any party or the political process, they are most likely to opt for the status quo.

6. Xenophobia doesn’t sell. The opposition campaigned on a heavily anti-immigration and tacitly anti-foreigner sentiment. 

Given the strong backlash to government plans to increase the population through immigration, this seemed logical. Globally nationalism is a proven vote winner but in this case it seems to have only scared those with a basic knowledge of economics (who know our economy can’t run without foreigners) and alienated naturalised citizens who themselves feel threatened by anti-foreigner sentiment.

7. Change isn’t  going to come via the ballot box. Basically what you see here is what you’re going to get, not just for the next five years but very likely the next 10. From such a strong platform a major reversal in five years is deeply unlikely. 

So where change does happen it will have to be refinements of the existing system. Moves to strengthen the media, ensure fundamental rights and tackle rising income inequality may lead to more genuine change than a few more opposition MPs in parliament.

But for now, all that is academic. The system that we’ve known for 50 years continues unscathed into the future, the men in white are back and it’s they, more than ever, who will determine the future direction of this small nation. We can only hope they choose wisely