Officially authored by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), Singapore’s Master Plan is billed as a technocratic roadmap for the city’s development. In practice, however, it has become a political tool in the hands of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).
Far from being a neutral planning document, the Master Plan has been strategically weaponised to bolster PAP legitimacy. Announcements of new MRT lines, estate upgrades, and flashy infrastructure projects are routinely timed with electoral cycles – and closely tied to PAP-held constituencies. These projects are paraded as proof of PAP competence, reinforcing a narrative that progress only flows through PAP rule.
This tactic became especially prominent after the 2010 General Election. Facing criticism over the overt politicisation of HDB upgrading schemes – which had come to resemble punitive tools against opposition wards – the PAP pivoted. Instead of dangling carrots during the campaign, it began rolling out “Town Council Masterplans” just before elections.
These town-level plans, marketed as local visions, are in fact rebranded fragments of the national URA Master Plan – a document updated every five years, conveniently aligned with the electoral calendar. The PAP presents these plans as unique local achievements, masking their origin and turning bureaucratic urban planning into political messaging.
This sleight of hand raises serious questions. In most democracies, urban planning is a contested space. Political parties offer divergent visions – growth versus equity, conservation versus densification, global ambition versus local need. In Singapore, the Master Plan is singular, state-sanctioned and insulated from public debate. There’s no alternative vision because no space exists for one.
The result? A city built not through democratic negotiation or robust grassroots participation, but shaped from the top down by the ruling elite. Urban planning becomes not a service to citizens but a performance of control.
Singapore’s Master Plan is not just a blueprint – it’s an instrument of power. Until planning is opened up to real and independent public participation and is free from electoral manipulation, it will remain a tool to manufacture consent and suppress alternative futures.
Urban space reflects political space. And in Singapore, both remain tightly managed by the few, at the expense of the many. We need to take back the control of our spaces from the PAP.