Skip to content Skip to footer

4 Highlights from Our DPA Survey on Disability and Singapore Elections

The next Singapore General Election (GE) is to be called by November 2025, and with speculation that the GE might be called as early as before the end of 2024, the Disabled People’s Association (DPA) Singapore set out to gather feedback from persons with disabilities on their thoughts and perceptions of the state of disability inclusion in the Singapore election process.

We thus sent out a survey between August – September 2024 to capture perceptions from persons with disabilities pertaining to two topics in particular: the state of inclusion in the voting process, and the state of inclusion in voter outreach. As with our other research initiatives, we were intentional to work with other disability organisations to circulate the survey amongst their respective memberships to attain a diverse representation of disabilities and to ensure the sample is as unbiased as possible.

A total of 171 persons with disabilities took our survey, and we thank everyone who took the time in doing so and sharing their thoughts and experiences with us.

Persons with all types of disabilities were represented in our survey, with physical disability (36%), D/deaf/hard-of-hearing (34%), and neurodivergence (22%) comprising the top three most represented disabilities.

Below is a summary of 4 main highlights from the results of our survey:

1. Accessibility in Voting

Out of the 171 persons with disabilities in our survey, 148 had voted in at least one prior election (whether GE and/or PE). Out of this group, more than half (53%) expressed satisfaction or facing no access issues when casting their vote on Election Day in a previous election. The remaining 47% expressed several areas for improvement – below are some of the main themes from this group:

Clearer communications: several persons with disabilities noted that while additional election officers are helpful, several, especially from the deaf community, noted that more communication in written form such as clearer signage would have made the process even smoother. Persons who are hard-of-hearing and who also have low vision noted the need for such signage to be larger as well. Persons who are vision impaired but who have enough vision to read large print and thus do not rely on a white cane also noted the need for clear signage and for various counters to be clearly labelled as they cannot rely on volunteers merely pointing to a specific counter.

Balloting process: Another common theme was persons with disabilities noting the preference as much as possible to vote independently without assistance. Several suggested that enhancements may be made to the voting process to optimise independent voting. For example, several wheelchair users noted the ballot tables at polling stations are too high and hence required assistance from election officers to vote. Such individuals noted that if the ballot tables were lower, it would potentially help them to vote and submit their ballot into the ballot box independently.

Accessibility pertaining to polling stations: Several persons with disabilities noted the great assistance from volunteers and requested to ensure that all areas of the polling station and potentially even in areas surrounding the polling station could be staffed with volunteers. For example, a few individuals noted ample volunteers at the entrance but few volunteers at the exits. Additionally, a few wheelchair users noted that because their polling station was in an older school, that the accessibility was not the best – i.e. with slopes that were particularly steep and that perhaps more attention could be provided to optimising accessibility in polling stations in older vicinities. A few persons with physical disabilities who do not use wheelchairs noted that it would have been good to have chairs or stools set up in the corridors or queue lines while waiting. Several neurodivergent individuals noted the noise levels of the polling stations were particularly overwhelming – with a few noting that their polling stations were still crowded despite having checked the queue status on their SingPass app beforehand, to which sectioned off voting areas at polling stations for individuals with heightened noise sensitivities may better assist.

2. Accessibility in Information Sources

One of the data points we sought to understand was where persons with disabilities were experiencing access barriers in engaging with sources of information on political parties or candidates – whether in a previous election or for other purposes. Some of the more pertinent findings include:

The top three sources of information where persons with disabilities indicated experiencing accessibility issues were Live televised/streamed broadcasts of round tables/debates (22%), Live stream and/or in-person political rallies (18%), and mainstream news media (15%). When asked to elaborate on access barriers they faced when engaging with such sources, some of the more common access barriers that persons with disabilities highlighted were:

  • the lack (or poor quality) of subtitling, live captioning, and sign language interpreters for televised broadcasts, live streams, campaign videos, roundtables and debates and in-person rallies
  • inaccessibility at in-person rallies and speeches – such as lack of seating, poor wheelchair accessibility, poor sound system, and not having live stream options
  • inaccessibility of online information – such as inaccessible websites
3. Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Voter Outreach by Political Parties

Another data point we sought to understand was the level to which persons with disabilities were satisfied or not with the voter outreach efforts by political parties in Singapore – whether by the ruling party or the various opposition parties.

Our survey results indicate that individuals with disabilities generally believe both the ruling party and various opposition parties can improve to actively engage people with disabilities in addressing disability-related issues in their campaigns. For example, we asked persons with disabilities to agree or disagree with the following statement: “In past elections, candidates and/or political parties have done well to actively discuss their positions on various disability-specific policy issues in a way that leaves me as a voter with disability informed on the similarities and differences of where the various political parties stand on particular disability issues.”

To this, more than half of persons with disabilities in our survey (51%) either strongly disagreed or disagreed with the above statement, 25% of persons with disabilities in our survey neither disagreed nor agreed with the above statement, and the remaining 24% either agreed or strongly agreed with the above statement.

4. Top issues for persons with disabilities

We asked persons with disabilities in our survey what were the most important issues to them as voters with disabilities that they would like political parties and candidates to discuss in the upcoming GE. Below were the top three issues:

20% of persons with disabilities in our survey noted issues pertaining to employment—such as enquiring what various political parties and candidates will do if elected to address employment opportunities, advancement, flexibility, discrimination. For example, respondents enquired what political parties and candidates will do if elected to ensure reasonable accommodations, ensure that persons with disabilities can upskill in their desired profession and interest, and enhance laws to ensure that discrimination in all its forms are taken seriously.

17% of persons with disabilities in our survey noted issues pertaining to financial assistance support, such as enquiring what various political parties and candidates will do if elected to ensure disabled people’s right to equitable insurance coverage, or to ensure the systemic nature and inequalities persons with disabilities face are factored into the planning, design, and implementation of various government support schemes. For example, respondents enquired what political parties and candidates will do if elected to ensure affordability in essential items such as hearing aids, or in overall cost of living for persons with disabilities. Many of such respondents noted that persons with disabilities face many economic inequities and barriers that are disability-specific, and that household means-testing should not be the main criteria in accessing government financial supports, and thus wondered what political parties and candidates, if elected, will do about this.

15% of persons with disabilities in our survey noted issues pertaining to transport and infrastructure accessibility, such as enquiring what various political parties and candidates will do if elected to improve accessibility especially in spaces with older and narrower pathways, or to implement enhancements to Singapore’s infrastructure to ensure that persons with disabilities can be as autonomous and independent as possible in navigating Singapore. For example, respondents enquired what political parties and candidates will do if elected to enhance accessibility of particular streets where they have witnessed others experiencing, or they themselves personally have experienced, difficulty in navigating. Others pointed out inequities for persons with disabilities in Singapore’s infrastructure such as most audible traffic signals completely turned off at night for the blind/vision impaired, and wondered what political parties and candidates, if elected, will do about this.

Summary of DPA Recommendations:

Based on the above key highlights from our survey, below is a summary of some of our recommendations

For the Elections Department (ELD):

  • to look into adding any of the suggestions noted by persons with disabilities in our survey regarding clearer signage, ballot process, and accessibility of the polling station for the upcoming GE
    We believe many of the suggestions by persons with disabilities pertaining to enhancing and optimising the accessibility of the voting process on Election Day can be feasibly implemented, and we have asked the ELD if they can look into implementing such suggestions for the next GE.
  • to ensure SGSL interpretation for key broadcasts during the campaigning period of an election such as during Live televised/streamed broadcasts of round tables/debates
    A livestreamed/televised broadcast of an election roundtable and/or debate is an important national broadcast that occurs once or twice during an election cycle every four to five years, and hence there needs to be SGSL for such an important broadcast.
  • to look into establishing an independent non-partisan accessibility office that can provide technical and funding assistance to political parties that are aiming to optimise the accessibility of their campaign materials and activities
    As smaller political parties in Singapore may have fewer manpower to coordinate and assist with optimising accessibility in voter outreach efforts compared to larger parties, a central independent non-partisan office may be necessary to provide all parties with technical and/or financial assistance in optimising the accessibility of voter outreach efforts.

For political parties:

  • to appoint staff and/or volunteer(s) to oversee disability engagement and oversee optimising accessibility of campaign materials and activities
    IN addition to the ELD establishing a central independent non-partisan accessibility office, we believe that it is also necessary for each party to appoint staff and/or volunteer(s) to oversee accessibility of campaign materials and activities. In general, persons with disabilities face larger systemic issues in attaining accessibility in Singapore – such as the lack of regulations around accessibility especially in spaces and services run by the private sector, the lack of SGSL interpreters, etc. Additionally, Singapore has a very short time span permitted for elections which affects not only how Singaporeans (disabled or not) can learn about different political parties, but also how political parties reach out to Singaporeans especially historically-marginalised demographics during campaigns. Thus, we understand that political parties, especially smaller ones, are not solely culpable for any needed improvement in accessibility during the campaigning period of an election. However, having noted this, all parties including smaller ones can and need to do their part – and this can begin with each party appointing staff/volunteer(s) to oversee optimising accessibility in their voter outreach efforts.
  • To clearly articulate and discuss their positions on key disability issues – such as through taking our DPA questionnaire for political parties
    All political parties should have plans and proposals as to what they will do if elected to address or advocate on the issues and inequities persons with disabilities face. We invite all political parties to take our DPA questionnaire for political parties – which we put together outlining questions pertaining to the three top issues persons with disabilities would like political parties to discuss in the next GE according to persons with disabilities in our survey – employment, financial assistance, and transport/infrastructure. The questions in this questionnaire are based on the questions persons with disabilities noted in their responses in our survey.

While the sample size is fairly small in the context of the total population of persons with disabilities in Singapore, we believe the suggestions and feedback from persons with disabilities gathered through this survey still puts forth important points that we hope will be taken into consideration by the Elections Department (ELD) and political parties in Singapore.

We are currently working on a full report of the findings and recommendations from the survey. However, as it is uncertain when the GE will be called, as alluded, we have already conveyed the above highlights and recommendations to the ELD and various political parties.

As always, DPA welcomes further conversations and collaborations with new and existing partners on working together to address the above feedback from persons with disabilities.

SHARE:

Latest Posts