You really think so? Is this targeted at those who want to "change things for the better"? Looks more like incidental generic warnings. I think the "distraction" argument seems stronger.
Just a summary of the pros and cons of getting rid of Michael Palmer.
Advantages:
1. Send a chill down the spines of your civil servants, especially those who don't toe the party line. Was Michael Palmer a "moderate" PAP member? This will make party senior leadership scared. All of them, including the more liberal ones.
2. Give a positive impression of the PAP that it is cleaning house. Also a disadvantage because now people will know that PAP people also have affairs.
3. Somebody out there made it impossible to keep this a secret. They may have realised that a cover-up operation was impossible because of 1 or 2 unco-operative parties.
4. Defeating WP, if it happens, will make PAP look good. Most likely they will retain Punggol East SMC.
5. I think there will be a by-election. The political cost of not having a by-election will be too high. But they want to do it own time own target. This is either a disadvantage or an advantage, depending on whether the debate over whether PM Lee calls the elections makes the PAP look good or bad. If LHL calls this one quickly, it could make the PAP look good.
6. Because of YSL, losing your seat is the "market rate" penalty for having an affair.
7. Something else was involved in the life of Michael Palmer which made it impossible for him to continue. Saying that it was an affair is a good front / cover up.
Disadvantages:
1. He's your speaker! Why you want to do this to your speaker?
3. PA is involved in the outing.
4. Small but significant Possibility of losing Punggol East SMC. This outcome will be bad for the PAP.
So when you put it all together, the picture is so complex that you can't definitively say any one factor was involved in the outing. In fact the real reason behind LHL deciding to fire Michael Palmer could be as simple as he was in a grouchy mood.