Tag: GRC

Walid J. Abdullah: Multi-Cornered Fight Is Good, Vote-Splitting Will be Rare

Some people have expressed their fears of multi-cornered fights in the upcoming GE (they are mostly either opposition supporters or people who want the PAP to be in government but wish to see more opposition voices in Parliament). I do not share their fears and have more faith in Singaporeans in this regard: not because i believe that all Singaporeans are politically astute in all aspects, but because there have been evidence to suggest that Singaporeans have learnt the potential effects of multi-cornered fights.

In the 2011 Presidential Election, Singaporeans were divided between three candidates: eventually, Dr Tony Tan won the election with the tiniest of margins. A substantial amount of people who voted for Tan Jee Say (25%) must have regretted their choice, as had they casted their votes for Dr Tan Cheng Bock (who would be the natural next option: one cannot imagine a person who voted for TJS preferring Tony Tan over TCB), TCB would have been the president.

Fast forward to 2013: Punggol East by-election. There were two things that did not receive sufficient attention in the aftermath of the sensational electoral outcome: 1) the disastrous performances of Desmond Lim and Kenneth Jeyaretnam (Desmond’s one is particularly important), and 2) SDP was completely ignored by WP when the former attempted to devise creative plans to mount a ‘unified’opposition to PAP.

In the 2011 GE, Desmond contested the Punggol East constituency against PAP and WP candidates. He received 4.45% of the votes. In 2013, he attained just 0.57% of the vote share. While both results were atrocious, the second one was particularly so. I argue that Singaporeans had learnt from the Presidential Elections that every vote truly mattered in a multi-cornered contest, and hence were less likely to waste their votes on candidates who had no serious chance of winning (in the first place, a significant portion of the 4.45% he received in 2011 could have been purely out of sympathy, and when the going gets tough, there really is less room for sympathy or other considerations). The fact that SDP withdrew very early on, suggests that its leaders probably believed this from the start too.

In Political Science literature, the above phenomenon is known as the ‘psychological effect’ in voting, and was made popular by Duverger. I believe we have seen the psychological effect occurring in Singapore, and that we will see more of it if there are more multi-cornered fights.

Hence, I contend that the following will be likely to happen:

In the constituencies that WP is contesting, the other opposition parties who decide to contest will not get their deposits back. In fact, I do not expect them to get more than 3% of the votes. This is regardless of which are the other parties.

In the constituencies that WP is not contesting but there are multi-cornered contests, it depends on which parties are contesting. If SDP and NSP contest, then maybe the votes would be significantly split: this is because both are parties of similar stature, and opposition supporters may be divided as to which would be the party that would get more votes.

In the constituencies that WP is not contesting, and only either SDP or NSP is contesting with the other smaller parties, one can expect the other parties to not get their deposits back.

So perhaps the opposition parties should take heed from lessons of the 2011 Presidential Elections and 2013 Punggol-East By-Election: be prepared to lose your money in the multi-cornered fights, because vote-splitting between the opposition parties will be rare.

In any case, Singaporeans should not be overly-worried about having more parties in electoral contests: such a situation is ultimately good in enhancing democracy.

Source: Walid J. Abdullah

July 29, 2015
No Outright Opposition Claims For Four Out Of 29 Constituencies

Ahead of a meeting scheduled for Friday (Jul 30) in which Opposition hopefuls will seek to avoid three-corner fights, the Opposition parties have already declared they will contest 25 of the 29 constituencies laid out for the coming General Election.

Only four – Holland-Bukit Timah, Jurong and Sembawang GRCs as well as Bukit Panjang SMC – have not been laid claim to. Of the four, three were contested in the 2011 GE by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), while one saw the National Solidarity Party (NSP) take on the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).

Dr Chee Soon Juan’s SDP last contested in Holland Bukit-Timah, Sembawang and Bukit Panjang in 2011. But so far, since the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee report was released on Friday (Jul 24), the SDP has only said that they are “considering contesting in the same areas as it did in the last election”.

In 2011, an SDP team which included future presidential candidate Tan Jee Say and civil activist Vincent Wijeysingha ran against Dr Vivian Balakrishnan’s PAP team in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC. The Opposition team garnered 39.92 per cent of the vote.

In Sembawang GRC, an SDP team led by academic James Gomez secured 36.1 per cent of the vote against Minister for National Development Khaw Boon Wan and his PAP team.

Film-maker Alec Tok was the SDP representative against the PAP’s Teo Ho Pin at Bukit Panjang SMC four years ago. He took a third (33.73 per cent) of the vote.

Similarly, the NSP have not yet laid claim to contesting Jurong’s five-member GRC, where it won 33.04 per cent of the vote in 2011 against a PAP team anchored by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

On Tuesday, NSP Acting Secretary-General Hazel Poa told Channel NewsAsia that the party can only confirm that it is looking at areas it contested in 2011, but added that a clearer picture would emerge after a meeting this Friday the party has called between Opposition parties.

The Workers’ Party, the party which has the largest share of seats in Parliament after the ruling PAP, on Sunday declared its intention to field candidates in 10 constituencies – 5 GRCs, 5 SMCs – in the coming GE. This will see the WP contest a total of 28 out of the 89 available seats.

“I think we still want to try and avoid any three-corner fights if possible,” said WP chairman Sylvia Lim, confirming that her party will attend the Friday meeting.

Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

July 28, 2015
Opposition Cries Foul, Calls For More Lead Time Before Polls

Despite the prospects of a major redrawing of electoral boundaries and the short reaction time should the General Election (GE) be called as early as September, opposition parties said yesterday (July 13) they were confident their preparations would not be derailed.

Nevertheless, some of them cried foul that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had kept the formation of the electoral boundaries review committee under wraps for the last two months, and called on him to ensure that there is sufficient time lag between the release of the committee’s report and the dissolution of Parliament.

On its website, the Singapore Democratic Party called on Mr Lee to “ensure that at least two months are given from the time of the announcement of the new boundaries to the dissolution of Parliament”.

“It is shocking that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong chose not to announce the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee when he appointed it two months ago,” it said.

Mr Goh Meng Seng, founder of newly registered People’s Power Party, added: “It’s not fair to us … After the report is out, at least give about two to three months, then we can have a good showing.”

The Republic’s first two Prime Ministers, Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Goh Chok Tong, had opted not to announce the formation of the committee. Apart from the latest instance, PM Lee, who took office in 2004, had also made public the setting up of the committee in the last two GEs in 2006 and 2011.

Responding to TODAY’s queries after yesterday’s Parliament session, Workers’ Party (WP) Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Yee Jenn Jong said his party believes the process of setting up the committee should be “automatic and transparent”.

“It will make (for) a fairer democratic system if the review of electoral boundaries is based on a known timeline, independent of when elections will be held,” he said.

WP also reiterated its call for a period of at least six to 12 months between any changes to the electoral boundaries and Nomination Day.

National Solidarity Party president Sebastian Teo said that should the GE be held in September, as some analysts had predicted, opposition parties would be at a disadvantage.

“We will have a shorter time to plan which areas to focus on and to study the formations of the Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs),” said Mr Teo, adding that his party had begun outreach efforts since the end of last year.

Singaporeans First chairman Ang Yong Guan noted that any drastic changes to the electoral boundaries could also hurt the People’s Action Party.

“All the goodwill and effort made by the existing MP will also be lost,” he said, adding that “we are always mindful that the GRCs may change, it’s never cast in stone”.

Similarly, Democratic Progressive Party secretary-general Benjamin Pwee said his party would take the changes in its stride, and redeploy its candidates accordingly.

“As long as the number of GRCs do not change significantly, we are not likely to see drastic changes to the boundaries,” he said.

Singapore Democratic Alliance chairman Desmond Lim said his party members would continue working the ground at Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC. If the constituency’s size is reduced, the party would adjust accordingly, he said.

Reform Party chairman Andy Zhu noted that any redrawing of the boundaries would not severely jeopardise his party’s plan.

On the outcome of the committee’s report, the party is adopting a wait-and-see attitude, he said.

The opposition parties reiterated their call to abolish the GRC system, which has been in place since the 1988 GE. Mr Pwee said: “What we would like to see, is fewer GRCs, and more SMCs, where electoral candidates get voted into Parliament on the basis of their own individual credibility.”

Dr Ang said the GRC system allows weaker candidates to ride on the coattails of stronger team members.

A one-to-one contest is more ideal, as voters can better assess the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate, he said.

Source: www.todayonline.com

July 14, 2015
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: Why A By-Election Should Be Called In Tanjong Pagar
The death of Lee Kuan Yew leaves his seat in Tanjong Pagar GRC vacant. Recently a Bloomberg journalist asked me to comment on the suggestion that Lee’s seat in Tanjong Pagar be left vacant as a mark of respect. Her resultant article can be read here. Some commentators have suggested that the Opposition should boycott any by-election, giving the PAP a walkover similar to the ones it has enjoyed ever since Lee Kuan Yew’s constituency was included as part of Tanjong Pagar GRC. In addition a lot of people have been asking me whether I think a by-election will or even must be called.

The fact that any one could even suggest that denying the democratic rights of the citizens of one ward to choose their representative is a way to show respect for the founder of our one-party authoritarian system goes a long way to explaining how far from being a democracy that system is and how far we have to go to become a developed nation in terms of our political and legal structures.

LKY’s seat had of course been effectively vacant for some time. For many years other MPs in the GRC had performed his constituency duties. Ill-health and advanced years also meant that his appearances in Parliament after his unopposed re-election in 2011 were mostly perfunctory. In a democracy an MP who was incapacitated by advanced years or ill-health would have resigned to allow a new and fitter incumbent to perform the duties that he was no longer able to.

In addition because of LKY’s deliberate creation and reinforcement of a climate of fear, and the very real measures he took to crush anyone who stood up to him, the voters of his GRC have been denied the right to choose their representatives for several decades. Even in 2011, when every other seat was contested and our aim was to see Singapore’s first non-walkover GE , a team of independents ran out of time in filing their nomination papers and were disqualified. The fact that the people of that ward have gone without choosing their representatives for so long means that there is a more urgent need to hold a by-election in his constituency now. But can the PM leave the seat vacant indefinitely in defiance of every democratic norm but as has been normal PAP practice until recently?

The short answer and the absolute legal fact is that it would be unconstitutional not to hold a by-election unless the Prime Minister decides to call a general election within the next three months or so.

The argument ( thanks to Article 14) runs like this.

Article 49 of the Constitution states:

49.

—(1) Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a non-constituency Member, has become vacant for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections for the time being in force.

It was established by the Court of Appeal decision in Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v AG (2013) that the calling of a by-election is mandatory and not discretionary and that it has to be held within a reasonable space of time, normally three months.

The Parliamentary Elections Act (PEA) seems to contradict this requirement when it states in Article 24-2(A) that:

(2A) In respect of any group representation constituency, no writ [for a by-election] shall be issued under subsection (1) for an election to fill any vacancy unless all the Members for that constituency have vacated their seats in Parliament.

However this places Article 24-(2A) of the PEA at odds with the Constitution. Where this is the case the Constitution clearly overrides any laws enacted by Parliament, as stated in Article 4 of the Constitution:
1. This Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic of Singapore and any law enacted by the Legislature after the commencement of this Constitution which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.
Article 24-(2A) of the PEA is clearly inconsistent with Article 49 of the Constitution. Therefore under Article 4 of the Constitution it is void. Therefore the Prime Minister must call a by-election for Tanjong Pagar GRC, or at least for the constituency vacated by his father’s death, within the next three months.

If the PM refuses to do so, I (and I know my Party members would join me) would support an application to the Court to declare that the PEA is inconsistent with the Constitution and that a by-election must be called. It should be easy for Lee Hsien Loong’s poodle, the Elections Department, to carve out Tanjong Pagar SMC from the GRC if the PM does not want to call a by-election for the whole GRC. However as it was uncontested in 2011 it would be right now to hold an election for the whole GRC.

In the event that the PM observes the Constitution and calls a by-election, it would be good for the Opposition parties to come together and agree to field a joint “A” team against the PAP under an umbrella with all our strongest candidates combined. This would be an important step in the process of transforming the Opposition in the eyes of the electorate into a credible force that is ready to form an alternative Government.

Source: http://sonofadud.com
April 24, 2015
SDP Considering Contesting A GRC In Upcoming General Elections

At the next General Election, which is due by January 2017, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) plans to contest the same four constituencies that it contested at the last GE in 2011.

But the opposition party, which does not have any seats in the current Parliament, has not ruled out contesting one more Group Representation Constituency (GRC) – possibly Tanjong Pagar. In 2011, the SDP contested two single seats – Yuhua and Bukit Panjang – as well as two GRCs – Sembawang and Holland-Bukit Timah GRC. It did not win any of the seats.

The party’s Secretary-General Chee Soon Juan revealed the SDP’s plans as the party launched its election campaign on Saturday (Jan 10). When asked if he would contest the next election, Dr Chee said it has been a long time since he stood for election and it would be an “interesting contest this time around”. However, he added that it was “premature” to say where he would contest.

Launching its party slogan, “Your Voice in Parliament”, the SDP said it will introduce its potential candidates at a pre-election rally in Hong Lim Park in October. The party also plans to release an economic policy paper in February and its manifesto in May. It also plans to unveil a town council management manifesto in June, which will spell out how the party plans to manage estates if it was to win in any of the constituencies it is contesting.

Besides saying it would focus on the same constituencies it had contested in the previous GE, the SDP also said it intended to campaign on several policy ideas it had raised earlier.

These included advocating the abolishment of Medisave, Medifund and MediShield schemes in favour of a National Health Investment Fund, and the introduction of a non-open market scheme for public housing which would see new flats being sold at a price which does not factor in the cost of land.

The party is also advocating the scrapping of the PSLE, a point system for foreigners to qualify to work in Singapore and abolishing the CPF’s Minimum Sum scheme.

Mr Chee expressed enthusiasm about the upcoming elections: “I’m excited about the prospect of leading the SDP into the next elections, excited about the opportunity of presenting our alternative vision to the people of Singapore, and excited that right now, we have the opportunity to effect change and take Singapore up a different path. One that is democratic, dynamic, just, equal and compassionate.”

Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

January 11, 2015