Who came up with GRC system?
-
I remembered in the last election, "Goose" came in to help his candidate in Hougang SMC and said something along the line that if Hougang SMC were to be won back, the town council could pool resources from Aljunied Town Cowcil in its projects.
Luckily, WP retained Hougang SMC else i reckon we would not see Hougang SMC ever again in the upcoming election. "Pool resources" mah... good excuse to swallow it -_-“
-
Originally posted by hasene:
It was announced over and over again during election campaign that voting is mandatory (I am referring to the past election). lee hsien loong himself stated that voting was a mandate.
Compulsory or mandatory means you MUST do, no excuses. Mandate means to give a right to to something.
As for voting, you want to vote, you vote, don't want to vote, don't vote. No one cares.
At the most, your name is removed from the electoral roll for the next election. You have the right to have it reinstate, no questions asked. Just pay $5.00 for the paper work.
Goh Chok Tong and Lee Hsien Loong were asking for a mandate.
-
an old saying " an empire long divided, must unite, long united, will divide"
the GRC system is only merely deleying the inevitable of the division of power here, after all nothing is perfect.
cracks has started to appear, but will it turn out to be a trickle or flood change against the ruling party only time will tell.
-
it no need any old saying, just remember that "nothing last forever in this world, it just a matter of time"
-
Originally posted by ~PEPPER~:
I am wondering who started the GRC system? The person who came up with this idea.
Suspect betrayal of the original purpose of the GRC system of elections.
What the numbers show ([link]/ see below) in the line "(projected) 2010/11(GE): 14/84 = 16.667% | 16.667 / 25.8 = 64.599% | 09 / 84 = 10.714%" is that whilst the GRC system was dismal 64.6% effective (a decreasing trend since 1991 (83.0%)) at ensuring minority representation in parliament, it was (100.00 - 10.7)% = 89.3% effective (increasing trend since inception from 51.9%) at minimizing independents and opposition-candidates from contesting in SMCs.
The exceedingly high ability of GRCs to reduce SMCs (by currently 89.3%) compounded by the increasingly poorer ability of GRCs to uphold its original purpose- that of safeguarding minority representation (currently= 64.6%), arouses suspicion about the PAP's true intentions in implementing the GRC system of elections.
As the figures suggests, it seems the outcome of the GRC system (in its current form), to more so reduce SMCs; with ensuring minority representation being the excuse rather then norm. Thus making suspect if the original purpose of the GRC system of elections was really what it was proffered to be: "The GRC system was established in 1988 to ensure that the minority racial communities in Singapore will always be represented in Parliament."
References:
- [ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT OF SINGAPORE]: 'Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs)': "The GRC system was established in 1988 to ensure that the minority racial communities in Singapore will always be represented in Parliament. To ensure this, the Parliamentary Elections Act requires that at least one-quarter of the total number of MPs must be representatives of GRCs." [link](- last accessed 2Aug2010)
Additional references:
[ST 1stAug2008]: 'By-election: Pragmatism or Principle?': ".. But there are two scenarios where the incumbent Government could lose political credibility by not calling a by-election, say legal scholars. One is if an MP from a minority race in a GRC dies or resigns - which has so far not happened. ..." [link]
-
Yes grouping small towns together does indeed save time but the one man one vote rule should still apply, abeit with a team of brains behind him. Putting so many ministers as leaders in a GRC is just a convenient way to bring in the lesser weight ministers while riding on the limelight of the heavyweight minister. The new minister did not fight for our votes especially if it's a walkover.
-
Hanor, like Cynthia Phua, honest show of hands how many of you know her.
-
U ppl got everything wrong. The Roman started the GRC and voting system. The American revived the voting system and we Singaporean perfected the GRC.
By the way, commuish PRC will revert it to the dynasty system soon with the rate it growth.
In the end, we will have a King...
-
Originally posted by Wmyongj:
U ppl got everything wrong. The Roman started the GRC and voting system. The American revived the voting system and we Singaporean perfected the GRC.
By the way, commuish PRC will revert it to the dynasty system soon with the rate it growth.
In the end, we will have a King...
Think y'r jumping a few steps has made your statement a bit incoherent, but guess some how there would be 'a King', anyway, here's an update version, enjoy.Question about Integrity of the GRC system of elections.
Although the 'ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT OF SINGAPORE'[link] states: 'Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs)': "The GRC system was established in 1988 to ensure that the minority racial communities in Singapore will always be represented in Parliament. .." (link last accessed 2Aug2010)
Simple calculations show the trend in efficiency of the GRC system in ensuring minority representation to be decreasing - currently 64.6%, whilst the efficiency (due to individually bloated GRCs) in reducing the the proportion of SMC available, to be increasing- currently 89.3%.
As a multiple of 'minority representation efficiency', the 'efficiency of reducing SMCs' is [(89.3 - 64.6) / 64.6] = 38.214% MORE effective in reducing SMCs then it is at ensuring minority representation.
The calculations for 'Ensured Min. Minority Rep (% of tot)'; ' Ensured Min. Minority Rep As a % of Pop. Minority Popln %. (%)'; 'GRC as % of All Seats Available', are listed as follows:
Ensured Minimum` ` ` ` | Previous, as a % of ` ` ` | GRC as % of All
Minority Rep.(% of tot)` `| Popn. Minority %. (%) ``| Seats Available.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1984: NA or = 00.0000% | 00.000 / 21.7 = 00.000% | 00 / 79 = 00.000%
1988: 13/81 = 16.0494% | 16.049 / 21.7 = 73.960% | 39 / 81 = 48.148%
1991: 15/81 = 18.5185% | 18.519 / 22.3 = 83.043% | 60 / 81 = 74.074%
1997: 15/83 = 18.0723% | 18.072 / 22.3 = 81.042% | 74 / 83 = 89.157%
2001: 14/84 = 16.6667% | 16.667 / 23.2 = 71.839% | 75 / 84 = 89.286%
2011: 14/84 = 16.6667% | 16.667 / 25.8 = 64.599% | 75 / 84 = 89.286%
Caveats:
1) It is understood that no requirement of minimum minority representation exists before 1988 (Full SMC system).
2) It understood that since inception in 1988 GE a minimum of one minority rep. per GRC is necessary to form a GRC team. [PARL ELECTIONS ACT Cap. 218]
3) It is assumed that the Wikipedia 'ethnic composition' chart is reasonably accurate and the corresponding figure used it the latest figure preceding that election year. (checked with june2009- 'singstat' for accuracy- [link])
4) 2006 is not shown for brevity of presentation but its figures exactly duplicate that of 2001 in this context.
5) The figures for 2010/11 GE are derived based upon GE 2006 and are subject review prior to the coming GE.
6) Note: 'SMC' = 'SMD' (Single Member Districts)- 'Table 1'
Conclusion:
The overwhelming and excessive ability of the GRC system of elections to reduce SMC seats in excess of its effectiveness in upholding its intended aim of ensuring minority representation calls for a return to the original objective for which the GRC system of elections was introduced and the downsizing of all GRCs to a max of 3 members each.
In fact, judging by the ability of just 14 GRCs in the last election (2006) to return 22 minority members: AMK(2), Bi-TP(2), EC(2), Holland-B.Timah(2), Jur(2), M.Parade(2), P.Ris(2), Semb(2), perhaps with the current 14 GRCs achieving in excess of ideal minimum guaranteed, 2006 having turned in a bumper of 22 minority MPs (26.19%- in excess of the population they represent); some being ministers or popular MPs, perhaps a spread of 14 x 3memb GRCs (42persons) and 42 SMCs would make GE 2011 a fairer one to all; without the need for any NCMPs, (but for the unlikely case where the total number of minority MPs dips below 21 etc- even then its 7 NCMPs max).
These calculations prove that current government, whilst never having fully expanded the GRC system's effectiveness at ensuring minority rep. (that peaked in 1991, then dwindled)- has been deviating since 1991 from its original objective of minority representation with its excessive exploitation of the side effect of the GRC system- that of diminishing the number of SMCs available for contest (plateau at 10.7% since 2001).
Info Source(s):
- [Table1]: Yeo Lay Hwee. “Electoral Politics in Singapore”*Electoral Politics in Southeast And East Asia, eds. Aurel Croissant, Gabriele Bruns & Marei John (Singapore: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung - Office for Regional Cooperation, 2002). [link]
- [Chart: Constituencies of Singapore]: [wiki]
- [Chart: Ethnic composition (%) of resident population]: [wiki]
Other References:
- [ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT OF SINGAPORE] states: "The GRC system was established in 1988 to ensure that the minority racial communities in Singapore will always be represented in Parliament. .. ": 'Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs)': [link] (last accessed 2Aug2010)
- [PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS ACT Cap. 218]: [link]
- [CNA 26 April 2010]: 'Parliament amends Constitution to change NCMP & NMP schemes': [link] -
I think our country better is all single seat no GRC.
Even if all is single seat u think opposition can win more? Opposition is weak in singapore all single seat also is PAP win. They at most win 1 or 2 more seats.
-
GRC system was designed by PAP to create a political structure that will lock in and secure the power of the PAP.
As if Lee Hsien Loong's remarks denigrating Australia were not enough to convince people how anti-democratic the Singapore government is, Senior Minister (and former PM) Goh Chok Tong has now provided more evidence.
In his latest speech, Goh said that one of the purposes of Group Representation Constituencies [1] was to help People's Action Party (PAP) candidates win election easily.
There! He has admitted it. The State and its electoral system have been corrupted to serve partisan ends.
Goh was quite brazen about it. He said that the role of GRCs was not just to ensure minorities are adequately represented -– a nearly 2-decades-old justification for GRCs. By doing so, he has conceded that for the last 2 decades, the PAP been less than truthful about their motives...
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-615.htm
You see, when it comes to politics, only a fool will trust PAP.
-
66.6 % of the voters
-
Originally posted by ditzy:
Hanor, like Cynthia Phua, honest show of hands how many of you know her.
Cynthia Koh I know.... lolwutharbak is that?
Kind Regards
Genie
-
The main point is even got no GRC all single seat one, PAP will still rule the parliament. The opposition at most win a few more seats only.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
The main point is even got no GRC all single seat one, PAP will still rule the parliament. The opposition at most win a few more seats only.
And bear in mind a few more seats for opposition is a compliment from PAP, if they want to act tough, i think opposition dun even have a seat. As long as the opposition remain guai guai and seat there and do some acting job just to say that singapore got opposition in the parliament, PAP dun mind them to be MP -
'12' the correct number of (3-Memb) GRCs for Singapore.
Ans: 12.2164 (3men GRCs, min 1 minority each).
i.e. 12 - if U round to nearest whole number.
Accepting that i) Singapore is indeed a multiracial country where non-Chinese are a minority; ii) Singaporeans want to have more say in government-
to achieve this both these objectives, the effort to ensure that minorities are represented adequately in parliament should be balanced with the side effect, of GRCs reducing the numbers of SMCs up for contest.
What is the optimum number of GRCs for Singapore that yields this objective?
Calc as follows:
- Where x is the number of GRCs; (84 - 3x) being the number of SMCs.
- Where the total number of seats in parliament is 84 (yr 2001- current).
- Where the minimum number of seats per GRC is 3 and the minimum number of minority MPs per GRC is one.
- Where no GRCs with more then 3 seats exists to keep the maths simple- i.e. 5mem GRCs w min 2 minority MPs only serve to complicate matters unnecessarily.
- Where the % minority population in Singapore is 25.8% (dtd 2009- Sing-stat).
- Where the efficiency of ensuring minority population is = [x / (84 x 0.258)]
- Where the 'efficiency' of upholding SMCs (unmolested) is defined by [(84 - 3x) / 84].
Solving for x:
[x / (84 X 0.258)] = [(84 - 3x) / 84]
84x = (84 - 3x) X (84 x 0.258) = (84 - 3x) X (21.672) = 1820.440 - 65.016x
84x + 65.016x = 1820.440
x = 1820.440 / 149.016 = 12.2164
Where the efficiency of maintain minority rep. = efficiency of maintaining SMCs= [x / (84 X 0.258)] = [(84 - 3x) / 84] = 56.3700%.
And the number of SMCs= [84 - 3(12.2164)]= 47.3508.
= 48 (rounded to the nearest multiple of 3/ based on optimal no. of GRCs).
Postscript:
Since at par, 12 GRCs only ensures [x / (84 X 0.258)] = 55.3710% minority representation, there remains a short fall of up to 9 minority MPs, an this is where PM Lee's good foresight comes to play- see: "With the changes, Parliament can have up to nine NCMPs, up from six.”: [CNA 26 April 2010]- giving PM Lee the honour of very coincidentally upping the max number of NCMPs from 6 to 9 in response to the number of GRCs being reduced to 12- to benefit racial balance, not partisan prejudices.
References:
- 'Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs)': "The GRC system was established in 1988 to ensure that the minority racial communities in Singapore will always be represented in Parliament. .. " [Elections Department Singapore](last accessed 23Aug2010).
- 'GRCs to shrink, but they will stay': "Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told Parliament yesterday there should not be too many six-member GRCs, as this makes it harder for voters to identify with the whole slate of MPs." [ST, 28May2009].
- 'Singaporeans want more say': "Singaporeans want greater say when it comes to political activities like policy making as compared to ten years ago." [AsiaOne, 02Aug2010]
- 'Parliament amends Constitution to change NCMP & NMP schemes' “The NCMP position is a unique feature of Singapore politics. … With the changes, Parliament can have up to nine NCMPs, up from six.”: [CNA 26 April 2010]
- 'Singapore: Drawing Districts to Ensure Super-Majorities in the Parliament': [aceproject (?date?)]
- 'Question about Integrity of the GRC system of elections Singapore.' Facts and figures from (Table1) Yeo Lay Hwee. “Electoral Politics in Singapore”, [Chart wiki: Constituencies of Singapore], [Chart wiki: Ethnic composition (%) of resident population], ~B.C.: [A1forums, 1Aug2010]
- 'The Malays in Singapore – no crutch mentality': "Berita Harian Singapore editor Guntor Sadali: 'We do not believe in being spoon-fed or being too dependent on government help. In other words, we do not have a crutch mentality.'" [LKSblog, 28Jul2010]:
Additional References:
- 'Having more single seats will help the PAP': "The PAP should consider having more SMCs so that more of their fresh candidates can prove their worth by winning a seat on their own steam.": [ST, 4Feb2010]
- 'SG Elections.com': "an award-winning website that houses the most comprehensive archive of Singapore election results available." [link]
- 'All eyes on whether PAP will stay in power on Nomination Day' : "We want to have a First World parliament for Singapore, so we need to have a First World government and a First World opposition. If you want us to treat you as gentlemen, argue on the merits of your policy and our policy. Take it to a higher level and we will treat you accordingly and respond accordingly," Lee Kuan Yew,. [CNA, 24 April 2006]
- 'Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew describes political opposition as 'riffraff': "'I want a world-class opposition, not this riffraff,' said Lee Kuan Yew." [AP 29Apr2006]
Post-postscript:
At 12x GRC (3memb), 48x SMC, the efficiencies of assurance of minority rep vs SMC integrity are 55.3710% vs 57.1429% respectively . -
Originally posted by bic_cherry:12 the optimum number of GRCs for Singapore.
But that's buying into PAP's fraud and con job wah.
GRC is a con job.
It's a fraud.
-
Originally posted by Vote PAP OUT to Save SG:
But that's buying into PAP's fraud and con job wah.
GRC is a con job.
It's a fraud.
Aiyah, dun say like dat lah, including minority in SG parliament is good thing actually, but what is important is BALANCE- which according to the initial 3men system (circa. 1988), was a good start actually, except that I believe that the PAP govt then secretly tweaked it so much to serve their own selfish interest- the interests of Lee F, Son and Holy Goh et al. (just jokin), that the current result now is an embarassment rather then an accomplishment. That PAP interest now outweighs that of 'ensuring minority interest' as my post at 4Aug: 10.38am: "As a multiple of 'minority representation efficiency', the 'efficiency of reducing SMCs' is [(89.3 - 64.6) / 64.6] = 38.214% MORE effective in reducing SMCs then it is at ensuring minority representation." describes- obtusely remains the main hinderence to the progress of fair politics in Singapore.
Balancing both 'ensuring minority interest' and 'ensuring SMCs', the par result would be 12 X 3member GRCs, the rest of the seats being SMCs: i.e. 84 - 12 (3) = 48 X SMCs.
PAP's [CNA 26 April 2010]: 'Parliament amends Constitution to change NCMP & NMP schemes': [link] announcement would then sync nicely with this change as '9' is the exact nice number in case minorities come up with only 12 seats coming election because then the total number of minority MPs (MP + NCMP) would be 21 (almost the ideal situation for minority representation).
In a world of limited opportunity and resource, all perspectives should be considered and balanced; as such, no one is indispensable, not even high earning PAP Ministers- let them compete in the 48SMCs or with a good team amongst 12 GRCs, let them earn their keep like every other Singapore Citizen.
Let Singapore be a democracy, let the people embrace peace and prosperity.
Good day to U.
:).
References:
- [Mal.Insider, 5Aug2010]: 'The Malays in Singapore, no crutch mentality — Guntor Sadali' [link] -
Originally posted by bic_cherry:
Aiyah, dun say like dat lah, including minority in SG parliament is good thing actually, but what is important is BALANCE- which according to the initial 3men system (circa. 1988), was a good start actually, except that I believe that the PAP govt then secretly tweaked it so much to serve their own selfish interest- the interests of Lee F, Son and Holy Goh et al. (just jokin), that the current result now is an embarassment rather then an acco
you are buying into PAP propaganda.
GRC from the beginning was always to secure the power of PAP.
Minority propaganda is only a pretext.
Lee Kuan Yew will look down on you and say you are ignorant if you continue to go and buy into the PAP propaganda.
-
The funny thing is that Singapore has always been controlled by a minority ethnic group.
Whether it is british, japanese or peranakan.
The majority group in Singapore, which we can say is the dialect chinese group, immigrants from southern China, has never held political power in Singapore.
Singapore is not a country where majority group rules the majority.
Singapore is a country where minority rules the majority.
That is why there are many problems in Singapore that cannot be solved by the PAP.
-
Originally posted by Vote PAP OUT to Save SG:
The funny thing is that Singapore has always been controlled by a minority ethnic group.
Whether it is british, japanese or peranakan.
The majority group in Singapore, which we can say is the dialect chinese group, immigrants from southern China, has never held political power in Singapore.
Singapore is not a country where majority group rules the majority.
Singapore is a country where minority rules the majority.
That is why there are many problems in Singapore that cannot be solved by the PAP.
Don't worry, Taiwanese infiltrator like you will not have a chance to control Singapore. -
[Straits Times - 28 May 2009]- GRCs to shrink, but they will stay.
News: The Straits Times - 28 May 2009
GRCs to shrink, but they will stay
By Zakir Hussain
IN A concession to often-made calls for smaller GRCs, the average size of these multiple-member constituencies will shrink to no more than five MPs.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told Parliament yesterday there should not be too many six-member GRCs, as this makes it harder for voters to identify with the whole slate of MPs.
Currently, the average number of MPs in a group representation constituency is 5.4, as there are five six-member GRCs and nine five-member GRCs.
There will therefore be fewer six-member GRCs by the next election, he promised.
There will also be at least 12 single-member constituencies, or SMCs, up from the current nine.
Mr Lee said he would make these requirements part of the terms of reference for the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee, which determines the shape and size of electoral constituencies prior to every election.
He hastened to add that he has not appointed the committee yet.
Former Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia of the National Solidarity Party told The Straits Times the move was 'a first step in the right direction'.
'From 1988 till now, it's been bad news for the opposition, but finally there's some loosening up,' he said, referring to how GRCs had expanded in size since they first came about 20 years ago.
'We hope the GRCs will be much smaller, and there will be more SMCs.'
In his speech, PM Lee defended the present system of having most MPs elected in GRCs. This was a sound system that ensured multiracial representation, the reason GRCs were first formed in 1988, he said.
'They encourage political parties to appeal to all races with moderate policies and not to one race or another with chauvinist or extremist policies,' said Mr Lee.
'They also put a premium on parties which can field credible teams and therefore demonstrate that they are fit not just to become MPs but also to form the government,' he added.
Mr Lee, however, said single seats should also remain, so that small parties and independent candidates can still contest in general elections.
He noted that there were both advantages and drawbacks to having bigger GRCs.
On the one hand, they allow stronger multiracial teams to be formed which include MPs with different backgrounds and skills 'to serve voters more comprehensively and effectively'. Resources can also be pooled to run town councils better.
They also require a challenger to field a strong team that offers a serious alternative, and so 'encourage responsible and credible opposition parties to emerge'.
On the other hand, having too big a GRC makes it harder for voters to identify with the whole team of MPs.
'In the light of our experience, we have concluded that on balance, smaller GRCs, that means less than six members, have the edge over larger GRCs,' he said.
However, he did not think six-member GRCs should be ruled out entirely, as 'sometimes the configuration of constituencies on the ground makes this the most practical option'.
'The changes to smaller GRCs and more SMCs may or may not result in more seats being contested or more opposition MPs being elected,' he stressed.
'That is not their purpose. Ultimately, it's up to the opposition MPs to field candidates to contest the elections and up to the voters to decide who they want to represent them in Parliament.'
When Mr Lee concluded his speech, Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang) promptly rose to ask the PM if he would ask the boundaries review committee to keep existing constituency boundaries as far as possible, and not gerrymander.
He also asked Mr Lee to consider appointing the committee earlier before an election so that the opposition will have more time to look at the changes.
Mr Lee said how boundaries were drawn was up to the committee members. 'I think it's best to leave them to decide in accordance with the situation on the ground. They do not disturb boundaries unnecessarily, but when the population has changed, boundaries have to recognise these electorate changes,' he said.
As for appointing the committee earlier, he said he would appoint it in good time.
'It is not our intention to do it at the last minute and spring surprises on either our own members or on opposition members,' he said.
'I will not tell you how many months' notice I give you, otherwise when I appoint the committee and its results are published, you will calculate forward and determine the election date.'
-end of ST article
http://www.pmo.gov.sg/News/Transcrip...+will+stay.htm -
Originally posted by angel7030:
it no need any old saying, just remember that "nothing last forever in this world, it just a matter of time"
U meant all political party is impermanent? Once the conditions are right the political party will be removed from power.I think PAP is also an impermanent party that cannot stay in power forever.\
I believe nothing lasts forever too, It's just a matter of time and conditions.
-
Originally posted by bic_cherry:
[Straits Times - 28 May 2009]- GRCs to shrink, but they will stay.
News: The Straits Times - 28 May 2009
GRCs to shrink, but they will stay
By Zakir Hussain
IN A concession to often-made calls for smaller GRCs, the average size of these multiple-member constituencies will shrink to no more than five MPs.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told Parliament yesterday there should not be too many six-member GRCs, as this makes it harder for voters to identify with the whole slate of MPs.
Currently, the average number of MPs in a group representation constituency is 5.4, as there are five six-member GRCs and nine five-member GRCs.
There will therefore be fewer six-member GRCs by the next election, he promised.
There will also be at least 12 single-member constituencies, or SMCs, up from the current nine.
Mr Lee said he would make these requirements part of the terms of reference for the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee, which determines the shape and size of electoral constituencies prior to every election.
He hastened to add that he has not appointed the committee yet.
Former Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia of the National Solidarity Party told The Straits Times the move was 'a first step in the right direction'.
'From 1988 till now, it's been bad news for the opposition, but finally there's some loosening up,' he said, referring to how GRCs had expanded in size since they first came about 20 years ago.
'We hope the GRCs will be much smaller, and there will be more SMCs.'
In his speech, PM Lee defended the present system of having most MPs elected in GRCs. This was a sound system that ensured multiracial representation, the reason GRCs were first formed in 1988, he said.
'They encourage political parties to appeal to all races with moderate policies and not to one race or another with chauvinist or extremist policies,' said Mr Lee.
'They also put a premium on parties which can field credible teams and therefore demonstrate that they are fit not just to become MPs but also to form the government,' he added.
Mr Lee, however, said single seats should also remain, so that small parties and independent candidates can still contest in general elections.
He noted that there were both advantages and drawbacks to having bigger GRCs.
On the one hand, they allow stronger multiracial teams to be formed which include MPs with different backgrounds and skills 'to serve voters more comprehensively and effectively'. Resources can also be pooled to run town councils better.
They also require a challenger to field a strong team that offers a serious alternative, and so 'encourage responsible and credible opposition parties to emerge'.
On the other hand, having too big a GRC makes it harder for voters to identify with the whole team of MPs.
'In the light of our experience, we have concluded that on balance, smaller GRCs, that means less than six members, have the edge over larger GRCs,' he said.
However, he did not think six-member GRCs should be ruled out entirely, as 'sometimes the configuration of constituencies on the ground makes this the most practical option'.
'The changes to smaller GRCs and more SMCs may or may not result in more seats being contested or more opposition MPs being elected,' he stressed.
'That is not their purpose. Ultimately, it's up to the opposition MPs to field candidates to contest the elections and up to the voters to decide who they want to represent them in Parliament.'
When Mr Lee concluded his speech, Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang) promptly rose to ask the PM if he would ask the boundaries review committee to keep existing constituency boundaries as far as possible, and not gerrymander.
He also asked Mr Lee to consider appointing the committee earlier before an election so that the opposition will have more time to look at the changes.
Mr Lee said how boundaries were drawn was up to the committee members. 'I think it's best to leave them to decide in accordance with the situation on the ground. They do not disturb boundaries unnecessarily, but when the population has changed, boundaries have to recognise these electorate changes,' he said.
As for appointing the committee earlier, he said he would appoint it in good time.
'It is not our intention to do it at the last minute and spring surprises on either our own members or on opposition members,' he said.
'I will not tell you how many months' notice I give you, otherwise when I appoint the committee and its results are published, you will calculate forward and determine the election date.'
-end of ST article
http://www.pmo.gov.sg/News/Transcrip...+will+stay.htm
I think GRCs are unfair.Pls create more SMCs.
-
Originally posted by Positron:
U meant all political party is impermanent? Once the conditions are right the political party will be removed from power.I think PAP is also an impermanent party that cannot stay in power forever.\
I believe nothing lasts forever too, It's just a matter of time and conditions.
as i said, nothing last forever, not you, nor your house, your world etc etc...so is the govt, everything must change, that is the law of nature, just a matter in time.