In a recent discussion on Singapore's political system, some opposition parties suggested scrapping the GRC (and presumably, first-past-the-post) voting to have Proportional Representation System (PRS).
There is a series of videos on political systems - how to choose a government - on YouTube, by CGP Grey.
First, you should watch the video on The Problems with First Past the Post voting.
This is a 6 1/2 minute video covering the problems with one person one vote, and first-past-the-post rules.
The initial scenario with 7 candidates is similar to the SG 2011 Presidential Election, with the winning candidate, getting less than 50% of the votes.
At 1:40, the video covers why eventually, all such First-past-the-post system will end up with a two party system (like in the US), and (by implication) why most voters don't bother to vote by then (in the US, voter turn out for the Presidential Elections is about 50% or less in some years).
Showing posts with label GRC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GRC. Show all posts
Thursday, 25 February 2016
Why not Proportional Representation?
Saturday, 30 April 2011
Living the Unthinkable.
From "Thinking the Unthinkable",
by Eleanor Wong
by Eleanor Wong
[Note: The link to the original blog is broken, so I have deleted it.]
I agree that it was probably to "minimise their losses" that the PAP reduced the size of GRCs, and also opened up more SMCs to pull the opposition heavy-weights to the SMCs. The more conspiracy-minded might even theorise that the PAP has an informant in the opposition, specifically the WP or even the SPP and got wind of Low's intent to abandon Hougang for a GRC contest, and Chiam's similar intent.
Is it a coincidence that Aljunied and Bishan-Toa Payoh both have 2 ministers? The only other GRC with 2 full ministers is East Coast GRC. Maybe there was a WP fall-back plan to challenge East Coast. In short, the PAP basically raised the stakes at these GRCs where sitting opposition MPs may launch their assault on a GRC.
As for thinking the unthinkable, I have a different perspective.
I think that I, that we Singaporeans have lived the unthinkable.
Any country with an unbroken dominance by a single political party for half a century should have poor human development, poor economy, high crime, corruption, inefficiencies, high unemployment, oppressed people, a failed govt or state or any combination thereof, or even all of those features.
It is unthinkable (by conventional political scientists acculturated to western democratic ideals) that any country with politics dominated by a single political party for 50 years could engender a society that has a vibrant economy, full employment, steady growth, low crime, an efficient civil service, little or no corruption, good health AND good healthcare.
Think the unthinkable? We LIVE it.
It's unthinkable that the PAP could lose a GRC and thus multiple seats 'overnight'.
This is eminently thinkable, of course. It is the natural outcome of the GRC system and, on the way up, it's been a potent plus for the PAP, helping them to snag a handful of seats with just one or two strong leaders in a GRC team. On the way down, so to speak, it could have the opposite effect. It's called leverage. It works both ways.
Actually, it's not inconceivable that this was exactly what the government was thinking about when it decided to reduce the size of some GRCs. And if the government can think about it, that's surely our licence to do so too.
I agree that it was probably to "minimise their losses" that the PAP reduced the size of GRCs, and also opened up more SMCs to pull the opposition heavy-weights to the SMCs. The more conspiracy-minded might even theorise that the PAP has an informant in the opposition, specifically the WP or even the SPP and got wind of Low's intent to abandon Hougang for a GRC contest, and Chiam's similar intent.
Is it a coincidence that Aljunied and Bishan-Toa Payoh both have 2 ministers? The only other GRC with 2 full ministers is East Coast GRC. Maybe there was a WP fall-back plan to challenge East Coast. In short, the PAP basically raised the stakes at these GRCs where sitting opposition MPs may launch their assault on a GRC.
As for thinking the unthinkable, I have a different perspective.
I think that I, that we Singaporeans have lived the unthinkable.
Any country with an unbroken dominance by a single political party for half a century should have poor human development, poor economy, high crime, corruption, inefficiencies, high unemployment, oppressed people, a failed govt or state or any combination thereof, or even all of those features.
It is unthinkable (by conventional political scientists acculturated to western democratic ideals) that any country with politics dominated by a single political party for 50 years could engender a society that has a vibrant economy, full employment, steady growth, low crime, an efficient civil service, little or no corruption, good health AND good healthcare.
Think the unthinkable? We LIVE it.
Thursday, 28 April 2011
The worst case scenario
Biggest news on Nomination Day, Low Thia Khiang pursues dream of a GRC victory, leaves Hougang to Yaw Shin Leong (WP) to defend. Now there is no anchor for the Opposition, no sure thing. Even Low admits as much in the article:
The worst case scenario might come true, with no wins for the opposition!
Aljunied will be a hard fight and a hard choice. The Opposition has a chance, but they have telegraphed their punch and the PAP would not have been sleeping for the last 5 years. I am sure they have worked the ground to win the voters' hearts.
Potong Pasir is also highly at risk of returning to the PAP. For both Hougang and Potong Pasir, the voters may feel that their MP had abandoned them and that would allow them to abandon the opposition without guilt.
If Yaw can hold Hougang, it would mean that WP has established their brand. If he can't, then there is still a lot of work to do on the brand.
Bishan-Toa Payoh may be a close fight, but Chiam is the liability. Yes he has experience, but does he have the emotional engagement and history in B-TP? Mas Selamat is a non-issue for most Singaporeans.
If so, then the last two elected opposition MP may be gone by May 7.
Apr 27, 2011With Low out of Hougang, there are no sure Opposition wins; no opposition stronghold.
Stakes and risk very high for opposition: WP chief
By Chong Zi Liang , Kor Kian Beng
WORKERS' Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang has said that the stakes and risk for the opposition in the May 7 election are 'very high' and Singapore may end up with no elected opposition MP.
Striking a stark warning, he told a packed press conference on Wednesday afternoon: 'This is a a watershed election. We may end up with no elected opposition MP.
'It was 30 years ago that JBJ became the first elected opposition in 1981. I hope we don't go back to those days without any opposition MP.'
Mr Low, 54, has moved out of Hougang single seat ward, where he was the incumbent MP for four terms since 1991, to contest the five-member Aljunied GRC, where the fiercest battle is expected to play out over the next eight days.
'I have contemplated this for a very long time. For the last 20 years since I was the MP, the opposition has not been progressing but has been regressing instead. Is this desirable for Singapore?' asked Mr Low.
The WP team will be squaring off the PAP's team led by Foreign Minister George Yeo.
Explaining why he has gone to the Aljunied GRC, he said: 'They (the voters) gave us strong support in 2006. I was more determined after the boundary report was out.
'Of course, the logical step is not to move out (of Hougang) because the stakes are high and the risk is very high.'
He said the party had been planning this move for the past three years but he became more determined to move out of Hougang for a GRC after the latest electoral boundary changes, which saw a part of the Aljunied GRC, where he said the WP enjoyed good support, being moved to the Ang Mo Kio GRC and the Pasir-Punggol GRC.
A part of the Marine Parade GRC - the Kaki Bukit area - is also now part of Aljunied GRC.
Said Mr Low: 'We could have waited for others to win a GRC but that is wishful thinking, based on how the PAP gerrymander at every election. We need to make a breakthrough in a GRC and teach them a lesson.'
The worst case scenario might come true, with no wins for the opposition!
Aljunied will be a hard fight and a hard choice. The Opposition has a chance, but they have telegraphed their punch and the PAP would not have been sleeping for the last 5 years. I am sure they have worked the ground to win the voters' hearts.
Potong Pasir is also highly at risk of returning to the PAP. For both Hougang and Potong Pasir, the voters may feel that their MP had abandoned them and that would allow them to abandon the opposition without guilt.
If Yaw can hold Hougang, it would mean that WP has established their brand. If he can't, then there is still a lot of work to do on the brand.
Bishan-Toa Payoh may be a close fight, but Chiam is the liability. Yes he has experience, but does he have the emotional engagement and history in B-TP? Mas Selamat is a non-issue for most Singaporeans.
If so, then the last two elected opposition MP may be gone by May 7.
Monday, 11 April 2011
NCMP: The flip side of the GRC
This blog is still under construction. Please excuse the mess.
In my previous post, I explained why the GRC is needed. Now, let's see how it might be unfair.
The GRC system provides the ruling party with an advantage. They can let an untested candidate ride on the coat-tails of politically established MP and coast into parliament, untried, untested, unstressed.
In contrast, at this stage of the oppositions' development, candidates have to fight and win every vote themselves.
But consider: If the opposition does the insurmountable and win a GRC, they become the incumbents and unless they screw up badly, they have the incumbents' advantage in the next election. Look at how long Chiam and Low held their respective wards once they won them. Of course, there were also one-hit wonders like Ling and Cheo.
So the GRC advantage is not a ruling party advantage, but an incumbent's advantage. In the next election, an opposition-held GRC can retire one MP (or more) and bring in a fresh face. Of course the incumbent's advantage is only an advantage if the team perform well or well enough.
But, the task of winning a GRC in the first place is not easy, so for now, the deck seems to be stacked against the opposition.
Now this could have stayed this way, but in all fairness, the PAP offered a side door to the opposition, even as they used the GRC to close many doors to them.
The Non-Constituency Member of Parliament or NCMP scheme is unique to Singapore. This scheme allows the best opposition losers (if there are less than 9 elected opposition MPs) to enter parliament as NCMP (now up to 9 NCMP and opposition MP in total).
So an opposition that does very well but still doesn't win all the votes necessary to repesent the constituency, can still slip into parliament on the NCMP ticket. This is the flip side to the GRC system.
So untried, untested, but promising opposition candidates can make it into parliament where they can show their ability, and if they are good enough, they could parley their credible performance in parliament to win a seat in the next election.
That's a pretty good deal for the opposition.
In my previous post, I explained why the GRC is needed. Now, let's see how it might be unfair.
The GRC system provides the ruling party with an advantage. They can let an untested candidate ride on the coat-tails of politically established MP and coast into parliament, untried, untested, unstressed.
In contrast, at this stage of the oppositions' development, candidates have to fight and win every vote themselves.
But consider: If the opposition does the insurmountable and win a GRC, they become the incumbents and unless they screw up badly, they have the incumbents' advantage in the next election. Look at how long Chiam and Low held their respective wards once they won them. Of course, there were also one-hit wonders like Ling and Cheo.
So the GRC advantage is not a ruling party advantage, but an incumbent's advantage. In the next election, an opposition-held GRC can retire one MP (or more) and bring in a fresh face. Of course the incumbent's advantage is only an advantage if the team perform well or well enough.
But, the task of winning a GRC in the first place is not easy, so for now, the deck seems to be stacked against the opposition.
Now this could have stayed this way, but in all fairness, the PAP offered a side door to the opposition, even as they used the GRC to close many doors to them.
The Non-Constituency Member of Parliament or NCMP scheme is unique to Singapore. This scheme allows the best opposition losers (if there are less than 9 elected opposition MPs) to enter parliament as NCMP (now up to 9 NCMP and opposition MP in total).
So an opposition that does very well but still doesn't win all the votes necessary to repesent the constituency, can still slip into parliament on the NCMP ticket. This is the flip side to the GRC system.
So untried, untested, but promising opposition candidates can make it into parliament where they can show their ability, and if they are good enough, they could parley their credible performance in parliament to win a seat in the next election.
That's a pretty good deal for the opposition.
Sunday, 10 April 2011
The GRC
If you consider the various opposition MPs elected since J.B.J. broke the PAP's hitherto clean sweep of Parliament in 1981, would you say that there is a similarity amongst them?
Chiam See Tong, Low Thia Khiang, Ling How Doong, and Cheo Chai Chen are all Chinese, grassroots-heartlander type MPs, who appeal to the average voter.
Chiam defeated Mah Bow Tan in 1984 election in spite of, or perhaps even because of then-PM Lee Kuan Yew's campaigning for Mah. Lee had compared the sterling scholarship of Mah, with the late bloomer achievement of Chiam (got his law degree at 40). Mah the scholar lost that election to Chiam the hardworking, heartlander who had built up his base of supporters in Potong Pasir. After all, how many of us are scholars, and how many of us struggle in our studies and sometimes hope or plan to further our studies, acquire new credentials and get a second chance, a second career? We identified with Chiam. Few had sympathies or affinity for Mah.
Chiam See Tong, Low Thia Khiang, Ling How Doong, and Cheo Chai Chen are all Chinese, grassroots-heartlander type MPs, who appeal to the average voter.
Chiam defeated Mah Bow Tan in 1984 election in spite of, or perhaps even because of then-PM Lee Kuan Yew's campaigning for Mah. Lee had compared the sterling scholarship of Mah, with the late bloomer achievement of Chiam (got his law degree at 40). Mah the scholar lost that election to Chiam the hardworking, heartlander who had built up his base of supporters in Potong Pasir. After all, how many of us are scholars, and how many of us struggle in our studies and sometimes hope or plan to further our studies, acquire new credentials and get a second chance, a second career? We identified with Chiam. Few had sympathies or affinity for Mah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)