thoughts on ge

Post-exam ramblings on the ongoing GE;

What is a vote? A vote is a personal choice. That's why one person gets one vote in the coming elections (except unfortunately for tanjong pagar constituency members this year). But is that all a vote in Singapore, in our particular system of elections (GRC i'm looking at you), really is? Because if it truly were my personal choice, I choose 2 things. One, I choose that every single seat in Parliament is contested in the GEs because each seat is supposed to be held by someone that the people have chosen for the coming term as their representative. Two, I choose that every single MP is voted in based on his or her own terms and merits, not on someone else's prestige just because they're in the same "team". Besides, my actual point with the vote question is that I do agree that some voters in this GE have a different burden from the others. So in this case a vote may not be a simple matter of personal choice but also a responsibility. Burden or opportunity though, it's up to Singaporeans in making the decision.

First just to take out my frustration on the GRC system. It's been the clever strategy of the PAP to field an "anchor" in every GRC, the bait, the irresistable person who has held an important post in government and appears frequently on TV so that we as the population recognise these faces as the faces of "our leaders", even if most of us barely have any idea how they got into Parliament in the first place. The main role of this anchor person has been to "shoo in" a couple of new faces that the PAP has chosen for us to be our MPs and speak on our behalf. This has happened in most of the past elections. Essentially, we get a buy-1-get-3/4/5-free "promotion" every election. We maybe couldn't really care less about having the 3/4/5 in Parliament, but we don't want to lose that 1, so we shoo them all in together. A victorious strategy indeed.

Granted, many of PAP's "chosen" MPs have stepped up and developed into respectable MPs who I myself might cast a vote for (hint i'm voting in pasir ris). But the thing about this is, as a matter of principle, it remains the case that they did. not. get. in. completely. on. their. own. merit. Why do I harp on this point? Because for every shoo-in who has stepped up and developed into a respectable MP, there's a shoo-in who, even years later, fails to serve as the people's representative up to mark. This choice is supposed to lie in the people, not the party. If we make the wrong choice now and again, it is supposed to be our mistake to make (that's the beauty of democracy - if we observe, 5 years later, that we picked the wrong person indeed, we can always rectify that mistake). So paychecks aside, I feel like this is also a matter of principle (though the paycheck issue ah... is also *makes sizzling sound*).

I think it might be time to come up with another elections system to replace the GRC system. The primary basis for the GRC system has been to ensure minority representation. The primary criticism of it? The GRC system favors parties that are large in size and composition. It also favors the incumbent party, since if a walkover occurs, they get 4/5/6 seats in parliament FOC (free of contest). Which party fits all of the above characteristics best? PAP. This is not a coincidence; the GRC was written into the constitution by the PAP government with the effect of benefiting the political party which embodies the characteristics that the PAP does. A victorious strategy indeed, until now that we've found you out and sound you out, so please do that thing you've been saying you'd do and listen.

Partly (but significantly) because of the GRC system, tinpeiling is probably going to get into Parliament tmr while nicoleseah does not. that just spells messed up to me...

Now that Singaporeans have got our heads around this, and given the government's displayed innovative capacity and creativity having devised the GRC system in the 1st place, I am pretty sure they can devise another system of elections that serves to ensure minority representation without being so obnoxiously discriminatory (who gets the pun say aye!).


A couple of things I'm thinking about with regards to the PAP vis a vis the opposition parties in this GE:

- The PAP has done a lot for Singapore. It has a great track record, and this should be acknowledged and appreciated (although the "track record" of fear-mongering is not; just saying). But some problems in the PAP's policies that have been brought up are real and serious, and these should be considered too.

- What would happen if a watershed event occured in this GE in terms of opposition party members voted into Parliament? It is unlikely that the PAP will retaliate in an abrupt way, despite all the warnings and fear-mongering that's been going around about how more opposition MPs would mean a weaker Singapore Government and how constituencies which do not vote for the PAP will "regret" it. If, from having a virtual monopoly in Parliament, the PAP is unable to share the space and power with opposition MPs that the people have voted in, then the PAP's own inadequacy in this area will be highlighted - come on every one wants a team player. And if the PAP delivers on the threat of treating opposition constituencies worse than they do their own, then I think another blemish on its reputation and respectability is due and that's something they'll have to face in the next GE. Either way, it is in the PAP's interest to ensure that even if an oppositional milestone takes place after this GE, for example if the opposition wins in a GRC, that the Singapore Government functions as effectively as it always has and that tax-paying citizens be treated as tax-paying citizens regardless of which constituency, opposition or PAP, they belong
to. Of course, in my position as someone not from one of the "hot" constituencies, it may be easier for me to say but really at the end of the day it's up to those voters themselves to weigh and consider if they wanna make a diff where it matters.

- Giving opposition seats in Parliament this GE would provide opposition party members the chance to prove themselves. Whether the voters feel they ought to be given this chance or not is their full prerogative, and given how this elections looks... the burden is unevenly distributed. I'd just like to point out that the PAP has had over 50 years in power to prove, and I believe it largely has, that it is very capable to govern the country. (And that's why at this point I wouldn't want any party other than the PAP to be the majority party in Parliament.) PAP has had its chance, while the opposition has been sidelined. Now, in this GE, the opposition is making a stand. For example by fielding its own cream of the crop in one GRC, I feel like WP is trying their best to provide voters with a viable alternative, and a viable alternative I feel it is. The opposition is small, and it has a much smaller pool of resources than the PAP - it can't scatter "anchor" people all over the island to "shoo in" the other team members. It used to be said that the opposition's so weak it can't attract quality members; a turning point may have been reached this year... you think? The opposition has been small both as a result of their own past weaknesses as well as the PAP's manouverings. But the point I think I'm making, is that voters have a choice if they want to meet the opposition mid-way in their efforts to get into Parliament as opposition voices to the PAP, or if they don't want that. IMHO certain members of certain opposition parties at least, deserve this chance. But of course it's not up to just me; it's up to the voters to decide if they are ready for this. I'd say the litmus test of voting LTK and CST into Parliament has shown the value of having opposition voices in Parliament, and I hope the trend moves in this direction.

But whatever happens with the results of this GE and whichever party wins whichever constituencies, I already feel heartened that many Singaporeans, "famed" as we are for political apathy, have gotten up and about in this GE, even if it's only because they are finally casting a vote (p.s. and how is it that at 21 years old i get to do what many Singaporeans didn't have the privilege of doing at this age - to cast a vote? Because the opposition parties have consolidated enough to be able to contest the PAP in almost every single constituency, even if less strongly in some than in others. They're reaching out to Singaporeans; it's now up to Singaporeans to show how much they value and support this move.