Singapore Democrats

I support SDP's call for Bt Panjang to remain a SMC.

But the reason is not that “it is obvious that stallholders and residents in the estate are deeply unhappy about the recent takeover and shocking rent hike of the Fajar market by Sheng Siong.”

Or that “Dr Teo has refused to step in and stop the supermarket chain from profiteering from the residents.”

Keeping the ward as an SMC will allow the government to demonstrate that it is NOT fearful of the type of waylaid politics pursued by SDP. Although this purpose can also be served within the context of a GRC contest, the government should be seen to be magnanimous to accommodate SDP's obvious resource limitations.

If SDP does not have a resource constraint, it would gladly have challenged some of those uncontested GRCs (and there are so many of them) so that their potential gains can be larger.

This would also be in line with its overt (but doubtful) concerns for Singaporeans to exercise their constitutional rights to vote.

If it is truly concerned, and it's membership numbers are indeed as strong as it repeatedly advertised, then SDP should contest as many GRCs as possible so that more Singaporeans can go the ballot.

But we know the truth.

That is why it is confining itself to a puny and lonesome SMC sitting beside the BKE.

BryanT,

Why have GRCs in the first place? Is it not a sign that the PAP is afraid of losing if all wards remained single-member constituencies as in the past?

GRC was introduced in 1988 to prevent the opposition from fielding more candidates and also to deprive almost half of the electorate from voting. GRC is to ensure minority representation is a PAP bullshit.

Furthermore, if PAP is not afraid, the elections should be conducted by an independent commission and not by a department taking orders from the PM who comes up with changes to the rules, including the recent so-called cooling off period.

SDP should contest as many GRCs as possible? Sure, why don't you and your richer friends donate the ridiculous amount of money required for that?

And like seebeng mentioned, why have GRCs at all in the first place? One justification we keep hearing is that its to ensure minority representation. But in fact, minority representation in parliament has actually gone down since the introduction of the GRC system.

In the first place, do the stallholders live in the same constituency where the wet market is located ?

I'm not sure if this incident itself is important enough for the residents at large. After all, many young couples don't patronize wet markets these days. They buy from Cold Storage or NTUC Fairprice, when shopping becomes a once-a-week event for the family.

Is SDP making a mountain out of a molehill ?

It is very sad to see SDP has to kneel so low to seek help from PMO for its political agenda. Nevertheless, I do applaud SDP for taking this bold step to declare to other opposition parties to stay away from Bukit Panjang SMC, if it is to be one.

We can actually read the real meaning from this unusual simple article: -

“Dear All Opposition Parties, The SDP has written to the PMO calling for Bukit Panjang to remain as a Single-Member Constituency (SMC) so that the party (which is SDP) can challenge the incumbent PAP’s MP, Dr. Teo Ho Pin in the ward in the upcoming General Election.”

PMO in this instance is only a smoke screen created by SDP.

SDP did not address to any official in their letter and merely indicate “To: Prime Minister’s Office and using Dear sir” instead of Dear Sir or Mr. so and so.

It is because SDP is not expecting any reply from PMO, so this smoke screen will have no fire eventually.

First of all, how can you stop those businesses and vendors from profiteering from residents when indeed, shop owners or operators regardless big or small have to feed their families and survive too? Are they not a commercial establishments or charity organizations? Did you approach the business operators and shop owners and tell them to “stop profiteering”? Your article is misleading.

You were missing for a period since the crying scene in 2006 election. Are you sure SDP has visited the constituency for years since 2006?

These 5 simple questions were posed to SDP during the earlier article but to no avail.

I shall repeat here.

1. How many blocks of flat you had visited since the last election prior to 31-12-2009?
2. What feedbacks have you received?
3. How did you act on those feedbacks?
4. How many residents in BP did you actually help?
5. How often you meet residents on aforesaid period?

SDP has made the call, loud and clear this time for Bukit Panjang to remain as SMC and SDP is contesting it. A message well said for other opposition parties to keep out of it for this coming election. But, why SDP cannot contest if Bukit Panjang SMC will to become part of a GRC?

Residents need opportunity to vote and this opportunity has to be given by the ruling party and opposition parties. Only the opposition parties challenge the ruling party regardless SMC or GRC then the residents will have that opportunity. PMO is not capable to give residents that opportunity.

And lastly to BryanT, fortunately you are not staying in Bukit Panjang and hence, you need not to decide whether to vote for this incompetent opposition party, as the choice is a clearly No.

Unfortunately, you cannot enjoy an estate which is well-run and well-maintained by the sincere and down-to-earth MP.

Seelan,

The percentages of minority MPs in parliament are as follows (in brackets):

Parliament - no. of minority MPS (percentage of minority MPs)

1968-72 - 16 (27.6%)
1980-84 - 17 (22.7%) - decreased
1984-88 - 15 (19%) - decreased
1989-91 - 13 (16.1%) - onwards with GRC
1991-97 - 17 (21.9%) - increased
1997-01 - 19 (22.9%) - increased
2001-06 - 22 (26.2%) - increased
2006-10 - 23 (27.7%) - increased to correct rep level.

The percentage descended (without GRC) until it reached the lowest on the year GRC system was implemented in 1998. I attribute it start-off issues.

But from then onwards, the percentage increased from 16.1% to 27.7%

It should not go up any further, because the percentage of minority in Singapore is around there.

In fact, the GRC has achieved what it spelled out to do, at least in terms of ensuring minority representation!

Good move SDP. Yes, Bukit Panjang is definitely prone to its boundaries being redrawn. And that's because it is not helmed by incompetent opposition party MPs such as in Potong Pasir and Hougang whose boundaries have NEVER be redrawn because they gave they PAP what the PAP wanted from them: incompetence.

An incompetence that comes at a price tag of $15 000/mo/MP.

Of course, I don't mean to say that PAP MPs are competent either; incompetence in governance is key no matter which party you are from, and if you don't want to be harrassed out of Parliament.

That's the lack of productivity that is epitomized by the PAP's management culture.

Re: "Unfortunately, you cannot enjoy an estate which is well-run and well-maintained by the sincere and down-to-earth MP."

SDP, with reference to the above comment, please don't fall into the same trap that other 'oppposition' MPs - the equivalent of ex-gays leading the charge for gay rights on behalf of the LGBT community - have, and aspire only to becoming becoming town council managers.

Aspire instead to becoming national politicians with ministerial calibre; you are fast developing that capacity, so please don't let all that work go to waste. (Waste in this regard, and the ensuing underemployment it creates, is a symptom of an unproductive work environment.)

This is a side effect of the GRC system. It has created two tiers of representatives in the House: the big boys who play national politics, and the little boys who play the more dimunitive role of making sure that the windows of our HDB flats don't fall out onto the pavement.

Yes, the justification for GRCs was to ensure minority representation, but as fradulent about it as the PAP has been, it was a damned good justification. As a matter of course, Indians and Malays are relieved by this guarantee even if they are dissatisfied by the quality of representation that they have had thus far; it's only democratic to ensure the widest possible participation in the political process.

I urge all who see the sense in the guaranteed representation of Indian and Malay Singaporeans NOT to support any campaign - even if it is by any opposition entity - that seeks to abolish GRCs but have have no provisions to guarantee Indian and Malay representation. (There are ways that this can be accomplished.)

And please don't cite JB Jeyaratnam's election, or even the strong possibility of his son's own even if as NCMP, as proof that GRCs can be abolished with no provisions for minority representation.

I ask if any non-Jeyaratnam Indian, or a Malay opposition candidate in SMCs has equal chances as his or her Chinese counterpart in getting elected.

All minority races want is the same guarantee that Chinese Singaporeans already enjoy. Chinese Singaporeans do not need to institutionalize any guarantee that they will be represented in the House; Indian and Malay Singaporeans do.

Hi NemoAlaska, perhaps you could send a email to SDP for direct answers to your specific questions.

I wonder, to what extent can SDP or any opposition go to help residents that are constituents of another MP? And if they did directly help the residents, I'm sure you'll jump up to ask why the SDP is using covert measures and hijacking the role of the 'elected' MP.

Likewise, even if they answered all your questions, I doubt it will do anything to change your mind anyway because from your comments your biased views are as clear as light of day.

Thanks BryanT for the updated stats, it helps me strengthen my future output.

So other than this "minority representation", what other reasons do you see for maintaining the GRC system? Perhaps for the "favourable conditions", as mentioned below?

"With amendments as we have done, you know, like GRCs.. We need to make it work. And I believe with pragmatic adjustments, given these favourable conditions, we can have more open debate.” - Lee Kuan Yew, 1990 National Day Rally

...About GRC (cont'd from title)

After seeing GRCs always automatically win by walkovers election after election, as simple as I may think, the creation of GRC is a mission accomplished by greedy people. The desire of not letting go. An obvious pattern of coward politic. Whoever gave this(GRC) idea to PAP is having the same demon as Hitler...

Talking about Hitler reminds me of LKY. The only difference between LKY and Hitler was that LKY is not daring enough to make a move on ethnic cleansing in Singapura because he can easily be stop by our neighbouring countries. And LKY will always be an easier target compared to Saddam. He(LKY) knows it.

As of races/cultures (let me talk about one example), the show 'Amazing Race', why is it that Singapore's TV only uses Lion Dance to represent Singapura? Why aren't there any Malay or Indian cultures to be aired too? Even the Malaysia (well known of it's political racism) aired all 3 major races' cultural activities for the whole world to see. What Mediacorp has done was an injustice to us, Singaporean. It is no wonder there are still so many people around the world who think Singapore is in China! Sigh...

Btw, I didn't watch the show (The Amazing Race) but this matter was mentioned by my young relatives. They told me that they were so shameful and unhappy. This shows how bias mediacorp was/is (under gahmen also right?). Even the a lot of Chinese people was never spared. LKY is an ultimate racist in Singapore, if you want to know... is one kind of a devil.

Back to GRC. GRC is like a pillar for PAP to be on Parliament. To stay in power. GRCs is a waste of taxpayers' money for having too many ministers working in a small island. Are they really so incapable until they have to hire so many ministers to handle Singapore? Indeed, the government should reduce about 30 seats in Parliament. That 30 extra wasted salaries can be use to cover FREE transportation for elderly.

Anyway BryanT I'd like you to read this essay on Lee Kuan Yew's views on Race, Culture and Genes: http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/lib/ne/lky/raceculturegenes.pdf

I'd wonder what you think of his views, but then again, you might already share the same views anyway. Don't like my assumption? Well that's what you do all the time :)

I'm surprised nobody have mentioned proportional representation or reserved parliamentary seats for minorities as an alternatives to GRC.

PR - a second vote for favored political party where seats will be divided by party % of votes. This way everybody get to vote.
under PR, you can set the first 3 in the list to include a Malay/Indian or a Female.