Andrew Loh / Deputy Editor
It is not unexpected that the Government has rejected calls to hold a by-election in Jurong GRC, following the death of Dr Ong Chit Chung. Many reasons have been proffered by both those who support a by-election and those who do not.
The Online Citizen’s result of a street poll of 478 people conducted in Jurong GRC last week was mentioned in Parliament by Nominated Member of Parliament Mr Siew Kum Hong (NMP). The results showed a clear preference for holding a by-election – with 60.1 per cent of those who had a clear opinion answering “yes” to the question of whether a by-election should be held in Jurong GRC.
This result is quite similar to those of another poll conducted by The New Paper of Bukit Batok residents, as reported here on 29 August 2008. In that poll, the paper reported that “more than two-thirds of those we polled who were clear in their opinion felt they wanted a by-election (70 out of 100).”
Yet, the Government has flatly refused to hold one.
And therein lies the biggest question which seems to have been ignored by the PAP Government: When the people of Jurong GRC, and the people of Bukit Batok in particular, feel they are not being adequately represented and want a by-election, is it right for the Government to dismiss their call?
In my opinion, the only credible reason against holding a by-election is the one expressed by MP Hri Kumar. He was concerned that MPs, especially minority-race MPs, would be bestowed with “extraordinary powers, including the power to force a by-election.” This is a valid concern. One MP should not be able to hold the rest of his colleagues – or even his party – hostage, by way of resigning in order to force a by-election for his own selfish purposes.
Having said that, however, I would argue that if an MP of any party goes to that length to resign and force a by-election, it would actually be a party problem – and not a national one – and it is for that party to sort things out within itself.
Thus, internal disagreements within a party should not preclude or take precedence over the principle of representative democracy, a point which was reiterated many times by both Professor Thio Li-Ann and NMP Siew in Parliament.
But even if we agree with Mr Kumar’s point and would rather prevent MPs from having such “extraordinary powers” to hold others ransom, an easy solution to his question would be to simply amend the law to state that only when an MP dies, and not when he resigns, should a by-election be held.
I am sure no MP would want to force a by-election by killing himself.
Alternatively, if an MP were to vacate his seat through resignation or other reasons, perhaps we should conduct a referendum in his ward and ask his constituents if they think a by-election should be conducted. This gives the power back to the people to decide – and takes it away from the MP who resigned or vacated his seat, thus resolving the problem of him having “extraordinary powers” to hold others hostage.
As for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s argument, I will leave it to a future piece on TOC to rebut his point. For now, suffice it to say that it is tiresome to hear PM Lee use our “turbulent past” to justify his refusal to call a by-election. To paraphrase what Mr Vivian Balakrishnan once said, please do not be ossified in the past, using it to justify all sorts of refusal and denials.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the most important question is this: For a Government which frequently cites its “electoral mandate” as a reason for its legitimacy, why is it so afraid to go to the people again when one of its members in a GRC team vacates his seat? What, really, is the reason?
Whatever it is, the Government is depriving the people of Jurong GRC, and Bukit Batok constituency, an opportunity to have a direct say in the running of their estates.
This goes against all those public statements and urgings by the same Government and its ministers for Singaporeans to be more involved – not just in politics in general, but also in how their constituencies are run.
Isn’t it ironic then, that when an opportunity presents itself to let Singaporeans do exactly that, the doors are quickly shut tight – by the same people calling for the public to be more involved.
*One wonders if Singaporeans are paying for redundant MPs if four MPs can do the work of five, as the PAP Government has been saying lately. (MPs get about $14,000 per month. That’s more than half a million for a 5-year term.)
———————-
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Permatang Pauh???
Because they will lose 2 ministers and a NTUC Asst Sec General?
i am very uncomfortable with the reasons given for not having a by election, especially with regards to minority MP representation.
a worrying trend and train of thoughts.
of course it a NO for them cause they will sure lose 100% lose .
One very simple reason:
The govt is virtually sure of defeat by the opposition should there be a by-election. It is simple logic – it knows that it has currently drowned Singaporeans with a host of very unpopular taxes and price hikes; there is nothing to prevent the people of the GRC from voting in some opposition members since it is unlikely to unseat the govt, a popular threat used by the PAP at every GE.
The govt leads in being kiasu and kiasee.
We challenged the PAP to hold a by-election or else be branded as cowards! What are Low Thia Kiang and Chiam See Tong doing? Are they not pressurising too? They have been too quiet lately.
Dear Andrew,
The PAP operates in a “top-down” fashion and NOT “bottom-up” ! LKY himself believes that the country should be run that way – just read his books.
In this political philosophy – the Government leads the people to whatever direction they want the people to go – and the people do NOT show the Government which way to go.
In a one-party state like Singapore – where the system is top-down – there is no deep reason why the Government needs to listen to the people. They do not have to care about what you think of them. Why ? Because there is no serious competition…..
And here – Chee Soon Juan is right ! The Singapore system has been moulded to give the PAP enormous powers and advantages. You cannot play this game and hope to replace the PAP. At the very best – you end up like the WP – a PAP approved, soft Opposition !!
its sad that once and govt, the citizens voice is not heard.
despite so many calls for by-election.
the govt still flatly rejects outright.
i believe to maintain the neutrality of the survey, it should be carry out by a neutral party.
In this current times of hardship, I can understand why the govt rejects calls for by-election. As more people is likely to vote for opposition as show of protest on the hardship which everyone is having.
They are worried a re-occurence of the malaysia’s BN poor results happening to them.
And i truly do not believe that only PM have right to call for by-election, the people voice should be hear.
I also agree on the thoughts of if 4 people can perform the task of 5, then why should we waste money? We maybe as well have 3 or 4 super GRC for whole singapore. As long it works, we can save taxpayer alot more while lesser people do whole.
Govt shd scrap the GRC scheme as it is unfair and unjust and really unnecessary as it only makes the incumbent more likely to retain the seat who doesnt matter which are the sub-members of the GRC, as long there are enough people, get a Minister to be in a GRC. PAP sure win the election.
They Don’t Listen because they CAN.
Perhaps only a UN sponsored mission will make them listen to the true wishes of the people? hhhaha (but seriously, our Constitution and laws are so unclear that it allows them to side-step it). Thanks to the 66.6% who have given them free will to amend/chop/change our Constitution and laws.
It’s obvious that 2 separate polls within the constituency came back with the same conclusion : ie. the Majority want a by-election and yet they chose to neglect the call from the very people that ‘gave’ them the power.
Dear The SS,
They don’t care about what you and I think. We don’t matter to them. What matters to them are their plans, goals, bottom-lines, GDP growth etc. Digits like us – are meaningless…….
At the end of the day – the fault lies with us – the people of Singapore. The people of Singapore gave them the mandate to rule as they please. Had Singaporeans put their foot down in the 1980′s – things would be very different today…….
There is a price to pay for everything…………………….
they always want their cake and eat it too including the icing …not share it; that’s hypocrisy.
the Hri Kumar reason is in itself a big joke – it means the party itself has poor people selection process.
For all you know now, every MP must go for monthly check ups. Talk about active citizenry. Singaporeans get what they deserve.
On 1 Septermber, we will be organising a protest in Speaker’s Corner. All you people who complained so much behind all those weird names better turn up to support.
If the PAP govt is so confident that it is a good government as S(mug)M Goh boasted recently, there is no reason that i should fear an election. Unless it is NOT a good government, just like the Badawi govt.
I agree we are paying a price because too many people in the past voted for the PAP blindly and the PAP has taken the liberty to do as they please. This is evident by the self serving governance and policies. Their MPs do not speak up for the people, then what’s the point of having 82 PAP members in parliament ? Essentially they behave like a bunch of eunuchs, except for Lily Neo !
The people of Singapore need to self reflect and ask whether we should allow things to be status quo. Political cowards with very questionable integrity do not deserve the peoples’ support.
In 1959, when the People’s Action Party first won the election, the newspaper reported a statement by Lee Kuan Yew, “The verdict of the people is a terrifying thing”. This was made in reference to the defeat of the other parties that the PAP contested against. At that time, the PAP had the support of the ordinary people.
Next year will be the 50th anniversary of this historic event. Will the table be turned this time? Maybe this statement
This is nothing to be surpised.
Remember another thing that old man said before – ‘of giving two votes to the senior voters’ tho words are not exactly as I said but something like it.
Of course, I believe he did an about turn – what if senior voters give 2 votes to the opposition, haha u see they have an arsenal of underhand policies which they can enact.
This latest episode again demonstrate the need to restore the Single Man Constitutuency!!!
The ideal set up by the Party was something huge, terrible, and glittering – a world of steel and concrete, of monstrous machines and terrifying weapons – a nation of warriors and fanatics, marching forward in perfect unity, all thinking the same thoughts and shouting the same slogans, perpetually
Wah, complain so much scully they amend the constitution to say “hold elections only once every 50 years” then you all know!
It’s not surprising that the PAP govt will not call for a by-election in Jurong GRC. And there is nothing the citizens can do about it. Put it bluntly, they have Singaporeans by the balls because the law is on their side. The power to call for by-elections and general elections (subjected to a maximum of 5 years term) lies in the hand of the PM.
Given the vote swing they have experienced in past elections where the opposition adopted a “by-election” strategy, coupled with the current economic climate and the various policies (such as more ERP gantries, CPF-Life, etc.) enacted, it is quite obvious the PM will not want to call for any by-election. The chance of losing the GRC is very real. And no politician worth his salt will call for a by-election under such circumstances.
However, the PAP govt may have to pay for this in the next general election. The Internet has an extremely large memory. Many of the issues, including the avoidance of the by-election, are well recorded and discussed on the Net in various blogs and forums. Such memories can be easily recalled and issues revived at the next general elections.
Who decides?
Them or the people ? them only? the people cannot influence the decision at all?
Let us know, officially.
We, the …..of spore.
u come to a point…bursting with rage…and u just want to tell him to SHUT UP!…we have enuff of same spinning again and again…about the past…blah blah blah…its ad nauseam MR PRIME MINISTER SIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Congratulations Singapore. You got the government you voted.
As the PM has put it, you voted for the party and not the person.
Enjoy the remaining years of PAP.
I am sure, when the next election comes along, the same menagerie will be back in power.
It dosen’t take much to convince the people that voting in anything other than the PAP will lead to a catastrophic collapse of the country…not to mention the loss of the baby bonus and other handouts.
It’s like going into a restaurant, ordering a abalone and getting a seehumm.
But somehow, you keep returning because you get a free cup of chinese tea.
seems like our voice is never heard. my guess is that we have to wish for more ‘drop dead’ cases in jrg GRC before we have by-election.
If there is a by-election now no doubt the PAP will lose by landslide because the political winds of change that is sweeping our region is very strong. First it has happened in Malaysia and now it is coming to Singapore. Not holding the by-election will only prolong the agony of an unpopular govt for a short while, but it cannot kill the winds of change.
Hold by-election – run risk of losing?
Don’t hold by-election – may antagonise more voters – may lose more votes to opposition in next general election
Haven’t they learnt anything from the Malaysian experience!
Start loosening up, loose a bit now – otherwise risk losing more in next general election
GRC is bad, those in the group cannot standup for himself. This is not the kind of leadership we want. Individual has to get his own merit to be elected as MP. If this is not revert to one constituency to one MP, I think , next stage will be Singapore GRC. like the Bush says, either you are with us or against us! Only one person will have a say in anything and everything!!
i see a glimmer of hope here.
TNP ran a story about how people wanted a by-election.
the media has always played a very important role in any society. yet this media ran a story that appears contary to PAP interests.
Is the singaporean media really loosening up?
Or is this a way to get us to trust the media, so that some real big shit can be kept under wraps?
the media appears fair to me (is it doing a good acting job?), and most importantly, most singaporeans take what it says without any pinches of salt. this could hinder the growth of civil society in the long run.
Our PM Mr. Lee HL said in a recent clarification that as long as there is going to be ONE MPs left in the GRC, there is no need for by-election. This is a load sharing system, you vote for the party, not the individual.
What does this mean?
1. Since GRCs only need 1 MP, then we should only have 1 MP per GRC.
2. MPs in the GRC should only get 1 allowance. If there are 7 MPs in one GRC, then each MP should get 1/7th of the MP allowance.
3. There should NOT be any more focus of the credentials of the MPs (i.e. whether they are university graduates or not), because we are voting the party and only 1 MP is actually working… So we can put 1 MP, 2 monkeys, 3 cats, 1 cow. They are all elected and it doesn’t mean a thing, right?
4. Those MPs in the GRC should have their voting rights in the parliament divided up. I.e. (if any MP is from a 6 man GRC, his vote should only be 1/6)
5. NCMPs are practically useless, because whatever they selected are almost always shot down because they have no votes. So they can do a “show”, but is practically useless.
Are these views correct?
This particular objection to a by-election caught my interest:
In my opinion, the only credible reason against holding a by-election is the one expressed by MP Hri Kumar. He was concerned that MPs, especially minority-race MPs, would be bestowed with “extraordinary powers, including the power to force a by-election.”
In rebuttal to this, you’ve raised two possible solutions:
1) hold a by-election only when an MP dies,
2) hold a referendum on whether a by-election should be held.
The first, in my opinion, can be rather problematic because it contradicts one of the main reasons why we should have a by-election in the first place, namely, that the constituency needs a representative in Parliament, and this should apply regardless to the manner in which the seat is vacated.
The second, while appearing fine in principle, seems a bit excessive in terms of logistics. I mean, it’s like arranging an election twice (assuming the people voted for a by-election in the referendum); to people who places a lower priority in voting, this may become a double hassle for them.
However, in any case, I doubt this objection is all that vital to the entire debate anyway.
Pingpong gals have proven that foreigner can represent spore after being granted citizenship certificate and in as short as 1 year can represent spore in the largest event in the world.
Likewise, I like to firmly state that the Opposition should never give excuse that there is a lack of talent . Talent can be welcomed from overseas.
Talents can be foreigners providing strategies for campaigns, Blogging, counter cybersquad, counter anything, for the better of the nation.
So, lets be clear that even if the majority does not want to join the opposition, due to extreme pragmatism or not, the opposition should know that they have access to the world of talents to help them succeed, to do what they are currently weak in. FT can play supporting but strong role in their quest for the majority . Apply and see if get approved lor.
what is the harm?
regards
Mee Siam goh-song.
I am a student.
I like to find out,
in a democratic society based on justice and equality, so as to achieve….
is a Poll = a Referendum ?
Has any of you very intelligent person out there ever experienced a Referendum so fundamental in a Democracy?
I think a election is a form of referendum. But other than that, have anyone still alive in spore ever experienced a Referendum?
wow, spore so stedi boon bi bi and 1st world siah .
there was once a referendum in 1961 or 1962, as to the TERMS as which to join malaysia.
i think you’d have learnt it in history.
there were three options. all three involved different forms of joining malaysia. so if you were not happy to join malaysia, you had no voice then.
32) Jonathan on September 1st, 2008 10.44 pm
Is referendum a taboo?
if so , is it banned?
if not, why not in books?
i am clueless. nice to meet you.
Poll_vs_Referendum:
Technically, a poll is an informal and “raw” survey of the opinions of the people on a particular issue. They typically have sample sizes too small to be representative of the population, and they are normally not statistically balanced to the population profile either (e.g. distribution of age in sample is different from that of population). Usually, polls just give an indication of the feel of the population, and cannot be taken too seriously in most cases.
A referendum is more formal and proper. In principle, a referendum is a poll with the sample to be the population. That is to say, the entire population is polled. Very clearly, a referendum takes quite an amount of planning and logistic to carry out.
In a sense, a referendum is an election, but one must be careful about how we define an election. A referendum asks the voter to choose, directly, whether a particular proposal will become the law. In contrast, the election, as usually referred to, asks the voters to choose candidates for political office.
u never know, they might take 14000 divide by 4 and give 3500 extra per month for each of the MPs for doing extra work. no cost savings afterall!
The election department should be deciding whether there should be a election or not and not the PM as it is conflict of interest. Oops, the election dept is under the PMO.
“The election department should be deciding whether there should be a election or not and not the PM as it is conflict of interest.”
Can that happened ? Every department is under the control of FamilLee, whether directly or indirectly. Papa Lee can just come out suddenly and give his final verdict. Remember the SIA pilot wage incident. Even more importantly for election where this is where the control of $$$$$$ is. Give them mandate and they find ways to dig money out from citizen eg Increase GST to help the poor, POOR MINISTERs. For them, they just accept that there is no need to ask the citizen for opinion regarding $$$$.
In a most damning indictment, Moore said that Lee has ‘lived a lie about the detainees for too long, giving the Party the impression that he was pressing for their release while, in fact, agreeing in the ISC that they should remain in detention.’
“Lee is probably very much attracted to the idea of destroying his political opponents. It should be remembered that there is behind all this a very personal aspect. He claims he wishes to put back in detention the very people who were released at his insistence , the people who are intimate acquaintances, who have served in his government, and with whom there is a strong sense of political rivalry which transcends ideological differences.”
- Lord Selkirk,
British Commissioner to Singapore
Read the above somewhere, it just shows like father like son
When my form teacher in BBSS passed away my principal get us a new form teacher (not relief Form Teacher) immediately. Sad to see BB can have only a relief MP.
LSL! you are worse than my principal.
I can only say these:
朗朗乾坤 清天何在
恶人之有恶人磨
(sigh)
pap is plain scared cause they will certainly lose big in the by-election… no guts, thats wat they are.. lousy dictator party.!
Competent politicians, such as ministers and trade union leaders, should have no issue for facing competition, even if Singapore is currently facing high inflation. Only in such a situation then we Singaporeans can indeed evaluate whether PAP still holds the electoral mandate.