The following was first published in The Kent Ridge Common.
Kelvin Teo
A foreign counterpart of mine once asked me how our cabinet ministers performed during our 2006 General Elections. Admittedly, I did have great difficulties answering his question. My foreign friend hails from a western country, and the politics in his homeland is such that all the seats up for grabs during elections are contested by the incumbent candidate and opposition alike.
Of course, I couldn’t give a straightforward reply. I could only recall that Mr K Shanmugam and Mr Khaw Boon Wan were among the best performing PAP candidates, garnering 77% of the votes at Sembawang GRC, and that our current Prime Minister Mr Lee Hsien Loong garnered 66% of the votes at Ang Mo Kio GRC. However, I promised my foreign friend that I would research on the current cabinet and get back to him later.
When I finally got down to checking out the details of our current cabinet, what I found really surprised me. A little less than half (9 out of 20) of the cabinet ministers didn’t have to contest the most recent elections. They were given a shoo-in into parliament on the basis of a no contest in the GRCs which they stood in, winning on a walkover. Thus, technically speaking, I couldn’t tell my friend that Singaporeans voted for these ministers because the residents at their respective GRCs couldn’t vote in the first place.
The 9 ministers are as follows:
1. Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar GRC)
2. Mr Goh Chok Tong (Marine Parade GRC)
3. Mr Wong Kan Seng (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC)
4. Mr Lim Boon Heng (Jurong GRC)
5. Mr Lim Hng Kiang (West Coast GRC)
6. Mr Lim Swee Say (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC)
7. Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (Jurong GRC)
8. Dr Ng Eng Hen (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC)
9. Dr Vivian Balakrishnan (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC)
There wasn’t any other way for me to put it across to my friend. Singaporeans didn’t vote for a little less than half our cabinet due to the walkover rule. Some time back, I addressed the topic of the walkover rule which raises this question – can the walkover victory be justified if we do not know the preference of the voters in the ward? And this is a very valid question. I did further research and compared the cabinet appointments of candidates in walkover constituencies during the 1988 General Elections and came up with the following list:
Mr Yeo Cheow Tong (Health Minister) – Hong Kah GRC
Mr Wong Kan Seng (Minister for Community Development) – Toa Payoh GRC
Mr Lee Yock Suan (Labor Minister) – Cheng San GRC
The 1988 General Election was the year when the GRC concept was first introduced. A GRC consists of multiple seats, and the requirement is that a candidate from a minority race (malay, indian or others) must be fielded. In 1988, the maximum size of a GRC is 3 seats, and has since increased to 6. Some GRCs are allocated 5 seats.
Comparing the results of the 2006 General Elections to those of previous years yield interesting discoveries. The question that comes out of it is whether the introduction of the GRC correlates with an increasing trend of cabinet members entering office through a non-contest. It appears so as I also researched on candidates from walkover GRCs who were appointed to the cabinet during the 1991 General Elections.
1. Mr George Yeo (Aljunied GRC)
2. Dr Ahmad Mattar (Brickworks GRC)
3. Mr Yeo Cheow Tong (Hong Kah GRC)
4. Dr Lee Boon Yang (Jalan Besar GRC)
5. Dr Yeo Ning Hong (Kampong Glam GRC)
6. Dr Tony Tan (Sembawang GRC)
7. Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar GRC)
8. Mr Wong Kan Seng (Thomson GRC)
9. Mr Ong Teng Cheong (Toa Payoh GRC)
10. Mr S Dhanabalan (Toa Payoh GRC)
*Dr Richard Hu won by a walkover in Kreta Ayer, which is a Single Member Constituency.
The introduction of GRC contest has various interesting impacts, many of which have been highlighted previously. And some of them have resulted in interesting trends, one of which has been discussed in this article. Thus, this give rise to pertinent questions regarding the nature of electoral contest within Singapore such as the implications of the walkover rule and whether the GRC concept has impacted competition dynamics.
————
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
i don not want a grc
Did you mention to your friend the elections here are little more than a pre-planned set of events of chest-thumping?
The ruling party set the rule to their advantage, a “pow cheah” election. Most of the ministers retain their seats thru this undemocratically electing system (GRC).
Our neighbour up north didn’t have any grc system and they still got MPs from the minority races.
So is the grc system used to entrench the power of our elites or ensure minority representation? i think our elites are trying to smoke us again….
GRC was implemented so that that there was a representative from each race. However, if this group does not represent the interest of the people, just the way they have always been – you put a range of colours that doesn’t truly reflect the true colours of citizens, then the GRC is thus lost it’s true purpose but in placed as a power controlling tool.
How many of the GRC representatives that got elected into parliment or through walkovers in 2006 are making an impact as of now? I can only recall 2 names that make their presence felt in parliment.
Sylvia Lim and Siew Kum Hong.
What happen to the rest who got into parliment through the GRC scheme? What are they doing now?
Any MP that makes citizens feel, “Yes, this MP is doing something, or clearing the air of certain policies, or questioning the revelenace of certain changes in policies”, makes us go, “Who is this person? He or she is interesting. I feel he is doing something for us, I will remeber his/her name”.
Then only then do I feel that the person I voted in is justified.
Where is their presence? That’s the gripe we citizens feel with GRC scheme, voting a group of sleepers into parliment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spectrum
Interesting that GRC was instituted in 1988…barely a year after Ops Spectrum.
That is why I don’t respect the ministers.They came in by back door!! No experience in fighting elections. Very sad for a so called 1st world country !!!!!
Yes, the GRC makes it very difficult for the opposition to beat. No it is not unbeatable, in one general election at Cheng San, the opposition almost did it. So instead of crying foul, I think the opposition should prove their mental, if you are good enough you should be able to get it after working hard for it. Like Chiam See Tong!
I don’t like the attitude of the opposition and some supporters who only know how to cry foul. Beat it man!
If you are well informed, you will know that GRCs is also a feature in the Japanese elections.
The sword works both ways, PAP could also loose FIVE members if they are not careful or make a slip. In this world there is no such thing as you will win every-time, one can be caught off-guard or take a nap and its gone.
So instead of crying foul, better polish you sword well.
I can’t even remember all the 5 MPs in my GRC. Anyway, it’s a buy 1 get 4 free lelong sale. Of course, you can expect the overall quality to drop when you go for the buy 1 get 4 free approach. Nonetheless, if Slyvia lim comes to Jalan Besar GRC, she can have my vote any time. I am a big fan of her.
It is very disturbing to learn that our ministers are not elected.
But the people accepted the system , or could someone challenge me that this is not a fact? Why discuss this when the people in general accepted this system? so as to satisfy the minority few who may or may not be neglible in number to cause any change or have any effect?
In a democracy, the stakeholders must be responsible for their actions or the lack of it.
no one owes us a living.
response to smallvice585
Not all ministers are un-elected. It may not please you to know that in the US, all ministers are appointed by the US President.
So whats wrong whether they are elected. Elected ministers may or may not be good. The point is the best man for the job and not just because they are from a certain political party.
Can you imagine, an unusal election results happens the next time (like the one in Malaysia). A small party form the government and who are you going to have for ministers.
Do not misunderstand me, I am not a PAP supporter, I just want SG to do well.
OK, this is my 3rd try to put in this comment. Go read the following articles by Yawning Bread, with numbers and quotations to support his arguments.
Apr-2008, The mathematics of elections 2 – data from the last 4 general elections support the “homogenising effect” theory of GRCs
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2008/yax-861.htm
Jun-2006, Goh Chok Tong admits that GRCs are meant to skew – so that “capable” people get an easy ride into office
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-615.htm
May-2006, The GRC election quiz – what are the rules for GRC elections?
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-582.htm
Jan-2006, What our electoral system brings in – Lee Kuan Yew admits that the PAP uses GRCs to bring weak candidates into Parliament
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-540.htm
“Can you imagine, an unusal election results happens the next time (like the one in Malaysia). A small party form the government and who are you going to have for ministers.”
It has to evolve. benefits of managing national resources must circulate and not concentrated only with one small group of self-chosen ones with the blessing with another group of hammer carriers.
have you heard of needing to pay high for them to stay free from corruption. y this concept does not apply to our own low-income countrymen who need even lower-cost FTs to compete and keep their much difficult down-to-earth low-cost work.
a system must not only elect good people to govern but it must also place in a constant renewing counter-checking mechanism to moderate the ‘greed’ side of human nature – be they phds, scholars with spectacles, garment oficers who you may mistake as private sector entrepreneurs, etc.
you have quoted our northern neighbour, do you think that it is the will of the common people that want this to happen or bcos some incumbent cannot believe the common people want them out and they are holding on as best as they can. any similarity here in our context. of course i could be wrong. so can you.
The intention of the GRC was so clearcut, forget their BS about bringing in
minority candidates. The PAP want their blue-eyed men even if voters rejected them.
So having lost in single seats in the GE, they will put these unsuccessful
candidates into GRCs so they can get into Govt on the coattails of heavywt
and popular candidates.
GCT already almost admitted to this.
9) Alternate Distractor Facade Smuty on March 26th, 2009 11.41 am
“But the people accepted the system.”
Really ???????????????????????????????????????????
Have you heard of a recent where a place as far as braddel falls under the GRC called Marine Parade. some person may have thought that braddel is the name of some hawker centre located within marine parade.
“I last voted (for the PAP, by the way) in the 1980s when Braddell was a single-seat constituency. Later, it was absorbed into an expanded Marine Parade GRC, defying the logic of contiguity.” – http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_352359.html
I guess the writer was a little subtle on the opening line commenting on the opposition.
“no one owes us a living.”
at least you are right on this one. and that is y so many people r fighting for a living within their own country where they should supposedly have more control. now do you copy.
‘Not all ministers are un-elected. It may not please you to know that in the US, all ministers are appointed by the US President. ‘ Akoloh #11
The US President may appoint his cabinet members , but they are confirmed by Congress ,whose members (senators and representives) are in turn elected by the people.
So, there is still a line of accountability back to the people.
Compare this with Singapore, where in every GE nearly half the people do not get to elect their MPs and Ministers.
Year 2017 will be ‘a year of policital storms’ for Singapore since independence.
Hold on tight!
Alternate Distractor Facade Smuty on March 26th, 2009 11.41 am
On what basis do you make the claim “But the people accepted the system”.
That there have been no riots?
aiyoyo
elites got the privilege – walk-in & check-in.
how commoners to be served with these elites??
aiyoyo
respond to john tay 17)
Whats the difference, the PAP piggy-back certain candidates which “they think” are of ministerial into parliament, it is also the people who elected the PAP into parliament. It is NOT the fault of PAP if the opposition do no contest certain seats.
The PAP did not cause the walkover, its the opposition failure to field enough candidates. I wish I could help the opposition, but I am afraid most of them got it all wrong. Like my constituent, they only “appear” once in 4 years. So are they going for a lucky draw or the lottery prize?
9) Dumb and dumber on March 26th, 2009 11.30 am
I can’t even remember all the 5 MPs in my GRC. Anyway, it’s a buy 1 get 4 free lelong sale. Of course, you can expect the overall quality to drop when you go for the buy 1 get 4 free approach. Nonetheless, if Slyvia lim comes to Jalan Besar GRC, she can have my vote any time. I am a big fan of her.
I don’t need Sylvia. Bring me a team consisting of a bimbo, a serial drug addict, the pregnant man who switched his gender, and the polar bear from the zoo and I will vote for them.
We don’t need a one party system.
Respond to AkokLoh 21)
“Do not misunderstand me, I am not a PAP supporter, I just want SG to do well.”
“The PAP did not cause the walkover, its the opposition failure to field enough candidates.”
Don’t think anyone is trying to argue with you about walkover. I think the issue here is equality, i.e. competing in an equal platform. From your point of view, is the GRC a more “equal” platform than the SMC (Single Member Constituency)?
If no, who proposed the GRC system and speculate why GRC is introduced, or at least read some of the rationale given in #13?
You sure you’re not working for the Garmen?
The MM always talk about having the PAP candidates going thru’ the ‘Fire Baptsim’ but they always just walk over…. so where is the fire??
Indeed they piggy back on the “better” candidates and get into paliament.
21) AkoLoh – Before we blame the opposition, let ‘s asked ourselves how have we supported the opposition. We know very well that the current system put up lots of blockage for the opposition to challange the PAP…..
“Whats the difference, the ??? piggy-back certain candidates which “they think” are of ministerial into parliament”
If you can’t see the difference, then probably you need to piggy ride also.
It is like you (a freshie) working in your own family business. Most (if not everyone) who may be more experienced than you have to give way and make you look good and yes presto in time to come you may indeed be a little good (well, unlikely that you will fail too badly after all the support, smooth-sailing opportunities that may not be afforded to others, sacrifice given to you by others ).
It is similar in economics, you call it subsidy, the value of someone’s good work (e.g taxpayers contribution) is used to give you (coat-tail rider) a yet-to-be-earned learning edge.
In the context of our case, do the people really want to ‘subsidize’ ths kind of piggies that you are referring to. The people may want give their own type of piggies the opportunity not your type of piggies.
hi all,
i think we all should ask ourselves this big question – who are really the real oppositions??? it is all out THERE OTHER THAN PAPs.
it is about time for us to do something not just for this generation, its for future of our children and grandchildren’s. if someone out there who has the ability and gut fearless of no one accept God…and i say DO IT!
if everyone is blaming the system (PAP’s) and whining and comdamning the present opposition whom i admired who got gut and fight for public rights, THEN i say….we are all in trouble. THE REAL ONE AND GOOD ONE ARE ALL OUT THERE, it just a matter of time and situation that compiled you guys to do it.
God Bless!
Abolish the walkover concept. Even if there is no opposing candidates, the sole party standing MUST secure at least fifty percent of the votes. If not, call another election with a fresh set of candidates until a majority is obtained. In this way, we can truly say that the all MPs in Singapore are elected.
“Like my constituent, they only “appear” once in 4 years. So are they going for a lucky draw or the lottery prize?”
Can do it openly without permit or not. lucky draw ?
you see no problem in piggy-back and yet you are making fun of lucky draw and lottery prize which other people “are forced” to make-do.
“I wish I could help the opposition, but I am afraid most of them got it all wrong.”
Really ? Spare your effort. You should help yourself by getting a good pair of spectacles so that you are able to see clearly who really got it all wrong.
Remember what the Merovingian said in Matrix Reloaded,
“Choice is an illusion, created by those with power for those without.”
This is true for our General Elections. We need Singaporeans to sincerely believe they have a choice, even if they were only aware of it at a near-unconsious level.
I just really hope Siew and Slyvia and some opposition big wigs join forces and contest In Aljunied or Wong Kan Seng’s GRC. (Actually PM’s GRC, with Wee Shu Min’s dad and Table Tennis Queen looks terribly weak and we may have a mother of all upsets there…. 66% without Shu Min’s and Table Tennis fiasco… against rookie team… imagine a strong team with the fiascos… )
Of course the people must give them a chance.. Slyvia and Siew looks like the quality candidates everyones craves for, they are successful in their respective careers, articulate and understand the ground. If we throw in Low or Chaim who had demonstrated they can run a town properly, and the people still dun vote them in..
I’ll migrate.
kelvin Tan,
you are right!
for those who believe ‘there is a choice’ seek for it. it is all ours ‘choice’ too.
it high time man!!
We had enough of GRCs. We want all single wards, then we can access
and elect each candidate according to their individual strengths.
We the citiizens have the right to vote, so respect and give us this right.
If they want to win, win with pride and glory.
In the old days when we have all single seats, it works just fine
for us. So we should revert back to that, GRCs is just not our cup
of tea.
My father is 82 this year. In a rare chance, we start to talk politic yesterday and I posted his a question. Are you happier now compared to 50 yrs ago?
small Yes is the answer : he live & managed to raise 7 kids (me inclusive) retired at 70 with a fully paid HDB flat and have enough saving to last him PLUS monthly token sum from his children. BUT BUT…
BIG NO for his kids. He can’t say the same for his children (me & my siblings) because he see us working our ass and eventually if we are lucky, mayb a fully paid HDB and nothing else!
Then we talk about election. well he nearly forgotten. HAHA guess wht he is 85 yrs old but only vote twice!!
That tell it all.
I pray for big change because I feel that we have nothing to lose. I rather embrace my self for the “suffer” if any for the BIG CHANGE than to die of a slow death.
Chinese saying 背水一战。
akloh
/ ‘Whats the difference, the PAP piggy-back certain candidates which “they think” are of ministerial into parliament, it is also the people who elected the PAP into parliament. It is NOT the fault of PAP if the opposition do no contest certain seats. ‘
That tells you the quality of their so-called blue-eyed candidates.
Leaders are shown out during times of adversity, crisis and not invited for tea and to piggyride on other people.
Whereas in the democratic world do we find an electoral system like the GRCs.
Its not the PAP’s fault? If that’s the case, despite overwelming disapprovals , why
didn’t they have the guts to dismantle the GRCs and fight with the oppositions
gentlemanly one to one?
“Then we talk about election. well he nearly forgotten. HAHA guess wht he is 85 yrs old but only vote twice!!”
And some people (e.g some fire fighters here) will blame it on opposition for not being able to provide the candidates to contest. What a joke.
Once an FT (also PR actually) asked me why there weren’t any contestants in some areas. I casually shrugged it off as due to the lack of opposition candidates and she kept on blurting out ‘how come’ for at least three times.
Probably to her and in her own country, the word ‘walk-over’ does not apply during election time – i did not ask so i could be wrong. do you think so fire-fighters.
GRC is now a fact..whether you like it or not..
AMK GRC to be contested next round? I thought Low of Workers Party said he would pull out in next election & concentrate elsewhere, though general consensus is that the team there is not that stellar, one mama drama Hokkien expletive queen & one father whose daughter shoots her mouth at working class Sporeans. Yup, does not look good.
BUT & here’s the BIG BUT, AMK GRC will still have a majority win if contested, perhaps a small dent or a slightly bigger dent. Passive Sporeans makes for passive voters which translates to status quo in voting pattern.
I know that both #16 and #19 Sgcynic disagreed that:
“the people accepted the system”
Let it be clear, I do not wish to be pro any party and wish to provide a neutral perspective. I know many of you are more intelligent and knowledgeable than me. Regardless, I will give it a shot at replying you.
[Assumption for this discussion]
1. The People = the people in general. There is no absolute 100% because people are not homogeneous like robots. They should not be. If it is so, it is a failure.
…
I assume that those who may not be happy with the ruling party may point out that not all got the chance to vote and so we do not know officially how many actually do not accept the ruling party in the last election.
I also assume that the same group of people feel that the GRC system is ‘too much’.
Even with these constraints the people is Still Responsible for the status quo.
Here’s why:
a. They can form an alternative party to challenge.
b. They can find good talents to challenge.
c. They can form activist groups to create movements.
d. They can find any other ways to achieve progress they way they want.
And I know, this group of people may say, but the ODDs are Against them.
Responsibility is a strong word. But we cannot run away from what is really our responsibility. Who says this process is easy? This is the world we live in. Its not pretty all of the time.
Citizens of a democracy cannot run away from this responsibility even if they don’t want to be responsible. This is how i see a citizen of a democracy.
The fact is that for the last 40 years, the people have not formed a strong opposition party. Yes, there is a mountain of an obstacle in front. But we cannot run away from the fact that this is the people’s responsibility, if they want something else.
[Acceptance]
1. acceptance can come in different forms.
-Reluctantly accept = accept.
-Happily accept = accept.
-Inaction is also a form of Acceptance.
Officially (voting), there is no 2 ways about it – either you accept or you do not accept. I am not in favor of spoilt votes. We have to make up our minds.
Do Not Accept = did not give a party the vote if you do not accept it. This is the only definition of Non-Acceptance, in my view.
[Responsibility]
1. Responsibility of Citizen of a Democracy :
The people ultimately HAS the RESPONSIBILITY to voice up or do the right thing.
– ignorance: people can be ignorant. But being ignorant is a weakness and not an excuse to be spared this responsibility because a citizen is by default responsible. So, there can be a trillion reasons and excuses. The fact remains, the people are responsible, ultimately.
– ruling parties are given mandate by the people. Regardless of the reasons and limitations or constraints, the people are still responsible for the status quo.
I do not know what the future results will be like. But the people better know they are ultimately responsible. Feel free to disagree or correct my understanding or point out where i am wrong.
#32) Righteous
We had enough of GRCs. We want all single wards, then we can access
and elect each candidate according to their individual strengths.
#36) Watanaporn
GRC is now a fact..whether you like it or not..
…………………………………………………..
The opposition parties should bring these unfair, undemocratic electoral system to the attention of the UN as voting for one’s representative in parliament is a human rights. Many citizens do not have the chance to vote for many years.
wow, the operation spectrum is so cruel, in modern peaceful singapore!
those poor guys are they still alright, can they sue the gov?
Scrap the GRC rule.
Akoloh (#12),
But PAP is the problem. You may think PAP is the lesser evil than the Opposition, but the problem with electing the lesser evil is that evil is still elected. What’s the solution to this? Dispose PAP first. Heroes always emerge from chaos.
38) Alternate Distractor Facade Smuty on March 26th, 2009 11.51 pm
“Citizens of a democracy cannot run away from this responsibility even if they don’t want to be responsible. This is how i see a citizen of a democracy.”
Then what do you think we are doing here in the internet. Mind you, new law coming out which may be even tougher than the more than 4-men assembly.
I do not think that It has to do with education but basic common sense. ‘uneducated’ or common people may not convey in the manner / language to warrant the slightest attention of those “high priests”.
How to create a more visibly open (and noisy if need be) platform to congregate like-minded and yet ‘responsible’ people who want to do it and present a more strong and concerted force if all these one-sided deterring rules are around.
One group is able to wield the hammer (in the name of law enforcement where there is no restriction on how many truckloads of armed law enforcement officers can be present) and on the other hand those ‘responsible’ people you are talking about cannot even form a group of more than 4-people (could be lesser soon) without permission from the people who are wielding the hammer.
Are you suggesting revolutions ?
To #43
Responsible to who?
“Regardless of the reasons and limitations or constraints, the people are still responsible for the status quo.”
Just a thought experiment, if your family deliberately chooses not send you to school (education), how long would it take for you to be responsible (have a sudden enlightenment that you have missed out so much all this while and pro-actively start the process of getting yourself registered to begin a much belated schooling, if you even know how to begin with in the first place).
The world is full of people who may not be knowledgeable / may not have fine understanding over wide areas of topics / matters and that is where the push factor comes in. remember the minibond (even national banks & big name-institutions get caught in the sub-prime mess)
That is what I analogize as “limitations or constraints”.
I feel that the walkover champions should get the chance to find out how overwhelming is the support from their residents. I feel that this walkover thingie has gone on for long enough. What is the effect on society if such forms of victory continues for another 50 years? Lets have a reality check by getting these residents to really casting their vote, which based on impression only, the support should be overwhelming. To what extent, I no no.
smallvice585 42)
You are wrong, I did not vote for the PAP thinking that they are the lesser of the two evil. I have consistantly voted for the opposition, The last election, some unknown candidates from the opposition had my vote that translated to 30%
of votes cast.
All they care about are votes, did they thank the voters after that. No, they just disappeared.
Heroes do emerge from chaos sometimes, you are right. Things also have to get worst before they get better. Well, sometimes.
Look at Pakistan and Bangaladesh, did heroes emerge from chaos? Closer home, if the people power in Philippines were to throw out Arroyo tomorrow, you think things will get better.
Well, the answer is depending on who you ask.
Let me hijack your conversation with the Alternator.
Ignorance calls for education to enlighten the minds.
Those who can or know more or are in the right position to educate
have not done their due diligence or I should say they should have done more or starting from 10 years ago.
Akoloh (#47)
It all boils down to what yardstick you use to measure whether the situation has become better. Different political factions would use different yardsticks and of course when I meant better, I meant better according to my yardstick. There is no such thing as a universal yardstick.
I am not against GRCs. The 2 main issues I feel are :
(a) the overwhelming number of GRCs
first and foremost, singaporeans are mainly pragmatic people. therefore, it is
impossible for an opposition mp to be voted in over and over again if the
benefits of having single constituency seats aren’t there.
what exactly in hard benefits are achieved with each GRC, large or small ?
it seemed that the arguments for are so far qualitative, which to me, is not
convincing.
(b) the number of MPs in GRCs are getting larger
4 is a good size, and most races woud have been adequately represented
anyway. 6 is an overkill based on the representation argument.
Perhaps a balance in number of GRCs and SMCs will make more sense. The current policy makers can still break the areas into SMCs during voting, and once the elections are completed, they can choose to form GRCs for administrative purposes during the terms.