Andrew Loh
In a democracy, the people elect its representatives to Parliament. That is the purpose of having elections. Any schemes which go against this principle should be rejected. Why? The idea of having citizens elect their Members of Parliament is based on the notion that anyone who wants to, in effect, be in the driving seat has to have the support of the people. This in turn subjects the elected members to be accountable to the people. It is through this principle that a people is said to have a say in the affairs of the state.
With the latest round of changes to the political system, as announced by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday, this very principle is being mocked at, and more significantly, being set aside.
Singapore’s “democracy” will now see more un-elected MPs in Parliament. These are: appointed NMPs, “loser” NCMPs, and “walkover” MPs.
Nominated Members of Parliament (NMPs) are appointed by the government. They are not elected by the people.
Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMPs) are candidates of an election who have been rejected by the people.
Walkover MPs are those who, for various reasons, do not face any contests in an election.
All three categories are MPs which have not won the people’s support or mandate.
Yet, if the latest changes were implemented in 2006, we would potentially have seen:
9 NMPs
7 NCMPs
38 Walkover MPs
That means, Parliament would have consisted of 54 MPs who were not elected by the people. This is 58 per cent of the 93 seats in Parliament. This is astoundingly more than half the number of seats in the House.
Should we then celebrate this “political liberalization” as the prime minister packages it to be?
It is possible that we will see this 58 per cent of un-elected MPs increase in the next elections as more GRCs are created and the opposition finds it hard to contest all of them, resulting in even more “walkover” MPs for the ruling party.
Parliament being filled with a majority of un-elected members is a joke. Pure and simple, no matter what rhetoric the prime minister uses in trying to convince one and all to accept these changes.
Perhaps this is the biggest danger facing Singapore right now – that Parliament is becoming more and more un-representative of the people. This is especially so when MPs like Hri Kumar is lulled into even suggesting that the prime minister appoints un-elected Singaporeans as ministers.
What Singaporeans should also watch out for are opposition parties which, being seduced by PAP rhetoric and by its own selfish political reasons, accept such changes and even see them as “a way forward” for our democracy, or even as an “improvement” – as Ms Sylvia Lim said in Parliament today.
Clearly, a system which results in more than half of Parliament consisting of un-elected members is faulty, to say the least, and a mockery.
—–
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
Hear, hear!
Throwing in the towel. before the first bell!
Proportional Representation is the holy grail!
a famous Chinese idiom==> “calling a deer a horse” (credit to zhao gao)
The makings of ‘The (pretend to be) Philosopher King and his Merry Men’
the people have become so indifferent, and the ruling class have lost their moral authority, sad, shame
PAP’s original slogan for the public was:
“From the People, by the People, for the People.”
After 43 years, the untold reality seems to be:
“From the PAP, by the PAP, for the PAP”
The title should also include, self appointed judges, parliament speakers, and pap (read: not Singaporean) elected president. Indeed a mockery of parliament and the democracy in this country. One party system is indeed a devil in disguise.
No wonder Singaporeans loss so much over the years and poverty on the rise due to mis management from the un-elected top people who make poor decision for us who did not give them mandate.
Proportional Representation is not really the Holy Grail, but it would be much better for Singapore if GRCs were abolished and replaced with a racially-proportionate voting system instead (if the govt really fears racism so much).
LHL has no respect for Singaporeans.
He just change whatever rules he need to keep him and his people in govt.
WMPs — They are there because no Opposition Party stood against them.
Not their fault leh. Blame Opposition parties for WMPs.
Very Bollywood-ish;
… storyboarded, scrypted, casted, filmed, and produced by themselves..
Well we, just end up buying the ticket (or be issued one) to watch the whole movie…
Cause totally LOST.
If LHL really sincere, remove the GRC and dare him to open up JURONG to vote for WHOM they want… got guts???
Being a singaporean without any experience of the de facto style of democracy ,
I hope to hear from International Democracy Communities their view on this situation. Someone out-of-the-box may give a more balanced view of the situation.
1 thing for sure, based on historical evidence, as long as this population continue to support without change, the nominated and appointed MP can increase. According to my understanding, there could even be a situation where ZERO as in NOT EVEN 1 Opposition PARTY MP need to exist in the house as long as at least 3 or more NCMPs (best of the losers) take up the seats.
Could NCMPs be independents? By independents are they considered non Opposition Party candidates? Or COULD there be ZERO NCMPs and instead have NMPs only?
Could someone help clarify this for the people, especially NAIVE and uneducated people like me? Some need translation into their 2nd language else they go to election without knowing / understanding these changes clearly.
I do not see why we should have MPs who have no power to vote against any bill proposed.
In effect, we get to hear more alternative views but that could be just that.
Like SKH, when a bill is passed, he voiced his alternative views against a bill or 2. The real effect is when it comes to passing the bill, I did not see him casting a veto vote.
To me at least, NMP is like a Blogger but one who is well versed in politics, voicing his alternative views.
I think many at TOC already qualify. Why need so many more in the house?
Why not get all NMPs to run for election as Opposition PARTY candidates to get elected to do the same voicing alternative views AND having the power to Make Decision on a Bill?
I feel that this change has too serious impact. If there is a PETITION, you can hear from me.
I guess it’s just to justify the ridiculous GRC system.
It’s not surprising that Mr Hri Kumar Sangaran should make the suggestion for unelected Ministers. After all, he is on of the ‘duly elected’ walkover MPs.
benedict
I fully agree with Andrew that the proportion of un-elected representatives is the fundamental reason why this government is so detached from the people. They have been running away with themselves these past years and seemingly they are going to run further away from us in the coming years.
Many are beginning to be awaken by this – that when we need the government most (minibonds & downturn), they are nowhere to be found – concerning themselves with the money-generating aspect of management more than the people’s welfare, with the numerous citizens struggling to survive the day.
Instead of helping the people with the here-and-now of daily survival, they are asking the people to help themselves to the whatever-skilling programmes made available so that they are better positioned to help the economy when it starts to recover. Who feeds these empty stomachs and pay their bills while they go for these ‘up-skillings’.
Having said that, we do know what we are up against where this PAP government is concern. And with this consideration, the recent twitching to allow more alternative opposition voices in Parliament cannot be too bad a thing. Like the cliché goes, ‘When in Rome, do what the Romans do’.
Since, the opportunity is now there for the plucking, for the opposition to think quality more than quantity, the onus is now on them to provide good credible candidates to stand for election and get into parliament, never mind yet, whether they are on the winning or losing sides.
While in Parliament, the onus is still on them to show Singaporeans what they are made of and perhaps win the confidence of the electorate at future elections to become truly the people-elected representatives.
What we must not do is to denigrate the concessions to allow more alternative voices to be heard into one where we continually nitpick to the extent that we fail to capitalize on the positives we can extract from them.
Let us begin by making suggestions and recommendations to the alternatives on what they can do, how they can maneuver and position themselves to take advantage of all these changes.
We must not forget that we are in for the long-haul when we consider that establishing a true democracy in Singapore will take time. Make this the turning point.
I think the suggestion for non elected ministers is not entirely bad. It is worth considering, although the appointments need to be limited in number and the mechanism for appointment carefully constructed. Are there not capable people who care about the people, have their interests at heart, and yet appear unapproachable and are therefore unpopular? Being an MP is an incredibly hard job – not all people have the patience and temperament for it. Yes, any politician needs to empathize with with people, but not all can be diplomatic – some people are frank and candid by nature. This does not always go down well with voters. I would think that having up to 2 non elected ministers i cabinet is ok, if for example, they must be approved by a super majority of MPs.
The only way to getting back a more representative Pariliament is through Voting in more Opposition -nothing more, nothing less.
If the citizens of Singapore continue to allow themselves to be cajoled, lulled, scared into their little corner of fear for voting against the PAP, we will get nowhere.
More NCMP’s are there only to provide ‘sparring’ partners for the WMP’s where we know they won’t get hurt unless they trip over themselves.
So more should be done to tell people this latest schems is only an ‘illusionary’ idea of offering more Voices (read as NOISE) in Parliament from powerless opposition MP’s who cannot change their lives.
At the end of the day, the only way all these rubbish ends is when a GRC is broken. I did my part to almost achieve this during the last election. However, will the rest of my fellow citizens, who served NS but got unfairly treated by the pro-foreigner (Foreign Talent my ass.. my gov gave scholarships to foreigners who achieve poorer academic results than me while my parents slogged to pay for my tuition fees, despite the fact that I served NS).
Lets change the system. “YES WE CAN!!”
why not just have nominations and appointments ?
why should the people choose their leaders?
Whats the point of having more parliamentarians not elected by the people in parliament? The interest of the people will not be in their upmost priority in parliament. No doubt, with an increase in NCMPs we will see an increase in opposition numbers but remember NCMP have limitations in parliament such as – no voting rights for bill amendments etc. As for NMPs we all know that these are critical yet maintaining status quo individuals nominated by state actors filtered by the comittee consisting of state officials – hence increasing NMPs = strengthening and balancing amidst increasing opposition in parliament.
please
peasants
hear me out
what you want our prince
the outgoin prime minister to do?
he want to retire
you all want him to head
he cannot do
what he was ^elected^ to do
yet the 66% of the ^RICHED^ eattoofool
want him to stay
if you peeps are askin
the good ole days
of barisan socialists vesus the pay N pay party
than you peeps must be dreamin
what is singapoor famous for?
kiasu
kiasee
and kaykianged
where have you seen a true singaporean gentleman amon us?
the 33% leftovers perhaps?
” Roy on May 29th, 2009 9.05 am At the end of the day, the only way all these rubbish ends is when a GRC is broken. I did my part to almost achieve this during the last election. However, will the rest of my fellow citizens, who served NS but got unfairly treated by the pro-foreigner (Foreign Talent my ass.. my gov gave scholarships to foreigners who achieve poorer academic results than me while my parents slogged to pay for my tuition fees, despite the fact that I served NS).
Lets change the system. “YES WE CAN!!””
ur frustration is shared by many fellow male singaporeans, esp during reservist.
did u know mm just went china to beg them to send more scholars to sg? he also beg them to tolong us, leave a few behind so that they can help sg.
we have woke up and realised that its really a ‘NS for singaporeans, jobs for FT’ under pap. why would we want pap so that they (both pap and FT) can treat us as second class citizens?
“YES WE CAN!!””
What is really worrying is the pre-emptive meaures the PAP is continuing to build into the system. Pre-emptives strikes take out all the good as well….
It started with back door PAP MPs whom the constituents know nothing of them…
Now the downspiral is happening – misfits and self champions are going to make their way to parliament soon – the lives of the priviledged few….not elected by the people but allowed by the PAP system for its own purpose of self preservation and bringing in the unwanted including the existing NMPs just for the wayang show… the show going to be over soon for Singaporeans with the new polticals proposals….. and all the people – just go home – nothing has really changed for the better.
The common sense way to really want to do something fair – is to DO AWAY WITH THE GRC system and go for SMC system in a fair one man one vote contest …..unfortunately the PAP is afraid to take up the challenge…..and the truth is that it will remain so, as long as the goodies are there for themselves and their own people…….foreigners and FTs are PAP secret weapons in the open now…..
I really don’t understand why our basic voting rights shall be dictated on PAP’s terms.
PAP is only a political party in passing (if I may use the word), albeit that it has a ruling mandate by courtesy of its own underhand tactics skewed against the opposition. But that mandate doesn’t give PAP the all-inclusive right act in whatever way that it deems fit.
PAP is supposed to serve all Singaporeans and not only to its elite rulers or members only. We should insist that we do not need any charity from PAP as far as our basic rights are concerned.
Stop pretending or acting as if you really cared about our rights!
“Yes, we can!!!”
Of the 3, walkover MPs are the worst. They have no clear mandate or whatsoever from the people whom they represented.
Technically speaking, there should be another type: the “backdoor” MPs, who enters the parliament under the GRC umbrella. Honestly speaking, the people could be just voting for the leading candidate, who is a Minister and not those “dongbang” along! So actually, they also have a “blurred” mandate so to speak.
Thanks but no thanks. If PAP MPs are so good then they should put majority of them in single constituencies and see once for all (without latching the coat-tails of ministers, threats and goodies,etc) whether they get their mandate or not. Where is the ‘baptizm of fire’ if they merely get elected in without a electoral fight ?.
The people deserve to elect who they they want and the threat of freak results should not worry the PAP if they claim they are that good. Single constituencies have been even won by minority candidates such as Devan Nair, J.B. Jeyaratnam, Rohan Khamis and Govindasamy (Radin Mas) based on their merits. Yes, keep some small GRC with minority candidates but put the others(including ministers) on the burner of single constituencies and see the results.
The citizens and voters, now including the women voters, deserve better. No creative excuses, please.
The economy is faltering and our reserves are dwindling that even without an organised opposition.
aiyoyo
so many elites, what happen when world economy downturn?
do elites got good recovery plans? action plans?
hear a lot bla bla bla…
aiyoyo
I submit that this is not only a mockery of Parliament, but also a mockery of our Constitution, which can be changed at will any time the ruling party wishes to.
PAP is walking a dangerous street…..Look ….and read the comments…..
People are not happy…..the non-elected people to be in Parliment…the new idea of appointments by the PM…..these are not good times for such suggestions…..
What are they doing….i know the CDC’s are trying feed all who walks in…but what other long term plans…..
A man who can’t feed his child or worrys about what the family is going to eat tommorow..won’t want to listen to LHL’s political changes….
The best PAP can do is go back to 1988….3 candidate GRC’s….that would serve the minorities well….it’s simple as that.
The economic crisis….is here to stay for a long time……mind you…and PAP where are you….
I did not even border to read the newspaper, same sentiments, mockery of the democratic process and our intelligence. What I see is a white wash or massage to keep themselves in power as long as they can. I think nothing is wrong with what they are doing , really above board and they can do anything they want. At the end of the day people are not so easily hood winked these days. If the WP or the other opposition parties can present more cadres for the next election, I think we are seeing the beginning of the end of the PAP. The fact is these would be still NMPs and have no voice at all and are not elected by the people. Who are the real losers, we the people…….again.
14) Is Sg moving towards near complete Appointed and Nominated People Representation? on May 29th, 2009 7.12 am
Hey read the IBA report:
http://www.ibanet.org/Human_Rights_Institute/Work_by_regions/Asia_Pacific/Singapore.aspx
19) SY on May 29th, 2009 8.53 am
You are assuming that PAP will always be honest, high integrity, clean, having the interest of the people in mind…. etc.
The truth is absolute power corrupt absolutely ….. If this is being practice, this will give room for abuse of power, and from the history of PAP, they will abuse it.
Moreover, the ministers are really not the brain behind all the ministerial matters, it is the PS, directors …. etc. I was a civil servant. Even press releases, and speeches are written by the “officers” approved by the directors and PS … then send to the ministers. What you see on TV on “today in parliament” is a very very short edited version of the parliament. Many times the ministers need time to answer the questions posted unexpectedly. The ministries and departments will function well even without a minister. The PS and directors of the various ministries were selected by the PAP, so why do we still need Ministers who are not elected but selected by the PM. IT is irrelevant.
SY, are you a PAPee?
I really tired and feel disgusted listen to LHL nosense…..Please those Singaporean who can vote, show them what Singaporean can do…let them lose one or more GRCs and in this case they will realise they can’t do watever they wan as they like. Thye got to be in tact with the ground….and I believe if they lose GRCs in this coming election, 1st they will think twice of more GRCs for future election, 2nd they will work for Singaporean in future if they wan to win in future election and not coming “back door” becoming MPs just “balls licking: their boss, 3rd we can let the opp candidates shows wat they are capable of, 4th if this happen in our coming election it will encourage more Singaporean coming forward joining politic and helping to built a better Singapore!!!
when gct mentioned few years ago that if opposition is really needed, it can be formed within its party. now it is real to what they have in mind way before.
to me nothing has really changed much other than making adjustment of their own error or screwed up so that it can be covered up.
leaders here giving totally wrong signal to future generation by way of such ridiculous one sided ruling system for 50 years and this however, will resulted in – GREED, POWER, SELF SERVED BEGETS EVILS in time to come.
very sad and pethatic political scenario in sg.
Must a walkover MP be a bad one? The fact is, if any incumbent MP does a bad job, then that MP will become an obvious target for a challenge from the opposition and will lose. The fact still reminds that a walkover MP must still work hard to win the loyalty of his people.
To Joel at 36) Yes, the civil servants make important contributions, and we have an excellent CS. But it is the ministers who decide the policies and set the direction. The point is that there are people who can make excellent ministers, but can’t be especially popular and therefore get elected. On the other hand, there are people who can be very well liked by the voters, but cant govern. It is good to have an additional mechanism to bring good people into cabinet, but must be done very carefully.
I never assume the PAP will always be honest, and I have always supported having more good, strong, honest opposition/independent MPs. We need them. Its the best for Singapore.
aft so many yr w/o the chance to vote,i became to wonder if many of us will not get to vote until the day we die true?pap has mke a small step n the opp should take whatever chances they have n work together n form a stronger n more organized team,.get dwn to work n plan for next election,mr chiam should lead a team n go for a grc,the grc system presently may be the pap best tactic to stay in power but it can be a double edge knife if the opp can have a strong n credit team,take dwn a grc is not impossible.i hope the next election we can see a strong opp team with mr low n mr chiam leading.we dont expect a anwar personality but a more united front
This increase in nos of NCMP scheme may have the effect of encouraging more voters of each GRC not afraid to vote for their idolised opposition candidates to get into parliament at least for the NCMP posts since LHL signals that he embraces opposition voice in parliament. The fear of voting for oppositions may be broken. The end result may be more opposition candidates are elected as mandated MPs
There should not be any walkover in an election. This is not a sports competition. It is about selecting people to lead
So if there is only one party contesting a ward, the people should be voting “Yes, I would like you to continue leading us”, or “No, we want someone better”.
Hence if people voted for “No”, the ward must be opened for all parties to contest.
“Must a walkover MP be a bad one?” : SY.
That is a question that only an electorate can answer. Unfortunately, since it is a walkover, no one can answer that question. This is why it is wrong.
You also got it wrong that should such an MP be bad at his job the opposition could just field a candidate to challenge him. You can be sure the opposition would want to do this but can they put in a challenge when the useless MP is hiding behind ministers who earn their keeps. The people cannot, because of a bad MP, vote out the ministers, can they? This is where the GRC system must be dismantled simply because it allows for such useless MP to enter by the back door.
Those who can have purposely chosen not to join opposition.
Game Over.
Self more important.
Hri Kumar, for a person not elected by the voters, you sure have a big mouth and undemocratic suggestions.
39) SY on May 29th, 2009 2.00 pm
You are wrong SY, such a mechanism can only be abused. You are too naive to think that the mechanism will be used for the benefit of the country. Everyone need to be voted in. That is democratic and fair.
My wuestion is how do you know which ministers is doing his job and which is not since those working hard in the background are not being mentioned. You will never know, you are only told what they want you to see.
What I’m angry is that some people still blatantly vote for the govt despite all these issues.
gj at #45: please understand Hri Kumar was just ‘flying a balloon’ to test the wind on behalf of his masters. On his own he is not senior enough to float policy options.
The PAP has been testing out its younger MPs this past week or so, to see how they perform ie whether or not they can ‘hack it’.
SY: there is merit to your view at #19. Dr Richard Hoo, former Chairman and CEO of Shell Singapore and former Finance Minister comes to mind.
The question is, who is going to police it?
With a super-majority in parliament, the PAP can bend the political process to its will. To extend the PMs logic, they might as well declare the whole of Singapore as one GRC and challenge opponents to field complete slates to run government. That will produce an even stronger government and challenge the opposition to produce an even better slate. When does sublime turn to ridiculous?
Sorry …… should read Dr Richard Hu
“who is going to police it?”
based on trust lah.
when that guy said they gained how many billion and lost how many billion,
i suspect the people take his word for it. me also .