Revert to 3-member GRCs for credibility

Revert to 3-member GRCs for credibility

WHAT has happened to the group representation constituency (GRC) system represents a deviation from its originally noble intention ('Cynicism will hurt GRC system', commentary by deputy editor Alan John; Wednesday).

Original three-member GRCs have mushroomed into four-, five- and six-member constituencies, although these upsizings have not helped increase minority-race presence in Parliament.

If the original objective could be achieved with three members in a GRC, why has the number increased so drastically over the years?

In my view, the changes were prompted by the People's Action Party's (PAP) desire to make it increasingly difficult for opposition parties to capture a GRC, after surviving a narrow shave in a few GRC contests.

The PAP's argument that having large GRCs cuts both ways for the PAP and opposition parties in terms of risks and rewards is unconvincing.

Also, linking GRCs to town council management is an afterthought to justify the increase in GRC size.

There is nothing to prevent two- or three-member GRCs from banding together if there is a common interest in improving management and benefiting from economies of scale, if the MPs concerned agree.

What the PAP has done in upsizing GRCs is wrong, although it may be legal and constitutional.

So, I say, cynicism has already hurt the GRC system. The PAP should revert to three-member GRCs to restore credibility.

Young Pak Nang

Harlow Mr Young, why should PAP revert to three member GRCs to give themselves more grief. IT IS THE JOB OF SINGAPOREANS TO TELL PAP TO REVERT TO THE THREE MEMBER GRC SYSTEM.

Give the signal properly in the next election.

suicidalpap said:

... If the original objective could be achieved with three members in a GRC, why has the number increased so drastically over the years?

n my view, the changes were prompted by the People's Action Party's (PAP) desire to make it increasingly difficult for opposition parties to capture a GRC, after surviving a narrow shave in a few GRC contests ...

Click to expand...

dat's exactly dat selfish ah loon's strategy ... he reduced others, but increased his own 2 6 ... he's damn scared of losing n now fixing opps by discouraging dem 2 challenge him ...

The SCUMS IN WHITE have lost their credibility quite sometime ago.

They stay in power by spreading FEAR....and empty promises to the 'older' folks and the MUTTS.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="if(typeof(jsCall)=='function'){jsCall();}else{setTimeout('jsCall()',500);}" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

suicidalpap (09-04-2011 03:32 AM) said:

Revert to 3-member GRCs for credibility
WHAT has happened to the group representation constituency (GRC) system represents a deviation from its originally noble intention ('Cynicism will hurt GRC system', commentary by deputy editor Alan John; Wednesday).
...

Click to expand...

Consider reverting to three-member GRCs
Letter from Vincent Chin 03:20 PM May 12, 2011
As the PAP starts its post mortem and soul-searching, many questions will be raised. These will include issues like the cost of HDB flats; the congestion commuters are facing in our public transport; the influx of foreign talent and the spiraling cost of living. While there is no doubt the PAP Government will do its best to tackle these problems, there are other areas they should look into as a result of several revelations during the General Election 2011.
The PAP should review the Group Representation Constituency system which was introduced in 1988, with three-member GRCs increasing to six members over time. At the outset, it was meant to allow candidates of a minority race to take part in the country's politics. However, when most GRCs experienced walkovers, this allowed the ruling party to bring in new candidates without them having to compete in an election. In GE 2011, while it has been said that Aljunied is an example that the GRC system works, everyone knows how difficult it was for the Opposition to make it happen. On the other hand, the PAP has pointed out correctly that Mr Michael Palmer, their SMC candidate for Punggol East, was a good example that a minority race candidate can win in a single seat.
It is hope that the GRC scheme can be revised such that a GRC will consist of only three candidates, with one from the minority race. Furthermore, all first-time candidates should be tasked to contest in SMCs and if they win, only then should they be included in GRCs in future GEs.
Another issue is the redrawing of the electoral boundaries before each GE. This practice should stop unless there are good reasons for redrawing the boundaries other than strategic political reasons. In the eyes of the voters, this is unfair practice.
http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC110512-0000770/Consider-reverting-to-three-member-GRCs

The 3 member GRC system was introduced to improve the chances of PAP win. It was done to dilute the opposition votes. All they need to do was to merge 2 constituencies with higher PAP votes with one with lower PAP votes.

suicidalpap said:

Revert to 3-member GRCs for credibility

WHAT has happened to the group representation constituency (GRC) system represents a deviation from its originally noble intention ('Cynicism will hurt GRC system', commentary by deputy editor Alan John; Wednesday).

Original three-member GRCs have mushroomed into four-, five- and six-member constituencies, although these upsizings have not helped increase minority-race presence in Parliament.

If the original objective could be achieved with three members in a GRC, why has the number increased so drastically over the years?

In my view, the changes were prompted by the People's Action Party's (PAP) desire to make it increasingly difficult for opposition parties to capture a GRC, after surviving a narrow shave in a few GRC contests.

The PAP's argument that having large GRCs cuts both ways for the PAP and opposition parties in terms of risks and rewards is unconvincing.

Also, linking GRCs to town council management is an afterthought to justify the increase in GRC size.

There is nothing to prevent two- or three-member GRCs from banding together if there is a common interest in improving management and benefiting from economies of scale, if the MPs concerned agree.

What the PAP has done in upsizing GRCs is wrong, although it may be legal and constitutional.

So, I say, cynicism has already hurt the GRC system. The PAP should revert to three-member GRCs to restore credibility.

Young Pak Nang

Click to expand...

Pro-PAP person. Revert to indvidual member constituencies and stop bastardising the Westminister model.

steffychun said:

Pro-PAP person. Revert to indvidual member constituencies and stop bastardising the Westminister model.

Click to expand...

The thing is, LKY dislikes the Westminster model (he said that before). So he created a unique Spore model, the one which we are languishing under. If only he had stuck with it, we would've been better off.

glockman said:

The thing is, LKY dislikes the Westminster model (he said that before). So he created a unique Spore model, the one which we are languishing under. If only he had stuck with it, we would've been better off.

Click to expand...

How many more years must we wait to revert back to the proper model?

steffychun said:

How many more years must we wait to revert back to the proper model?

Click to expand...

When the PAP are constantly losing GRC on a regular basis.