Leong Sze Hian

Since voting is compulsory, what happens if you do not vote in the elections?

Your name will be removed from the register of voters.

You can restore your name to the register of voters, if you pay a fee of $50.

For those who have a valid reason, such as being away from Singapore, no fee is charged.

Why was the fee increased from $5 to $50?

Will this fee deter some Singaporeans from restoring their names to vote in the future?

The procedure to apply to restore one’s name to the register of voters seems overly onerous, as according to the Elections Department’s web site:

“For those who claim to be overseas to work or study, or to be living with a spouse who is working or studying overseas, the passport plus an employer’s letter or educational institution’s letter, and marriage certificate would be required. For those who were on an overseas vacation or business trip, the passport plus documents showing that the trip had been planned before Nomination Day should be produced, such as receipts from travel agencies, air tickets, hotel booking receipts, or a suitable letter from your employer.”

Wouldn’t one’s passport showing that one was overseas suffice?

Why the need for an employer’s or educational institution’s letter, marriage certificate, documents showing that the trip had been planned before Nomination Day, etc?

Is the Elections Department saying that from Nomination Day onwards no Singaporean can travel, other than for work, study or illness?

Given that the procedure and criteria are arguably quite troublesome or unreasonably onerous, I wonder how many people may simply not bother at all, and also not pay the $50.

Well, I recently met one person like that.

Are there any countries in the world which charges a fee to restore citizens’ constitutional right to vote?

How many Singaporeans have not restored their names, in the last few elections?

I have analysed the number of Singaporeans who did not vote in the 2011 elections. They are ranked below from the highest percentage of voters who did not vote in a constituency, to the lowest.

Ranking of Non-voters (%)

Single Member Constituency (SMC)

Joo Chiat                                 13.0%

Mountbatten                            12.3

Radin  Mas                                8.5

Potong  Pasir                            7.2

Yuhua                                        6.9

Whampoa                                 6.7

Hougang                                  5.8

Hong  Kah  North                      5.1

Pioneer                                      5.0

Bukit  Panjang                           4.8

Punggol  East                            4.8

Sengkang  West                       4.4

 

Group Representation Constituency (GRC)

Moulmein-Kallang                   10.7%

Holland-Bukit Timah                 9.7

East  Coast                               9.2

Bishan – Toa Payoh                 9.0

Marine  Parade                         8.7

West Coast                               7.7

Jurong                                       6.7

Aljunied                                     6.6

Ang  Mo  Kio                             6.5

Chua  Chu  Kang                      5.8

Pasir  Ris –  Punggol                 5.6

Tampines                                  5.4

Nee  Soon                                 5.3

Sembawang                              5.2

(Source:  Lianhe Wanbao, May 8)

The hotly contested SMC wards of Joo Chiat, Mounbatten and Potong Pasir, appear to have relatively higher percentages of non-voters, at 13, 12.3 and 7.2 per cent, respectively.

New citizens

What was the impact of new citizens voting in this election?

As there were about 90,000 new citizens over the last five years, the estimated number of new citizens in each of the 87 constituencies is about 1,034 (90,000 divided by 87 constituencies).

So, for example, in Potong Pasir, where Mrs Lina Chiam lost by only 78 votes, after counting the overseas votes, how many of the 7,973 residents who voted for the PAP’s Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, were new citizens?

Of course, new citizens could have voted for Mrs Chiam, instead of Mr Sitoh Yih Pin.

Also, how many non-voters were there, compared to the last 2006 elections?

How many Potong Pasir residents did not restore their names to the register of voters, in the 2006 elections?

Finally, perhaps we could try to find out the categories of reasons as to why the 1,495 absentee voters in Potong Pasir did not vote?

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

苏睿勇起诉田总诽谤

新加坡马拉松好手苏睿勇,今早在脸书分享将入禀法庭起诉新加坡田径总会。 “尽管我已尽力去达致共识,不过我和田总的调解失败了。我的律师已把传票令状(Writ of Summons)和诽谤诉状寄至田总处。但我仍崇敬会长邓永辉,我感到他有善良的心。” 不过,他强调仍需还他一个清白,并且让国内体育界人士清楚,如果要公开谴责一位运动员,也要有理有据,否则就应被追究责任。 事发于今年8月2日,田总对苏睿勇提出了一些指控,指他们注意到有马拉松运动员作出一系列据称“有违运动员行为准则”的行为,但是没有提供有关的细节解说。 对此,苏睿勇发律师信函予两协会高层,即马利克和奥委会秘书长陈志荣,8月13日下午5时前给出具体解释,详细解释“行为失当”的指控。 田总于13日回复苏睿勇的律师信函,前者称体愿以“无偏见会面”进行调解,但是苏表示,“他们没有为诽谤指控提供依据,或者澄清他们在此事件中的立场,试图在作出诽谤性指控后暗地解决”。 接着,苏睿勇于14日再次对田总发出律师信函,要求对有关指控作出澄清;8月20日,他表示决定给新加坡田径总会(SA)一个机会,并且愿意和对方见面,但田总执行董事马利克(Malik Aljunied)除外。 不过,显然在9月6日的见面,双方并无法达成共识。

前记者忆述 曾询问何晶薪资引总理发脾气

亚洲新闻台(CNA)前记者哈喜娜(Haseenah Koyakutty)分享了一篇由革新党领袖肯尼斯(Kenneth Jeyaretnam)撰写的博客文章,文中他再次质疑淡马锡控股公司首席执行官兼李显龙总理夫人何晶的薪金秘密。 哈喜娜表示,她很高兴肯尼斯仍然执着于她多次试图挖掘的问题。 #Singapore #Succession #HoChing: Kenneth ain’t gonna let go…

Your Vote is Your Voice

This article was first posted on MARUAH. “Is my vote really secret?” That…

车厢内“烟茫茫”吓坏乘客 SMRT:空压缩机泄漏

地铁车厢发生空压缩机漏水,导致车厢内冒出白烟,吓到乘坐在内的乘客。 莱佛士地铁站内,一架车厢今日(10日)中午12点45分发生空压缩机泄漏,导致车厢内白烟滚滚。 SMRT通讯副总裁张耀美(Margaret Teo)证实白色烟雾是由于空压缩机泄漏,释放出氟利昂气体。 张耀美也补充,基于安全,该列车里的所有乘客都已经被疏散下车,并改由达成另一班列车。 “目前受影响的列车已停止运行,以作进一步的检查。” 事后,该班列车的乘客也纷纷将此景上传到网络上,可见车厢内烟雾弥漫,相当模糊,有些照片显示,乘客在车厢内纷纷捂住嘴巴和鼻子,防止吸入白烟。 https://twitter.com/lupcheong/status/1215493904050507777 据《亚洲新闻台》报导,烟雾含有相当刺鼻的味道,乘客在内如同被熏,也因此了一阵骚动。 氟利昂气体一般用于空调中为制冷剂,并无任何毒性,一旦接触空气中的水分后,便会形成无味的白烟。 长时间接触氟利昂气体,也可能会导致眩晕、专注力下降、引发中枢神经系统抑制作用或心律失常。 若在密闭空间中,其挥发后气体可能会引起窒息。