The Group Representation Constituency (GRC) scheme hinders political competition, fortifies the incumbents and works against democracy, and as such should be abolished in favour of a scheme that genuinely allows for Parliamentary representation by candidates of a minority race, says the National Solidarity Party (NSP).
At a media conference yesterday, NSP outlined its proposal for electoral reform, where it cited an earlier proposal made to Parliament in 1988 to have a Constituency Reserved for Minority (CRM) scheme.
NSP GRC forum
The CRM scheme was rejected by Parliament, in favour of the GRC scheme which was implemented in 1987.
The NSP cited two objections then raised for the CRM scheme, which it now felt contained “fallacious reasoning”.
The first was the argument that the reserved constituency will have no choice but to accept only Malay candidates, which will lead to unhappiness among non-minority groups i nthe constituency.
NSP identified this to be false, as GRC residents may not be served by an MP of their choice. “As this “detriment” is also being experienced by GRC residents, the GRC scheme would not be superior to the CRM proposal in this respect.”
The second objection from the government then was that, while constituencies under the CRM scheme can be rotated to ensure that other constituencies have to opportunity to be served by a minority MP, “they will not be able to build any lasting relationship of trust and confidence.”
However, NSP suggested that this concern for lasting relationships really did nothing more than ensure the incumbent’s chances of getting re-elected. “Once an MP is elected, his duty is to serve his constituents for the duration of his term. How would the prospect that he might not be re-elected to the same constituency affect his ability to build a relationship of trust and confidence during his term?”
Furthermore, NSP indicated that there was nothing stopping a minority candidate from seeking re-election in the same ward.
NSP then questioned the appropriateness of the GRC scheme. While the purpose of the GRC scheme was meant to “guarantee a minimum representation of minorities in Parliament” for racial and religious fairness, it cited instances where changes to the numbers of GRCs and the number of Malay candidates to be fielded seemed to have been randomly decided on, which the government did not properly justify.
The party also argued that the GRC scheme does not ensure proportional minority representation.
“Legal provisions governing the GRC scheme mandate that at least one-quarter (1/4) of the candidates must be returned from GRCs and that at least three-fifths (3/5) of all GRCs must include a Malay candidate.” However, this situation only shows that “Malays, which comprise 13% of resident population, are only guaranteed roughly 5.7% of the Parliamentary seats under the GRC scheme.”
NSP also cited other inadequacies of the GRC scheme, such as citizens not being served by a specific MP of their choice, the greater load required by GRC MPs should one of their team members be unable to perform his duties as by-elections are not required for GRCs, and that it adulterates the one-man-one-vote system.
In addition, NSP also cited issues such as higher electoral deposits, arbitrary increases in GRC sizes, the unchallenged subsuming of Single Member Constituencies (SMCs) into GRCs, and greenhorn PAP candidates to ride on the coat-tails of heavy weight PAP candidates to enter the House. These issues were often citied as being unfair to opposition party politicians.
NSP believes that the CRM scheme will equally ensure minority representation in Parliament, while also removing many of the identified problems with the GRC scheme. One of the key tenets is that a minority candidate will be able to serve residents as well as a non-minority candidate, regardless of whether in a single or group ward. In addition, Singaporeans in today’s social-political climate are less likely to vote along racial lines.
“The GRC scheme should be abolished because it does not serve Singaporeans well. The CRM scheme will ensure a multi-racial Parliament, but without exacting the heavy price on democracy as the GRC scheme does.”
NSP member Ravi Philemon also addressed accusations that the proposal for implementing CRM scheme would lead to the formation of racial segregation when residents deliberately move to other constituencies with their preferred race of MPs.
“With 85% of the population living in HDB flats, and there being an Ethnic Integration Policy in place which prevents racial segregation, I wonder how this is even possible,” he wrote in his Facebook page. “NSP had addressed this and other such concerns in our Paper.”
 
Full report by the National Solidarity Party on “Electoral Reform Proposal – Constituency Reserved for Minority Scheme”
Electoral Reform Proposal- Constituency Reserved for Minority

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

莱佛士码头一号南座大厦 证实出现一起确诊病例

莱佛士码头一号南座大厦管理层,发文告证实昨日(20日),获通报该大厦曾出现一名武汉冠状病毒(COVID-19)确诊病患,最后一次到该大厦是在本月10日。 上述确诊病例相信是来自该大厦其中一家租户的职员。为安全起见,租户已从11日起落实分开办公,只有少数职员还在该大厦办公。 管理层在文告中也像租户强调,已对有关单位进行消毒,提高清洁公共场所、电梯和厕所等地区的频率以及为出入大厦的人士进行体温检测。 截至20日,本地累计确诊病例增至85起,最新确诊病患是36岁中国籍男子,工作准证持有者。但近期未回到中国,他是在昨早确诊并已送往国家传染病中心接受隔离。 第83起为54岁男公民,近期未到过中国,惟常到马国公干。在入院前曾到Philemon Singapore 公司(加冷坊16)上班,住在盛港河谷通道(Rivervale Drive)一带。 第84起病例,则是35岁女公民,近期也未到过中国,,她与第66例(28岁男公民,在神召会恩典堂工作)有关联。 第84例是在19日早上确诊,在入院前她曾到Lonza Biologics(大士南6道35号)上班,也曾到过武吉士白沙浮广场。她住在阿裕尼路一带。

舆论:闭门会议谈话泄露– 本来无良誉 何惧损毁?

人权律师、前政治拘留者张素兰: 对于闭门会议谈话内容泄露,新加坡中华总商会会长黄山忠发表的声明把我逗乐了。信函中他担忧泄露事故会影响该会“崇高声誉”,也对有关偷录音会员的行为表达失望,事件恐影响部长和商会之间的信任。 请允许我在这里给会长先生一些安慰。 别担心被泄露的音频。私人会议上录音政府也常做,贵会会员的行为并不可耻。 其中一例,就是80年代,我在新加坡律师公会一项私人特别大会上发表的致词被未经许可录音。我的演说被秘密录音并逐字转载给当时的总理李光耀先生。1986年的律师专业法令修法,后者试图在国会特选委会听证会上诋毁我(尽管没有成功)。 所以会长先生,别担心。如果政府对待专业团体如律师公会,也可以表现如此卑劣,且在我看来前者比你的商会重要得多,我想贵会员泄露音频的行为相比下算是循规蹈矩了。 再者也不用对于贵会员可能拉低商会声誉感到遗憾。您和商会可能对贵会的“崇高声誉”过于自负。对我而言,贵会对于普通老百姓无所建树。实则贵会只对有钱有势者阿谀奉承。让我举例您如何让老百姓失望。 贵会有座富丽堂皇的礼堂,以贵会创始人暨知名慈善家和社运份子陈嘉庚命名。是开放予会员和民众租用的。 2015年,我代表我的协会–功能八号氏族会租用该礼堂,为陈嘉庚的外孙傅树介的著作《活在欺瞒年代》办推介活动。我付了510元抵押金。数日后我却被告知,贵会理事不让我租用,且没告知理由。 我立即写信给商会希望贵会重新考虑这不明智的决定。我把信件拷贝并电邮给所有有电邮邮址的理事。然而拥有“崇高声誉”的贵会却不屑回应和解释理由,为何不让贵会创办人外孙,在以其外公命名的大礼堂内办著作推介礼。 拜托会长先生,不用再去调查谁泄露陈振声部长的谈话内容啦。就我所知贵会也没有声誉。而且我知道,群众根本不在乎。 (译自原文:https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2020/02/20/dont-worry-about-damaged-reputation-from-the-leak-audio-recording-of-minister-chans-rant-for-you-have-no-reputation-to-begin-with/)

卫生部公布私人医院222常见手术收费标准

卫生部在本周三公布了针对私人医院222种常见手术制定的收费标准,可供民众在决定医疗消费时作参考,同时也成为私营医疗服务业者征收合理费用的指南。 有关收费指南,乃是卫生部今年初委任的13人收费标准咨询委员会制定,于本月5日提呈卫生部,获该部全盘接受。 卫生部 在文告指出,医疗收费指南也是卫生部确保医疗成本维持在可负担范围的举措之一。指南列出了私营医院一些常见手术的收费价目范围,让病患在与医生洽谈时,有一个参考概念。 至于医疗服务业者也受促参照有关指南,开出合理的收费;同时,也能成为保险公司在评估索赔以及涉及保险产品和选择医疗服务供应商/合作单位的参考。 卫生部称,有关委员会在制定收费标准上,已纳入了近期医疗收费和通膨等因素,同时也包括不同个案和手术的复杂程度、时间、经历、专业程度,确保有关收费标准公平、合理地反映实际的专业收费范围。 ”该委会也广泛咨询了相关医疗专业人士、医院行政人员、全国职总、消费者协会、保险业者的意见。“ 2007-2017年平均私立住院费用涨幅近9巴仙 卫生部表示将继续咨询有关委员会,为将来的新的医疗收费制定标准,委会也考虑顶起检讨该收费指南。 收费标准咨询委员会主席林延庭认为,最终仍需取决各界手否愿遵循收费指南,如果大家愿依据该指南,将有助缓和本国不断上升的医疗成本。 避免”砍菜头“   病患该问医生的四大问题:…

SIA not involved in Air India deal for now but refuses to comment on future plans

Last month, it was reported in the news that Singapore Airlines (SIA)…