Move to a proportional representation system
February 2nd, 2023 | 
Author: 
1. I do not like the system of electing people into parliament in Singapore. The election system is based on “first past the post”. The candidate with the largest number of votes, which may be less than 50% of total votes, wins the election.
2. Singapore has modified the traditional system of electing one person for a constituency into a modified system of electing 4 to 6 people in a group representative constituency (GRC). It still uses the “first past the post system”.
3. This system is complicated. At each general election, the boundaries of the constituency and GRCs are redrawn to reflect changes in the population. Many people suspect that this is an exercise in “gerrymandering” made to favor the ruling party and give it a bigger chance to win the election under the “first past the post system”.
4. In spite of these mechanisms, the ruling party may lose of its experienced leaders as they failed to win the majority in their constituency. This leads to a weaker government, even though the ruling party may be returned to power.
5. Is there a better system to ensure that capable people are elected into parliament so that some of them can be drawn from parliament to become ministers in the government?
6. If the constitution can be changed to adopt a new system of electing people into parliament, I suggest the following approach:
a) The voters cast their votes for the political party and not individual candidates.
b) Each political party gets the number of seats in parliament in proportion to their share of the total vote. If parliament has 100 sets and party A, B and C gets, 60%, 30% and 10% of the votes, the parties gets 60,30 and 10 seats respectively.
c) Each party files the names of their candidates in the order of priority prior to the general election. The winning candidates are taken from this party list.
7. In drawing the party list, each party can ensure that the minority races are represented fairly. This was a key feature that led to the change in the constitution to form the GRC.
8. My suggestion follows, to a large extent, the system that is practiced in Switzerland and some other countries. It is described as the “proportional representation system”. A fuller description is given here: [LINK]
9. This system has the following advantages:
a) It allows for a better quality of the people elected into parliament, as they are likely to appear at the top of their party list.
b) The political parties do not have to spend a lot of money in the election campaign to promote their individual candidates.
c) The elected people in parliament will be more representative of the wishes of the voters.
10. This system will have some disadvantages:
a) It may result with no single party holding a majority of seats in parliament. They have to form a coalition, which may lead to an unstable government.
b) There is no direct link between the voters in each constituency and their elected leader.
11 The disadvantages can be mitigated as follows:
a) The parties in the coalition government can set their internal rules to prevent internal disagreements.
b) The voters can establish a link to the political party in their district. All the parties can remain active in the period prior to the next general election.
12. On balance, I prefer the proportional representation system to the current system practised in Singapore.
Tan Kin Lian
Posted in 
We are supposed to be electing people to represent us. Instead we elected people who represent their own party. PAP show the whip and all their MPs quickly obey.
“PLEASE DON’T WHIP US.”
loading...
No lah…go back to single constituent lah.
Best man wins.
Everyone must fights their own battle.
loading...
very well said. it is a fair system if the BEST man wins. current system is a failing system because it allows the weakestest to be in parleeement.
loading...
very well said. but the good thing is, despite sinkies slumbering, pap will soon be history because when new citizens wake up, boy they sure wake up much faster than stupid sinkies, pap folks shall all run road. this is a fact.
loading...
No political system in the world is perfect since politics itself is a dirty game.
So instead of change this change that, I would suggest that for starters, just do away with the party whip for Sinkieland. I am sure there are dissenting voices in the same party itself that may not agree with every policy the party forms, and I am quite sure the vaccine mandate is one of them.
loading...
I think d Party Against People does not prefer TKL’s suggestion. They fear or kiasi many oppo parties n their candidates (e.g Mr Chee, Mr KJ, etc)would get into Pariahmen easily ! Wat do u think ? They want to make it difficult for well-known oppo candidates into Pariahmen bcos a dynasty emperor saying he has to spend more times fixing them ? They will ways n means to ensure monopoly of their party.
loading...
Aiayh, gerrymandering or whatever it’s still a fact that PAP lost 2 GRCs so this will definitely continue. The problem that PAP has is that fewer voters trust it unlike decades past so it’s no surprise that their vote share is at a measly 60% when what they want is 65% minimum.
If you can remember their nonsense they like saying that the ground isn’t sweet when it comes to an election that they called for ha ha ha. Ironic isn’t it, why you go call for election when the ground isn’t sweet, you got no brains or what? Ha ha ha!
Just wait lah, when the next election is called they will attempt to scare us all by saying they might not be in charge after the election as if we need them or else we are doomed. Who cares about them when we know they aren’t doing shit and talking cock only?
It will be an interesting time for when they are no longer in power, would we still have GRCs or back to every single person for himself/herself SMCs?
loading...
If what is proposed is ok, then half are oppositions. LOL
Pinky and his wife would not agree!
loading...
Single party and multiparty system all has serious flaws. The system set the elites up to woo, influence, seduce and even radicalise voters in some cultural setting to their core ideology- the rule/power and wealth concentrated in the hands of the few superior ones.
Ultimately they will anoint one supreme leader – the all wise and capable one.
All political system will anointed “the wise/capable one”. It is in their social contract when they set the criteria and definition of “capability “.
What are they really capable of?(nobody seriously gave a thought about this) They are most self indulged leadership to run the nation like a business corporation where people are primarily stacked like a pyramid tower of wage earners and social classes. At the bottom of the vast majority where crumbs are shared and fought over.
As a result, people behaved like dogs(eat dogs) to secure food, shelter and all the coveted things in life at the destruction of the earth and humanity.
Costs keep rising and many middle class sank to being the new poor or in many nations homeless. Crimes and vices rise. People generally become apathetic and many suffer(mental,health,socially etc), die or perish away without even their family members knowing let alone their neighbours.
At the end of the day the elect represented self interests and they served primarily the dominant strong man ideology, power and wealth extracted from the ground.
You barked up the tree of the “wise/crafty one” and leave the fate of nations in the reign of a strong man who can and will do irreparable damages(a mix of good and evil but the evil it wrought is cruel and devastatingly destructive) to lives and nations for many many generations – as history attested.
“…but the worries of life and the deceitful pleasures of wealth choke the word so that it can’t produce a crop.”
loading...
Seriously, tell what you understand here by the word “word”. Remember. The sentence was said to the Jews by the Lord. If you think it was said to all mankind, then, your understanding of the word “word” shall be in error.
loading...
Lky assembled sg.
Technically need related one to disassemble.nature’s law.
loading...
Remove GRC,it breeds mediocrity.
Juxtapose 1G MPs of SMC against MPs of GRC.
The DIFFERENCE is glaring.
SMC ensures mediocres cannot hide behind good MPs.
SMC IS MORE MERITOCRATIC system for sure.
The likes of Ong You Cons got seats in Parliament mostly by hiding behind MPs of stronger standing.
By themselves,such candidates have been incapable in winning seats under the more equitable system of SMC.
Even incapable oppo candidates would be uncovered as well.
So,SMC allows better qualified candidates to be elected while GRC inadvertantly let otherwise ill-qualified(in all sense of the word) to win seats unfairly.
Only the best who truly want to SERVE THE PEIPLE shud be in Parliament like in 1G’s era.
Thats my humble take.
loading...
The much revered and respectable Dr Goh’s definition of PUBLIC SERVICE AS A VOCATION ,A CALLING,TO SERVE THE PEOPLE must echo in the minds of aspiring Public SERVANTS.
A tiny Sg cannot afford to allow RELUCTANT candidates who a$pires to do otherwise to occupy the precious and sacred seats in Parliament; else,the PEOPLE are bound to suffer.
We need to EXAMINE if such is the case currently.
If so,REFORM is in line.
Good MPs will likely help bring about true progress and prosperity for ALL THE CITIZENS.
THE DEDICATED SERVICE OF 1G MPs n LEADERS is a living proof.
In recent years,more and more sgs are suffering from various public policies and policy PRACTICES.
We must bear in mind before we embark on PUBLIC SERVICE that we aspire to do so brcause WE WANT TO SERVE ,whatever the cost.
We give thanks to our 1G leaders.
They were our benefactors.
loading...
Kepple ,sph de ja vu like.wp MP lie to police case.parliment do the investigation.not
Police.
loading...