Synopsis of Sylvia Lim's speech in Parliament

NCMP Sylvia Lim made a speech in Parliament on Wed 27 Aug on the issue of by-elections and GRCs.

She said that she was unable to support the motion tabled by Nominated MPs Thio Li-Ann and Loo Choon Yoong for amendments to the Parliamentary Elections Act because this motion sought to entrench the GRC system, which WP is opposed to.

Sylvia Lim also pointed out what she thought were flaws in the motion tabled.

Firstly, the motion proposed that the moment a Minority member left a GRC, a by-election would be called. Sylvia Lim asserted that it is unjustified for by-elections to be triggered by the departure of a single member, including a Minority member, because elections are won or lost by GRC teams not necessarily on the merits of any one member.

In this respect, Sylvia Lim’s position is in complete agreement with the stand made by PM Lee Hsien Loong.

Secondly, the motion proposed that once half or more of the members of a GRC team have departed, a by-election in the GRC should be called as well. Sylvia Lim said that this would mean that we could be left with a situation no by-election is called even if 1 or 2 members departed. The issue of the constituents being under-represented immediately arises.

Thirdly, the motion asked the House to amend the Parliamentary Elections Act such that a writ of by-election shall be called in the event that a Member of a single member constituency vacates his or her seat for any reason. Sylvia Lim pointed out that is already provided for under the Constitution and the Parliamentary Elections Act. In particular, Article 49 of the Constitution states that whenever the seat of an elected Member has become vacant for any reason, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by law. The Parliamentary Elections Act, S 24, further provides that the President shall issue a writ of election “to supply vacancies caused by death, resignation or otherwise”.

Sylvia Lim then gave her views on what she thought was wrong with the GRC system:

• A team member’s non-co-operation could sound the political death knell for the rest, including during the period leading up to nomination day.
• The motion tabled in Parliament itself shows that the GRC system does not promote representative democracy.
• GRCs increase the bar for those who intend to contest, increasing the likelihood of walkovers.
• GRCs serve the PAP’s interest rather than the people’s interest: When Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong spoke of the PAP’s recruitment challenge in 2006, he said: “Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics.” Are we to infer that the PAP candidates these days are not what they used to be? It also seems that the GRC is a recruitment and training tool for the ruling party.
• GRC has weakened politicians’ mandates: Back in 1988, Dr Ahmad Mattar already hit the nail on the head. His views were quoted in Parliament, as follows: “As a Malay, I don’t think I would like to contest in any Elections where my victory is guaranteed - not because I am a ’strong’ candidate but because I have a so-called ’strong’ twin brother to lean on.”

On the issue of minority representation, Sylvia Lim said: “How do we ensure minority representation? Singapore’s history has shown that, in the past, minority candidates stood and won single seats. PAP MPs such as Mr Dhanabalan, Mr Rajaratnam, Mr Sidek Saniff and Mr Zulkifli Mohd have done so; so have opposition leaders like Mr Jeyaretnam in Anson, a predominantly Chinese constituency. This was so even in the 1984 GE. Are we saying that Singapore has regressed as a society? Or is the PAP now saying that they have less confidence in their current minority Ministers, MPs or new candidates winning on their own?”

Sylvia Lim's speech is an excellent one.

Though I do find it slightly contradictory for her to agree with PM Lee that GRC teams are elected not necessarily based on any one member, whilst at the same time lambasting the GRC system for providing cover for newbies which the PAP wants to push into Parliament.

I think we all can agree fully that GRC system is a cover for wannabes and newbies seeking entry to Parliament, but wouldn't that mean that those teams are therefore elected based on the more senior members/ministers? Essentially those teams would therefore be elected based on specific key personalities.

Still, that is a minor point which she failed to tie up, and her speech is overall very good.

Let's look at Silvia Lim speech with foresight. Silvia is expecting that one of the opposition parties might be able to gain GRC ground in the next election. The chances is quite high based on current state of affairs. Should opposition win one of the GRCs, it might be a little challenging for oppositions member to hold and sustain as a team because of individual differences and expectations. This were not uncommon among different opposition members and it is a fact that they have the tendency to "job hop" to suite individual objective. Though I have no grudge on individual preference, but Should one of them decided to resign, Silvia can quote LHL speech as precedent to hold firm on her hard-earned territory for 5 years. If by-election is required, than another battle might cause the opposition to lose its ground and PAP will take over again (because sinkies mentality were quite fickle over little bribery). So why fought so hard to win your GRC and than lost it the next year for any slight movement within the party? By election from this perspective will do the winning parties no good. That is yet another problem created by having a GRC. We must see beyond the surface of Silvia's speech and not take her for words by words thinking she is on PAP side.

How do we ensure minority representation?

Let our Malays/Indian Minorities select their own MPs by reserving seats for them in parliament. I am sure they would love to select their own representatives this way instead of that farce of a GRC.

Introduce proportional representation where at least 30% of parliamentary seats are divided according to parties share of nationwide votes. Every party must have 1 minority candidate among the first 3 for the at large list, 2 from first 5, 3 from 8. PR is party based, you vote for your favored political party. Isn't this what LHL wanted.

Minorities in any countries always find it hard to win elections. This is reality and so we must reserve seats for them this way.

The best way is to have the number of representation in parliament based on the percentage of votes during election. In our case, we were not 33% represented in parliament. The 66.6% were represented by 100% members in parliament. It is really skewed when at least more than a million populations voted against the ruling party. So where are the voices for these million voters in parliament?

Sideswipe said:

How do we ensure minority representation?

Let our Malays/Indian Minorities select their own MPs by reserving seats for them in parliament. I am sure they would love to select their own representatives this way instead of that farce of a GRC.

Introduce proportional representation where at least 30% of parliamentary seats are divided according to parties share of nationwide votes. Every party must have 1 minority candidate among the first 3 for the at large list, 2 from first 5, 3 from 8. PR is party based, you vote for your favored political party. Isn't this what LHL wanted.

Minorities in any countries always find it hard to win elections. This is reality and so we must reserve seats for them this way.

Click to expand...

i call this smart rendition a good ambush by Sylvia Lim.

Why ding-dong about the motion when in the first place, the GRC system is a flaw or rather a colorful display to hookwink the uninformed 66% voters.

hahaha...endorsing by-election of the GRC is gving mandate to GRC system.

If wealthy lily Neo whimpers at the sitting, then what can the PAP-NMPs do ? What a fucking parliamentary joke !

NMPs should join WP and fight alongside with Sylvia and LTK, and not waste time at the parliament.

Only tearing down bad PAP policies can do good to the peasants.

myfoot123 said:

Let's look at Silvia Lim speech with foresight. Silvia is expecting that one of the opposition parties might be able to gain GRC ground in the next election. The chances is quite high based on current state of affairs. Should opposition win one of the GRCs, it might be a little challenging for oppositions member to hold and sustain as a team because of individual differences and expectations. This were not uncommon among different opposition members and it is a fact that they have the tendency to "job hop" to suite individual objective. Though I have no grudge on individual preference, but Should one of them decided to resign, Silvia can quote LHL speech as precedent to hold firm on her hard-earned territory for 5 years. If by-election is required, than another battle might cause the opposition to lose its ground and PAP will take over again (because sinkies mentality were quite fickle over little bribery). So why fought so hard to win your GRC and than lost it the next year for any slight movement within the party? By election from this perspective will do the winning parties no good. That is yet another problem created by having a GRC. We must see beyond the surface of Silvia's speech and not take her for words by words thinking she is on PAP side.

Click to expand...

I am waiting for our opposition MPs to table a motion demanding parliamentary proportional representation.

Like to hear what LHL have to say on this. Can he reject the theory that PR result in fairer representation of seats by % of party nationwide votes. and EVERY votes count, no WASTED votes.

and Sylvia Lim should ask the PAPs MPs that by using "single winner district elections" and no PR - Is it a fair method of elections and do PAP deserve a parliamentary mandate ( 95% seats ) higher than their nationwide votes ( 66% ) what about the 33.3% opposition support which result in only 2 seats.