A better means of MINORITY REPRESENTATION in Parliament than GRC elections.

[bic_cherry]

NCMP scheme a great replacement for flawed GRC system of elections.

NCMP scheme a great replacement for flawed GRC system of elections

The GRC system was created to promote PAP hegemony and despotism, not entrench minority parliamentary representation.
2 clear examples prove this point:

1st example: the Prime minister can just after election result declaration, vacate the seat of a minority MP by dismissing him from party membership without any recourse of the minority MP retrieving his seat by way of a by-election according to Parliamentary Elections Act (Ch218), S24(2A) which states: "In respect of any group representation constituency, no writ shall be issued under subsection (1) for an election to fill any vacancy unless all the Members for that constituency have vacated their seats in Parliament."

2nd example: Current GRCs (despite affecting 86.2% of parliamentary seats) in fact fall far short of adequate 'entrenching ethnic minority representation in parliament:
According to 2014 Singapore population census also viewable at '[Wiki]: Demographics of Singapore: Ethnic groups' 25.7% of Singapore is from minority ethnic group. 89 seats are being contested in GE2015: meaning that unless extra effort of minorities is made to be represented in either SMCs or GRCs, there would only be 15/89= 16.9% minority ethnic representation, far below the real 25.7% of population that demographic percentage that ethnic minorities actually make (There ought to be 0.257 * 89 = 22.87 minority MPs or 23 MPs (rounded up)): i.e. a short fall of [1-16.9/25.7]= 34.4%. The GRC system of elections has thus shortchanged minority groups by 23-15= 8 MPs actually.

These 2 examples are sufficient proof that GRC for the purpose of 'entrenching ethnic minority representation in parliament' is just political sleight of hand, hoax or lip service.

More reasons to show that GRC system of elections promotes hegemony and autocracy (despotic rule) can be found at 'How the GRC system of elections is a farce and promotes despotism and autocracy in Singapore' with further criticisms at: '[wiki] Group Representation Constituency: Criticisms of the scheme': gerrymandering, enshrining racism/ increasing minority social handicap due to society negatively viewing massive GRC system as a crutch minorities need to rely on/ undeservedly blaming minorities for disrupting 86.2% of the political election system etc being some of the drawbacks of the GRC system of elections.

Given the multiple drawbacks of the GRC system of elections, what would be a good replacement with all the intentioned benefits of 'entrench minority parliamentary representation'?

One would be a return to the completely single seat method of elections but with caveats like Non-Constituency-Minority MP scheme and the Nominated Minority MP scheme (all permutations of currently in operation schemes) that would better 'entrench minority parliamentary representation' WITHOUT the attendant drawbacks as a/m.

Minority races will enjoy new found pride of being elected on their own virtues/ qualities by a multiracial electorate without having to just have token presence as part of a GRC team. Such a win would prove that minorities are directly acceptable as MPs representing a district, not just as part of a token contrivance to convince the world that Singapore is a peaceful multiracial society.

The lack of gerrymandering (a perennial problem with large district GRC elections) would also stabilise elections in Singapore, so that even independent minority race candidates will find before themselves a more level playing field unlike the current GRC electoral system which favours larger political parties so much so that everything else including minority racial interest become secondary. All political interest, minority race or otherwise, would under a solely SMC method of elections, have a fighting chance of being heard in parliament.

In line with the weight placed on ensuring Singapore's multi-racial constitution, there would be a minimum quota for minority MPs in parliament mirroring the current quota requirement for opposition MPs according to the current NCMP scheme. There would thus be a MINIMUM quota of minority MPs in parliament (23 by current ethnic proportions is suggested).

With the NCMP scheme entrenching minority race MP's representation in parliament and the opportunity to shine in public light, there will no longer be any more need for GRC system of elections and with that, lesser gerrymandering, better relationships between the electorate and their elected representatives, less party political bias/ interference during elections, more deserved social respect/dignity accrued to minority racial groups with verifiable competencies to win single seats on their own standing (instead of as a token presence where GRCs make up are concerned), more political transparency through the conduct of appropriate by-elections, lesser volatility of election results since ministers who are good MPs can always be expected to win back their seats.

(PS: should there be any complaint that capable minority race MPs are not given NCMP seats due to unfortunate circumstances (3 way contests etc) then some NMP seats can also be reserved from the total guaranteed quota of 23 and chosen by the respective key minority ethnic bodies).

PAP's continued dependence on the GRC system of elections for to entrench its hegemonic (authoritarian) rule will weaken itself and eventually bring Singapore to its knees.
Status quo will only bring failure to Singapore- one of titanic proportions: as the evil tentacles of the GRC system of elections spread wider and wider.
===============

The real reason for GRC system of elections was for PAP to cultivate more PAP yes men (as the mafia welcomes new entrants), always grateful to the PAP for lining the red carpet for their easy entry into parliament, through a political thievery such as gerrymandering, elimination of by-elections and other underhand methods:

'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,' Mr Goh Chok Tong, June 2006 ['GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM'].

[Pict= [URL=http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2012/04/disassembling-grc-benefits-pap-1/]Disassembling GRC system benefits PAP (Part 1 of 3)[/URL]]

 

[bic_cherry]

Re: NCMP scheme a great replacement for flawed GRC system of elections.

How it all first began:
http://www.youtube.com/v/f6NTRAOaIwU
[video=youtube;f6NTRAOaIwU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6NTRAOaIwU[/video]

 

[winnipegjets]

Re: NCMP scheme a great replacement for flawed GRC system of elections.

The GRC scheme was introduced to make it easy for preferred people to be elected into office and feed off our tax dollars. The minority representation component was a red-herring. PAP is made up of entitled and lazy people; there are lots of deadwood in the PAP. The obvious ones are Hari-kiri, toothpick thief and the look-down on sinkee mongrel.

 

[bic_cherry]

Re: NCMP scheme a great replacement for flawed GRC system of elections.

My replies at another site:

Re thread (A1): A BETTER Minority Representation in Parliament than through GRC elections.
dont think u just need a grc for minority representation, we didnt have grc before and am sure we can do so now without and still can have minority representation.

We did not have NCMP system for opposition politicians and now we have 9. With a completely SMC form of elections, there will be ZERO need for such opposition NCMPs so long as elections are conducted fair and transparently.

Then shall we have PRC, Party Representation Constituency, since 40% didn't vote for PAP?

U are speaking about the NCMP scheme right? Currently the 9 opposition are allowed as MPs in parliament. Those who do not qualify under the normal election route are given NCMP seats with similar rights to speak in parliament albeit with some restricted voting/ participation rights etc. Unfortunately, the quantum is fixed by the PAP at 9, which is not in proportion to the 39.9% polled result by the average of all opposition parties.

I have a few questions. If all wards are SMC:
1) how to ensure all candidates contesting in a constituency are of the same race?
2) who decide which race to contest in which constituency?

My suggestion of s¢rapping GRC system of elections comes with the caveat that it is replaced by an NCMP scheme which admits up to a total of 23 ethnic minority MPs to parliament, the shortfall of regular MPs being made up with ethnic minority NMPS.

How do HDB decide on HDB flat allocations in their sale and re-sale huh? .... You mean it is not controlled today? ....

HDB practise somewhat mirrors my suggestion on which there only broad but purposed guidelines set for maximum possible fairness to all. Quotas are only by block and by district (block being possibly more relaxed than district etc): likewise, there is really NO NEED to specify where a minority candidate should stand since HDB ethnic quotas means that ethnic minority race persons live EVERYWHERE: as such, PAP shouldn't prescribe where a minority candidate should stand which is as punitive as it is restrictive: just as the opposition is at liberty to stand ANYWHERE they wish, (though and forward planning by opposition is often thwarted by gerrymandering by the PAP). The NCMP system, being least disruptive to overall general elections and returning a higher proportion of ethnic minorities to parliament should thus be the option of choice. As compared to the NCMP system option, GRC is an old and outdated option, better consigned to the dust heap.

 

[bic_cherry]

Re: NCMP scheme a great replacement for flawed GRC system of elections.

New version, some figures updated:
---------------------------------------------------------
NCMP scheme a great replacement for flawed GRC system of elections

The GRC system was created to promote PAP hegemony and despotism; if anybody still insists that GRC system can actually be justified by its original premise of actually "entrenches the presence of minority MPs in Parliament": then one is a fool since the following 2 examples prove this to be UNTRUE:

Firstly, the law (Parliamentary Elections Act (Ch218), S24(2A)) obviously neglects ANY interest minority existence the moment GRC election results are announced as the statute does states: "In respect of any group representation constituency, no writ shall be issued under subsection (1) for an election to fill any vacancy unless all the Members for that constituency have vacated their seats in Parliament.": there is no need to replace a seat vacated by a minority candidate for any reason: suffice to say that just one candidate who need not be a minority need remain. A bait and switch trick by the PAP?

Secondly, despite needlessly emphasizing minority race differences (through 16 GRCs occupying 76 seats in a 89 seat parliament (=85.4% of all seats post GE2015)), the 16 designated GRCs are only able to guarantee a meagre presence of 16/89= 18.0% minority representation in parliament: far less than the population census result (2014) showing 25.7% of the Singapore as belonging to minority ethnic group. The significant shortfall of 25.7%-18.0%= 7.7% (or equal to 7.7%*89=6.87=~ deficit of 7 minority MPs) remains glaring proof of how deficient/ inadequate the GRC system is at defending minority ethnic interest in parliament.

These 2 examples are sufficient proof that GRC for the purpose of 'entrenching ethnic minority representation in parliament' is just political sleight of hand, a hoax or mere lip service.

More reasons to show that GRC system of elections promotes hegemony and autocracy (despotic rule) can be found at 'How the GRC system of elections is a farce and promotes despotism and autocracy in Singapore' with further criticisms at: '[wiki] Group Representation Constituency: Criticisms of the scheme': gerrymandering, enshrining racism/ increasing minority social handicap due to society negatively viewing massive GRC system as a crutch minorities need to rely on/ undeservedly blaming minorities for disrupting 86.2% of the political election system etc being some of the drawbacks of the GRC system of elections.

Given the multiple drawbacks of the GRC system of elections, what would be a good replacement with all the intentioned benefits of 'entrench minority parliamentary representation'?

One would be a return to the completely single seat method of elections but with caveats like Non-Constituency-Minority MP scheme and the Nominated Minority MP scheme (all permutations of currently in operation schemes) that would better 'entrench minority parliamentary representation' WITHOUT the attendant drawbacks as a/m.

Minority races will enjoy new found pride of being elected on their own virtues/ qualities by a multiracial electorate without having to just have token presence as part of a GRC team. Such a win would prove that minorities are directly acceptable as MPs representing a district, not just as part of a token contrivance to convince the world that Singapore is a peaceful multiracial society.

The lack of gerrymandering (a perennial problem with large district GRC elections) would also stabilise elections in Singapore, so that even independent minority race candidates will find before themselves a more level playing field unlike the current GRC electoral system which favours larger political parties so much so that everything else including minority racial interest become secondary. All political interest, minority race or otherwise, would under a solely SMC method of elections, have a fighting chance of being heard in parliament.

In line with the weight placed on ensuring Singapore's multi-racial constitution, there would be a minimum quota for minority MPs in parliament mirroring the current quota requirement for opposition MPs according to the current NCMP scheme. There would thus be a MINIMUM quota of minority MPs in parliament (23 by current ethnic proportions is suggested).

With the NCMP scheme entrenching minority race MP's representation in parliament and the opportunity to shine in public light, there will no longer be any more need for GRC system of elections and with that, lesser gerrymandering, better relationships between the electorate and their elected representatives, less party political bias/ interference during elections, more deserved social respect/dignity accrued to minority racial groups with verifiable competencies to win single seats on their own standing (instead of as a token presence where GRCs make up are concerned), more political transparency through the conduct of appropriate by-elections, lesser volatility of election results since ministers who are good MPs can always be expected to win back their seats.

(PS: should there be any complaint that capable minority race MPs are not given NCMP seats due to unfortunate circumstances (3 way contests etc) then some NMP seats can also be reserved from the total guaranteed quota of 23 and chosen by the respective key minority ethnic bodies).

PAP's continued dependence on the GRC system of elections to further entrench its hegemonic (authoritarian) rule will only weaken itself and eventually bring Singapore to its knees.
Status quo will bring failure to Singapore- one of titanic proportions: as the evil tentacles of the GRC system of elections spread wider and wider.
===============

The real reason for GRC system of elections was for PAP to cultivate more PAP yes men (as the mafia welcomes new entrants), always grateful to the PAP for lining the red carpet for their easy entry into parliament, through a political thievery such as gerrymandering, elimination of by-elections and other underhand methods:

'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,' Mr Goh Chok Tong, June 2006 ['GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM'].

[Pict= [URL=http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2012/04/disassembling-grc-benefits-pap-1/]Disassembling GRC system benefits PAP (Part 1 of 3)[/URL]]