After the general elections I read several arguments that the GRCs are not relevant. Most of them take Michael Palmer, K. Shanmugam and Tharman Shanmugaratnam as examples to show that good credible candidates from the minority races can be elected.
But they are only looking at the present scenario. These are strong candidates standing alone or leading a strong team from a strong party contesting against weaker opponents. They are veterans or familiar with Singaporeans.
We cannot guarantee that it will be like that in future. Things will change.
No one has suggested a sure way that we will have elected MPs from the minorities. So, I would say GRCs, despite its shortcomings, are not irrelevant.
If we have two equally strong candidates, say Teo Chee Hean vs Tharman , then most people will likely pick one of their own race. It does not mean they are racists or they vote along racial line, it is just a natural preference.
6 comments:
Two or three members GRC will ensure elected MPs from minorities. Why do we need four or five members GRC?
All new candidates from ruling party and opposition parties should stand in SMCs for election into parliament.
With the present system we do not get the best candidates elected.
I really wish that you would just keep your postings to Cantonese Opera.
I really wish that you would just keep your postings to Cantonese Opera.
GRC is NOT the only way to ensure minority representation.
In this regard, I fully agreed with Anonymous that this blog should be devoted to CO only.
Looks like Frannxis' support for the GRC upsetted some people. Any blogger can express his views on any topic. There is no need to confine to one narrow topic.
BTW, there are other ways but none better than the GRC.
Linda, you are right, the GRC is not perfect.
Two or three members in a GRC are not proportional. It would mean 50% and 33% minorities. The best is 4 with a few 5.
Post a Comment