During the Jul. 5, 2023, debate on the motion to abolish the Group Representation Constituency system, Minister for Education Chan Chun Sing debated Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh on the merits and drawbacks of this Singaporean feature in our elections.

Multiracialism

Chan characterised the motion as a binary choice:

"Do we as a people and as a system, believe in ensuring that the Parliament, our highest legislative body of the land is representative of a multi-racial Singapore?

Or are we willing... to take the risk of rule by majority without safeguards for our minority communities, without safeguards against racial politics that can easily tear apart the fabric of our nation?

These are the fundamental issues in discussing this motion and informs the basis of why we have the GRC."

Chan pointed out that the motion did not call for the reform of the GRC system but for its abolition.

Chan restated the government's position that the GRC system was an extension of the government's multiracial policy and a safeguard for minority representation.

The GRC system, Chan said, required multiracial teams to contest elections, minimising the use of the race card. The alternatives suggested by the Progress Singapore Party failed to address those points.

Alternatives

Chan said he also thought "deeply" about the two alternatives to GRCs that the PSP had put forward — one an NCMP system for minorities and one of proportional representation.

On the suggested NCMP scheme for minorities, whereby minority candidates who lost in SMCs but still had a high percentage of votes could be appointed as NCMPs, Chan said there was no guarantee there would be enough minority candidates among those who lost if there were only SMCs.

Another reason is that the NCMP system only comes into play when the ruling party has a large majority in Parliament. If Poa's suggestion was implemented, Chan said this would likely result in a predominantly Chinese party in power, with minority NCMPs in opposition.

Parliament would be divided along racial lines, with political divides based on race. "And this, if I may suggest, would be most dangerous for Singapore," Chan said.

On proportional representation, Chan said this would result in parties based on race, religion, or special interests.

"Some parties will be incentivised to build their base around a particular interest to win seats rather than to appeal to a broad majority of voters," Chan said.

While all political parties were eager to move past race, Chan said that "having an aspiration is not the same as having it today".

While he welcomes the progress made so far, Chan said there was a need to be realistic about the present circumstance, citing a 2021 Institute of Policy Studies and CNA survey that indicated respondents still "preferring those who are racially similar to themselves for many roles".

Coat-tail Effect

Chan also dismissed critiques of the GRC system allowing parties to use the "star power" of popular politicians to let weaker or more inexperienced politicians ride on their "coattails".

Chan pointed out that both Opposition parties in Parliament had used such "coattail advantages" at one time or other.

He claimed that the Worker's Party had supposedly taken advantage of Low Thia Kiang's popularity in 2011. He further claimed that Tan Cheng Bock's popularity allowed Leong Mun Wai and Hazel Poa to become NCMPs in 2020.

Chan said such an effect could also be negative because it allowed a single unpopular MP to drag down the rest of their GRC team.

In response to questions by NMP Mark Chay regarding the geographical size of GRCs, Chan said that it is for the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) to decide and not the government of the day.

"Ultimately, the EBRC will take into consideration various factors, including what was mentioned today, to decide on the boundaries," Chan said.

Pritam Singh on why WP opposes GRC

In his speech, Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh of the Workers' Party said that his party stood by its 2020 manifesto position, that the Workers' Party favoured the abolition of the GRC system.

No one disagrees about the importance of multiracialism, but what about politics?

Singh expressed his concerns that the GRC system was being "ridden on for gerrymandering purposes".

He referred to occasions where SMCs which had gone through tight races during general elections seemed to be often absorbed into GRCs at subsequent elections, giving Feng Shan and Joo Chiat as examples.

Singh said he accepted the importance of supporting multiracialism, and he did not believe that anyone in parliament would disagree with its importance of multiracialism.

However, he reiterated that his party's issue with the GRC system was its use as a "political football".

"So I don't think the PAP can walk away from any topic on the GRC by saying 'multiracialism is important for Singapore', we all agree with that. But what of the matter, when the rubber meets the road, when we look at how the boundaries are redrawn. The GRC system is used for that purpose as well."

Singh also cited the reform of the elected presidency as a way to show that there were occasions when alternative systems were considered.

Singapore has progressed as a multiracial society, but is it time to abolish the GRC system which has contributed to the progress?

Singh believes that using the GRC system for gerrymandering leads to cynicism, notwithstanding the importance of multiracialism.

With regards to Singapore's progress as a multiracial society, Singh pointed to IPS surveys comparing results from 2013 to 2018, showing that the majority of respondents embrace religious diversity and adopt colour-blindness in social interaction and employment.

While he said that the GRC system had "some part to play" in achieving this, as it forces political parties to adopt a multiracial slate of candidates, these surveys put race and religious issues into perspective in Singapore.

In response, Chan reminded Singh that the motion was on whether the GRC system should be abolished outright instead of reforming it. The question is whether the system should be abolished even if they could agree on the "fundamentals" just because some things could be improved.

Chan also said that while he does welcome the improvement of race relations in Singapore, he questioned if it was wise to remove the measures, like the GRC system, that brought about the improvements in the first place.

"It is like saying that on the roads, our traffic is generally safe, because we have traffic rules. And when the traffic is relatively safe, then one makes the argument, then we shouldn't have so many traffic rules or traffic rules at all."

On allegations of gerrymandering

Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean addressed Singh's gerrymandering claims, saying it was not a new accusation and asked if Singh was aware of the term's origins.

"I just wanted to ask Mr Pritam Singh, whether he knows where the term gerrymandering comes from, and how far back it goes, and whether or not they have GRCs in those places.

Singh said he was not aware of the exact origin of the term, but "you know it when you see it, and I think we have seen it for all and sundry", referring again to SMCs that are "gone" following a "tight fight" between the PAP and WP.

Teo said that accusations of gerrymandering are ever-present in any polity where electoral boundaries are drawn or redrawn and went back 200 years, and it was not an issue limited to just GRCs or SMCs in Singapore.

In response to Singh's point about changing boundaries, Teo pointed out that GRCs and SMCs won by the Opposition have not had their boundaries changed. He added:

"I don't understand why the EBRC has not changed them, but perhaps you can make a request for them all to become SMCs. That may be an interesting idea."

In response, Singh said that the WP was prepared to contest any constituency on an SMC basis.

He also said that the EBRC had previously produced detailed reports, up to "50 pages" in length, explaining why boundaries were changed.

But more recent EBRC reports, such as the most recent one, were fewer than 10 pages, only detailing the physical boundary changes, and such lack of information would mean a continuation of cynicism towards the GRC system.

Related story:

Top image via MCI Singapore/YouTube