Is the Opposition’s push for electoral reform really about fairness?
If we adopt Jamus Lim and Hazel Poa’s suggestions of involving political parties in the electoral boundary review—are we not then introducing political considerations into the process? Isn’t that, well, gerrymandering?
In the recent Parliament session, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) and the Workers’ Party (WP) called for a review of the process by which electoral boundaries are determined. Both insinuated that the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) has given the People's Action Party (PAP) an unfair advantage through gerrymandering.
Jamus Lim proposed some rather interesting alternative methods. For one, he suggested using game theory concepts, such as allowing parties to take turns proposing boundaries.
But let’s take a step back and consider why the EBRC exists in the first place. The purpose of the EBRC is to determine electoral boundaries by taking into account population shifts and new housing developments. By definition, this process should have no political considerations.
If we adopt Jamus Lim and Hazel Poa’s suggestions of involving political parties in the electoral boundary review—are we not then introducing political considerations into the process? Isn’t that, well, gerrymandering?
If parties take turns to gerrymander every election, wouldn’t that be worse than the current system where gerrymandering does not occur?
“In performing its role, the [EBRC] does not examine the results of past elections. It also does not take into account the profile of voters who may be affected by the new boundaries.”
With the current system, even though boundaries were redrawn in Hougang and Potong Pasir SMCs while the opposition held these constituencies, the changes were minor and not made to favour the PAP.
Moreover, involving more stakeholders with vested interests would likely result in even more drastic changes. What good does this do for Singaporeans, aside from giving political parties the legitimacy to manipulate boundaries for their own gain?
Another alternative that Jamus Lim proposed was to use computer-aided tools to create compact districts aligned with electoral geographies. However, this approach would allow boundaries to be adjusted based on previous national voting patterns.
Wouldn’t this favour the incumbent party—essentially gerrymandering and manipulating boundaries to ensure the ruling party stays in power? Surely, this isn’t in the interest of Jamus Lim or the WP.
I do not fundamentally oppose a review of the electoral boundary review process if it ensures that the EBRC remains aligned with its objectives and serves the people.
However, the WP and PSP seem to be offering suggestions that introduce political considerations into an otherwise apolitical process, all while claiming to do so “for the people.”
When Leong Mun Wai was asked about the end goals of his party’s proposals—whether they were about ensuring fairness of boundaries or achieving political outcomes—he appeared stumped. Shouldn’t this have been a straightforward answer if the intent was simple?
The opposition can push for a review of the process to benefit their political outcomes, but claiming to do so with Singaporeans in mind seems rather disingenuous.
