Said another, 15 minutes later, in Singapore-speak: "No point, one. In Singapore, elections where got meaning?"

I was helping out with a street poll in the third week of August. Volunteers fanned out to various parts of Jurong Group Representation Constituency (GRC) to ask citizens at random whether they thought there ought to be a by-election after one of their Members of Parliament, Ong Chit Chung, passed away.

It is absurd, when you think about it, that a by-election isn't automatic once there is a parliamentary vacancy, and that we had to go around asking people what they thought about it.

This problem is a direct result of our having this ugly beast called Group Representation Constituencies: super-large electoral districts electing whole teams of MPs. What happens if one member of the team should die, resign or get convicted in court midway through the parliamentary term? What does one do with the vacant seat?

As the Parliamentary Elections Act currently stands, Section 24 says:

Writ of election
24. - (1) For the purposes of every general election of Members of Parliament, and for the purposes of the election of Members to supply vacancies caused by death, resignation or otherwise, the President shall issue writs under the public seal, addressed to the Returning Officer.

[skip]

(2A) 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.

This means all the 5 or 6 seats for a GRC must become vacant before a by-election is called to fill them.

The government relied on this to say that no by-election is required even though Jurong's representation in Parliament will be one member short till the next General Election. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said: "If a parliamentary seat falls vacant mid-term, the party steps in to take care of affected constituents." [1]

But what if, in a 6-member GRC, 5 members have gone for various reasons, leaving only 1 member? Can he or she cope with all the constituency work? Do we still say the GRC is adequately represented in Parliament?

The government says it's a judgement call they will make. "If I decide to call a by-election during this Parliament, Jurong is certainly one possibility I will consider," Lee said. [2]

How can he do that? You might ask. How can it be discretionary? After all, the law says, "No writ shall be issued..." Isn't that crystal clear?

In real life however, the Prime Minister should be able to "decide to call a by-election", even when not all seats of GRC have fallen vacant. He can do so by persuading the remaining MPs for a particular GRC to resign. (As you will note, the Prime Minister cannot in practice provoke a by-election for an opposition-held GRC in the same way.)

So even without changing the law, there is a way to precipitate a by-election in Jurong GRC to return a full-strength team to Parliament. Would that be what the constituents want?

That was what the survey was about. And these were our results, as presented to the House by Nominated Member of Parliament Siew Kum Hong on 27 August 2008:

If you ignored those who had no opinion ("don't know") you'd see that a clear majority of Singapore citizens preferred that a by-election be held. They outnumbered the "No need" by about 3:2.

* * * * *

 
For the street survey, my friend and I were assigned the residential district of Taman Jurong. Here are some observations I made during that experience:

1. Before starting, I had wondered how many Singaporeans would even understand the term "by-election". We haven't had one for maybe 20 years. Would the people we meet even understand our survey question?

I was quite gratified to discover that most respondents knew the term, whether in English or Chinese [3].  Even the younger ones who might never have voted before, knew what the question was about. Were they merely guessing the meaning of the term from the context? Or did they know about this electoral procedure from events in Malaysia, where opposition politician Anwar Ibrahim was that very week contesting in a by-election in Permatang Paur constituency to get back into Parliament?

Unfortunately, curious as I was, I felt I couldn't probe further lest it jeopardise the survey. Still, on the surface of it, it suggested that Singaporeans were quite familiar with democratic mechanisms even though no one under 65 has ever tasted real democracy here.

2. On the other hand, I felt that the percentage of "Don't know" was rather high. The survey asked a simple question, and it shouldn't be difficult to hold an opinion on the matter. Was this percentage reflective of political apathy? Or were the respondents trying to avoid expressing any political opinion, perhaps out of fear?

3. The Chinese were noticeably more reluctant to be polled, compared to other races. Most of them waved us away or pretended not to have seen us. (I tried to compensate for this by approaching more Chinese to ask if they'd participate in the survey.) This points to a major difference in attitude between the Chinese and other races with respect to social and civic values, but I won't get into it here.

4. Except for that, I observed no difference in the type of responses to our question by race, gender or age. That is to say, the Yes/No/Don't know split was pretty much independent of these attributes.

5. The respondents who said Yes -– that there should be a by-election –- were generally more decisive in their replies than those who said No. "Of course", "There SHOULD be an election", "That's what democracy means" were the kind of answers I encountered.

6. Among those who didn't think a by-election was necessary, there were roughly three groups. Even though the survey never asked respondents the reasons for their opinions, one group volunteered the view that with other MPs helping out, there was no need for a by-election, echoing the government's line. Another group expressed cynicism: "Even if you have an election, nothing will change, so why bother?" The third group just said "No", without volunteering any justification.

7. A good number of respondents looked at me up and down, trying to figure out whether I was from the government. I had the distinct impression that they needed to work that out before they could decide what answer to give me. This of course, begs the question as to how reliable the results are.

Well, it's not a statistically rigorous survey, that's for sure. Nobody is claiming that it is. But as an indicator of where public opinion might lie, it has its value.

By sheer coincidence, the New Paper did a similar street poll in Bukit Batok. I found the news story in the No Fear Singapore blog:

The New Paper,
29 August 2008

What People of Bukit Batok say 
By Arul John

The majority of parliamentarians voted one way, and heartlanders the other.

Do Bukit Batok residents feel the need for a by-election to fill the seat vacated by the late Jurong GRC MP Dr Ong Chit Chung?

Yes, said the majority of 150 who had a clear opinion.

The New Paper asked 150 people in Bukit Batok what they thought. And their views, depending on which side of the parliamentary debate you were on, would either be a vindication or a surprise.

While less than 10 per cent of Parliament felt a by-election was necessary, more than two-thirds of those we polled who were clear in their opinion felt they wanted a by-election (70 out of 100).

The rest - 50 - were not concerned either way.

They were either undecided or did not care.

[truncated]

The New Paper's survey results were in the same ballpark as our survey.

* * * * *

It was therefore interesting to see the ruling party MPs live in their own little cocoon.

During the same parliamentary debate wherein Siew brought up our survey results, one of the remaining Jurong GRC MPs, Halimah Yaacob, asserted that grassroots leaders and residents in Bukit Batok were satisfied with the arrangements that fellow MPs in the GRC had made to look after the ward. Bukit Batok was the division of Jurong that Ong Chit Chung had looked after.

At no point, Halimah said, did residents or grassroots leaders even broach the subject of a by-election: "They raised the usual local or municipal issues but none raised any concern or discomfort at the existing arrangement that we had worked out." [4] 

Ah, but she was approaching the question from a different direction. She saw the role of MPs as that of dispensing patronage: Were residents content with the alternative arrangements to "look after" the ward?

Has the ruling party forgotten about the principle of choice and representation, the very underpinning of democracy?

© Yawning Bread