Tag Archive | "GRC"

Survey: S’poreans satisfied with PAP, promise to let them lose another 3 GRCs at most

Survey: S’poreans satisfied with PAP, promise to let them lose another 3 GRCs at most

Tags: , , ,

Don’t worry, Singaporeans tell PAP, continue to believe what you want to believe.


Singaporeans from all walks of life who are feeling highly satisfied have come out to assure the PAP.

This after a survey commissioned by MediaCorp unilaterally declared that satisfaction with the ruling government is at a high level since the general election in 2011.

Singaporeans, who heard of this result, then nodded their heads and took side way glances before telling the PAP that they are indeed so contented.

As a result, Singaporeans have promised they will let the PAP lose up to three more GRCs at most this coming general election in 2015.

One Singaporean, Gong Jiao Wei, explained how he responded to the survey: “A vast majority gave a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ rating. When Singaporeans say you are ‘good’ or ‘very good’, what we mean is that the current PAP team is good or very good to be kicked out of political office.”

“It is time.”

Other Singaporeans explained that the survey is to give the PAP a false sense of security so that they will let their guard down, like how they did in GE2011, thinking that they had victory sealed.

Hor Yee See, another local, said: “The last time round, the PAP was very good at assuring themselves everything was going to be alright. Until it was too late.”

“So this time Singaporeans are helping the PAP by letting them hear what they want to hear until it is too late to do anything about it.”







GE results

GE results

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Find out the election results here, as well as who your MPs will be. Map updates will lag.

2011: PAP: 60.1%, Opposition: 39.9%

2006: PAP: 66.7%, Opposition: 33.3%

View Larger Map

White: Constituency goes to PAP

Blue: Constituency goes to Opposition


2.49am – PAP wins Potong Pasir at 50.36% while SPP garnered 49.64% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 81, Opposition – 6

2.21am – PAP wins Jurong GRC at 66.96% while NSP garnered 33.04% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 80, Opposition – 6

2.10am – WP wins Aljunied GRC at 54.71% while WP garnered 45.29% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 75, Opposition – 6

2.03am – PAP wins Choa Chu Kang GRC at 61.20% while NSP garnered 38.80% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 75, Opposition – 1

2.03am – PAP wins Holland-Bukit Timah GRC at 60.10% while SDP garnered 39.90% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 70, Opposition – 1

1.56am – PAP wins Nee Soon GRC at 58.56% while WP garnered 41.61% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 66, Opposition – 1

1.54am – PAP wins Sembawang GRC at 63.89% while SDP garnered 36.11% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 61, Opposition – 1

1.48am – PAP wins Pioneer SMC at 60.73% while NSP garnered 39.27% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 56, Opposition – 1

1.45am – PAP wins East Coast GRC at 54.83% while WP garnered 45.17% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 55, Opposition – 1

1.38am – PAP wins Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC at 56.94% while SPP garnered 43.06% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 50, Opposition – 1

1.34am – PAP wins Punggol East SMC at 54.53%, WP garnered 41.02% of the votes, while SDA got 4.45% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 45, WP – 1

1.28am – PAP wins Ang Mo Kio GRC at 69.33% while RP garnered 30.67% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 44, Opposition – 1

1.22am – PAP wins Sengkang West SMC at 58.08% while WP garnered 41.92% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 38, Opposition – 1

1.19am – PAP wins Yuhua SMC at 66.87% while SDP garnered 33.13% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 37, Opposition – 1

1.12am – PAP wins West Coast GRC at 66.57% while RP garnered 33.43% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 36, Opposition – 1

1.04am – PAP wins Hong Kah North SMC at 70.61% while SPP garnered 29.39% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 31, Opposition – 1

1.04am – PAP wins Tampines GRC at 57.22% while NSP garnered 42.78% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 30, Opposition – 1

12.58am – PAP wins Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC at 64.79% while SDA garnered 35.21% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 25, Opposition – 1

12.56am – WP wins Hougang SMC at 64.81% while PAP garnered 35.19% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 19, Opposition – 1

12.53am – PAP wins Marine Parade GRC at 56.65% while NSP garnered 43.35% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 19, Opposition – 0

12.44am – PAP wins Joo Chiat SMC at 51.01% while WP garnered 48.99% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 14, Opposition – 0

12.30am – PAP wins Moulmein-Kallang GRC at 58.56% while WP garnered 41.44% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 13, Opposition – 0

12.27am – Strong win expected for PAP at Sembawang GRC.

12.10am – PAP wins Whampoa SMC at 66.11% while NSP garnered 32.89% of the votes. Seats won: PAP – 9, Opposition – 0

12.07am – PAP wins Radin Mas SMC at 67.11% while NSP garnered 32.89% of the votes.

12.04am – PAP wins Bukit Panjang SMC at 66.26% while NSP garnered 33.74% of the votes.

12am – PAP wins Mountbatten SMC at 58.65% while NSP garnered 41.35% of the votes.

Want to have the blogosphere in your pocket? New Nation has an app for that. Available on the Android Marketplace.

More New Nation content on GE2011 here.

PM Lee justifies the PAP’s weak candidate

PM Lee justifies the PAP’s weak candidate

Tags: , , , , ,

Because cannot find enough people mah.

By Fang Shihan

“We are not able to generate the talent in order to produce those numbers of people who are able to do their job, competently, to the satisfaction of Singaporeans” – Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, 5/4/11

Now we know why the PAP’s fielding Tin Pei Ling. In his reply to a student during the Q&A session of the NUS-organised Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum, PM Lee defended the decision to field Miss Tin by emphasising that she empathised with the elderly, was bilingual, and had been doing grassroots work for 6 years.

He also revealed that the PAP had trouble finding suitable candidates to be fielded as potential MPs. At least, not enough candidates to form a “team B” to serve as a shadow opposition party. PM Lee did not mention if he currently had enough candidates to field a complete team.

This begs the question of whether the current team consists of deadweight to make up the numbers.

But let’s give him the benefit of doubt. Not many people are like Miss Tin: Despite the years of moral education taught both in Mother Tongue and English, not many people truly love old people, are bilingual and care as much for their community. She must have been a rare find, groomed the moment she was talent-spotted speaking at a PAP convention while schooling in NUS.

She’s not the only inexperienced new face in white. To ensure that the party does not stagnate, PM Lee emphasised that it was of utmost importance that at least a quarter of the PAP candidates are fresh faces. Around 20 new candidates will contest this elections of which 18 have already been revealed with less fanfare than Miss Tin.

If you’ve got no idea who these new guys are, you’re probably not the only one. Chan…Chan who? Orh, the former general har. He believes that Singapore should er…. er…

*crickets chirp in the background*

The new candidates have no experience in politics, credentials from past jobs aside. If they appear weak or unimpressive, that is to be expected. Paraphrasing PM Lee, voters must give them time and support over the years in order for them to deliver results.

In Singapore, new MPs are not elected based on political skill or savvy. Oh no. MPs become understudies only after they’re elected.

You, the voters, hold the key to the minister job-training centre. If these new faces don’t get voted in, they will not be able to start their on-the-job training and will hence weaken the half-a-century old PAP succession plan.

Scared already? Read on.

The GRC system allows for the assumption that all candidates who won the GRC are competent, an assumption with no proof until he, the one with no political clout, enters office.

Not only does PM Lee admit that the lack of qualified candidates has led to MPs needing to be trained on the job after being elected, the need to enforce racial harmony through the GRC system has sustained repeated batches of low-profile MPs with the ability to do a disappearing act better than David Copperfield.

You’ve heard of them. That one minority candidate in each GRC that you’ve never heard of, or seen for 5 years. And you know he’s there just to show his non-Chinese face. Whassisnameagain? Er…dunno. The Malay guy.

Okay, maybe I’m being unfair. Maybe he’s been busy behind the scenes, fixing problems plaguing the neighbourhood like broken tiles, uncleaned litter and whatnot. And there are many other Chinese MPs like that too.

But you get the point. GRCs allow politicians to… not be politicians. They allow MPs to be quiet servants of the public, or as one MP puts it, the caretaker of the constituency. Most of all, the GRC system allows for the assumption that all candidates who won the GRC are competent, an assumption with no proof until he, the one with no political clout, enters office.

A big risk for the voters, no? Yet according to PM Lee, the risk of not having a proportionate number of minority candidates is a bigger threat. At least bigger than having a potential deadweight on the GRC team.

If GRCs were abolished one day, he says, Singaporeans would vote overwhelmingly for the candidate of the same race. For example, newly converted citizen, Janil Puthucheary, despite not having done his national service and justifying that practicing medicine was a form of service to his new country, would have the overwhelming support of Indians in this country.

The PAP conducted tea sessions with 240 candidates, of which only 20 made the cut. And PM Lee still laments that the PAP cannot find enough qualified, ministerial-quality candidates. But he still has to fill the numbers. MP spots have to be taken up just like minority quotas have to be fulfilled.

Is the PAP responsible for ensuring each and every candidate is deserving of the peoples’ votes? No. They’re only responsible for ensuring a win. If a deadweight politician makes it to office just remember, you elected them.

Or did you?

Want to have the blogosphere in your pocket? New Nation has an app for that. Available on the Android Marketplace.

Quit playing games for my vote

Quit playing games for my vote

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

You know it’s time for you to vote when all you hear in the news is the “PAP” and “The Opposition”. But you know it’s supposed to be about you and not them right?

By Justin Zhuang

I THOUGHT that Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng was shooting himself in the foot when he questioned the opposition’s motives of wanting to capture a GRC in the upcoming elections. Then again, he made a lot of sense.

“Some say they are doing it for party renewal, some want to be the first ones to do so, but what is the elections about? Is it about the ambitions of a political party or individuals to make history?” he asked.

Clearly, he didn’t seem to remember that his party, the PAP, also has intentions to capture a GRC for party renewal. After all, the party is trying to build its fourth generation team. But in case anyone gets this “team” mixed up with “government”, here’s a quick reminder: The PAP candidates need to be elected by the people first.

That aside, I think his remarks pretty much sum up the elections hustings thus far. All the politicians have been doing is talking about themselves or with one another.

And if history repeats itself, that’s probably how the upcoming General Elections will turn out to be — political entertainment served up once every five years. As usual, the PAP will have a field day caricaturing the opposition parties and their candidates, digging up any dirty and dismal past.

Just look at what they did in the 1963 elections, using cartoons on flyers to succinctly sum up their position against their opponents. The same thing in the 1967 by-elections was done on banners at a rally in Thomson. Nowadays, they just say it as it is, like in 1997 when they labeled Workers’ Party candidate Tang Liang Hong anti-Christian and a Chinese chauvinist. The medium may be different but the method stays the same.

On the other hand, all you hear from the Opposition parties is the plea to us to vote out the PAP — the exact rallying call of the Barisan Sosialis in the 1984 elections.

Yet, what is an elections really about? Is it just about who we vote in or what we are voting for? The problem with our elections here is it never seems to rise above petty politics (and personalities) to a proper debate about issues that matter. It’s like watching an entertainment show on television, with two sides trying to outdo one another, and you as a viewer (some people don’t get to vote, you see), you stand to receive prizes (goodies) just by picking the right winner.

One big reason for this is that neither side treats the voters with enough respect. We don’t know who we are as voters. The constant redrawing of electoral boundaries give us no sense of place. This elections, I am be part of Hougang SMC, but in the next I could be part of Aljunied GRC! Then, there’s the parachuting of candidates: people who don’t live in our constituencies or spend years with us are suddenly moved to stand in a constituency to suit the party’s strategy.

We don’t need a Cooling-Off Day to think about who we want to vote for, but we need certainty about who the candidates are as early as possible. How can we be expected to make an informed choice about a candidate in weeks? Especially when I have to live with the decision for five years!

But the true mark of a people’s candidate is when voters come up to you to take a photograph and an autograph. Not the other way around.

The uncertainty is further fuelled by the lack of a fixed election date, that leads to unnecessary time wasted on speculation. “When are the elections?” “Who will be contesting?” become the de-facto election questions when voters should be discussing the ‘Whats’ and ‘Whys’ of voting.

Uncertainty also breeds uncommitted candidates, because nothing is confirmed until Nomination Day. And in order to win our votes in such a short time, politicians on both sides end up engaging in mudslinging to make their opponents look bad. The opposition especially seems prone to that.

On the flipside, parties the party that can afford more, resorts to gimmicks and giveaways that are sometimes in such bad taste. In order to wrest Bukit Gombak back from the SDP after the 1991 elections, PAP candidate Mr Ang Mong Seng began celebrating the birthdays of children attending the constituency’s PAP Community Foundation preschools. Recalling how he won it back in 1997, Mr Ang told The Straits Times that not only did he sing them birthday songs and cut a cake with them, he even posed for a photograph with each child and autographed it.

Besides the likelihood that the children would have preferred to pose with Barney instead of Mr Ang, I wonder if they even knew who he was. At the very least, the children’s teacher who spends much more time with them in class is more worthy of being in this photograph.

This example pretty much sums up the elections in Singapore: It’s the candidates imposing themselves on us instead of convincing us that we need them. They stick themselves into our lives not necessarily because they want to, but they need to. And when voting is compulsory, it often becomes a choice of the lesser evil.

But the true mark of a people’s candidate is when voters come up to you to take a photograph and an autograph. Not the other way around. To get to this level of acceptance, candidates should start talking with the voters instead of to them.

Oh, and please leave the kids out of your politics.

Justin Zhuang is a Singaporean writer and editorial designer. He blogs about Singapore’s politics, society and visual culture at justrambling.sg