[ad_1]
SINGAPORE: Singapore could see a “one and a half party” political system in the future, with increased political opposition even as long as the ruling party remains in power.
This was one of the scenarios raised in an online forum held on Thursday (October 1) by the Institute for Political Studies (IPS) where a panel of experts gave their opinion on the results of the 2020 General Elections.
IPS also shared the findings of a post-election poll on the attitudes of Singaporean voters at the forum.
READ: Bread and Butter Issues, Need for Different Points of View in Parliament, Both Mattered to Voters in GE2020: IPS Poll
Dr Lam Peng Er, a senior fellow at the East Asian Institute Studying Japanese Politics, said this was a likely system in Singapore for the next decade or two.
“There is … speculation that the 2020 general election has led to an incipient two-party system in Singapore. I highly doubt it,” he said.
“If you are going to put a gun to my head and ask me to anticipate what the likely party system in Singapore is, it is not going to be a PAP monopoly of all seats in Parliament after the Barisan Sosialis withdrew. I think (it) is more likely that we will see the emergence of a party and a half system within the next decade or two. “
Singapore is unlikely to see a rotation of the ruling party as in Western models of democracy, but the country could move towards a system that Japan had for many years, from 1955 to 1993, when the conservative Liberal Democratic Party was in power, Dr. Lam said.
READ: GE2020 – PAP credibility down, WPs up from previous polls, says IPS post-election poll
At the time, the perennial party in power was the PLD, but there was a permanent opposition party: the Socialist Party of Japan, which had a substantial presence in the Japanese Diet.
“If such a Japanese scenario arises, then it would be a Goldilocks outcome for the majority of voters,” he said.
A Goldilocks scenario is often used to describe one that does not take either end of any given spectrum.
Dr. Lam made this analogy, saying that there would be political stability and predictability, with the Popular Action Party (PAP) forming the Government, while it would have checks and balances in Parliament.
ASIAANS HOPE “DEMOCRACY WILL BRING”
Dr. Lam was giving his analysis as part of a discussion with a panel comprised of political observer Dr. Derek da Cunha, Professor Chu Yun-han, director of the Asian Barometer Survey, and Dr. Teo Kay Key, a postdoctoral fellow. from IPS. The discussion was moderated by Dr. Gillian Koh, IPS deputy director of research.
Professor Chu analyzed the political culture of Singaporeans compared to other Asian countries, based on his institute’s extensive survey of attitudes towards governance and democracy in multiple territories in Asia.
His assessment was that Singapore’s system of government had strong legitimacy among its citizens, compared to other Asian countries. This was because many Singaporeans, like citizens of other Asian countries, valued good governance and social equity above the norms of democracy, such as fair elections, or democratic freedoms, data from His studies.
“Asian citizens expect democracy to work, they do not conceive of democracy in the terms that a typical political scientist would define … their understanding of democracy is good government, it is clean politics, it is efficiency,” he said.
Responding to questions from viewers online, the panelists also gave their opinion on whether the elections in Singapore were fair and whether improvements could be made to the nation’s political system.
Dr da Cunha said that, in his opinion, the elections in Singapore are free but not necessarily fair. “So in the sense that we have an elections department that is part of the Prime Minister’s Office, and then we also have an electoral boundary review committee, part of the same setup,” he said.
“If the boundaries are to be redrawn before the elections, I think that to have a minimum level of justice, they should be redrawn one year before the general elections,” he said.
Dr Lam said that as Singapore develops as a democracy, a sense of justice was “very important”, adding that it was a good move to formally recognize the head of the Workers’ Party (WP), Pritam Singh, as leader of the opposition after the elections of July 10. .
The move came after WP won a second group representation constituency (GRC) and increased the number of elected seats it held in Parliament to 10.
SHOULD THE GRC SYSTEM BE CHANGED?
However, Dr da Cunha said he did not see much change in Singapore’s political culture, as Parliament has maintained its Government Parliamentary Committees, which are committees to review legislation and programs of government ministries made up of deputies from the PAP.
He suggested replacing them with Select Committees that will attract members from both the PAP and opposition members of Parliament.
“They can provide direct information for policy making … then we will have participatory democracy throughout the year instead of what we have now, which is once every four to five years,” he said.
READ: Facebook, CNA and YouTube were the channels voters turned to in the 2020 ‘online’ general election: IPS survey
In response to a question about whether the GRC system should be changed, Dr. Lam said it can be “adjusted.” He suggested limiting the size of the GRCs to four members. The current limit is five.
Although opposition supporters criticize the system for raising the bar for opposition candidates, its original intention was to ensure representation of ethnic minorities, he said.
The GRC system is a “double-edged sword,” as the WP demonstrated in the Aljunied and Sengkang GRCs, he said. Winning a GRC allowed the party to secure four or five seats at a time instead of one, Dr. Lam noted. He added that Singapore should also think about how to ensure greater representation of women in Parliament.
However, Dr. da Cunha disagreed and said that the GRC system remains a “one-edged sword” in favor of the ruling party because a GRC is large enough that the sample size tends to imitate the popular vote at the national level, although he added that “there will always be outliers.”
