Singapore: Pritam Singh, the leader of the Workers’ Party (WP), said on Tuesday, April 29, that only elected opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) had the ability to “push” and exert pressure on the administration.
Ahead of Saturday’s general election, Mr. Singh addressed the media at Hougang SMC and made the point that Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMPs) had no residents or voters to ask for input from.
Mr. Singh of the governing People’s Action Party said, “They don’t have an office under a block in the constituency where they have worked, and basically this is where the PAP wants to keep the opposition.”
“I understand why they don’t want elected opposition MPs, as only they have the power to exert pressure and influence on the government.”
He was reacting to remarks made at a rally on Monday by Indranee Rajah, a minister in the prime minister’s office, about how opposition parties often ask people to vote for them in the name of bringing other viewpoints to parliament, but they seldom ever admit that these viewpoints are already “guaranteed.”
They portray it as a binary decision, as if choosing the PAP will eliminate opposition representation in parliament. However, it isn’t accurate… and the PAP ensured that.”
Ms. Indranee referred to the NCMP program, which was established to guarantee a minimum number of opposition members in parliament.
The “best losers” among the opposition candidates are proclaimed elected as NCMPs in the event that less than 12 opposition members are elected during an election, bringing the total number of opposition members in parliament to 12.
It was formerly illegal for an NCMP, who does not represent any constituency, to vote on issues like money bills, supply bills, constitutional changes, motions of no confidence in the government, and resolutions to remove the president from office.
However, NCMPs now have the same voting powers as elected MPs, according to a 2016 constitutional amendment.
NCMPs are “a function of what had transpired after certain important political changes that happened in Singapore in 1988,” according to Mr. Singh’s description on Tuesday.
“A lot of people were calling for more opposition in parliament at that time, and I believe it was almost like a check to make sure the momentum was slowed down,” he added.
But there’s no denying that you need elected opposition members of parliament. They must be elected to the parliament if you want them to speak out consistently and to feel planted in the ground.
Then-prime minister Lee Kuan Yew suggested changing the Parliamentary Elections Act and the Constitution in 1984 to enable at least three opposition MPs to be represented in parliament.
Mr. Lee said that the establishment of NCMPs would educate younger Singaporeans about the capabilities of the opposition since they had been excluded from the politics of early independence in the 1950s and 1960s.
However, the initiative was criticized by opposition parties, who called it a backdoor into parliament. They said that the plan was an attempt by the PAP to discourage voters from choosing the opposition.
The plan was also criticized by several PAP backbenchers, who said that the opposition should be elected and that it undermined the democratic process.
However, others believed that the plan provided the best of all worlds since it allowed NCMPs to serve in parliament without having to represent a constituency.
After being approved by parliament, the suggested modifications became operative in August 1984.
Following the GE in December 1984, the election of opposition candidates Chiam See Tong and J. B. Jeyaretnam to parliament left one NCMP seat vacant. However, two contenders declined offers to take it up; therefore, it remained unfilled.
Mr. Chiam was elected as the only opposition MP in the 1988 GE. The WP offered two NCMP seats to Francis Seow and Lee Siew Choh. They were the first two NCMPs to accept.
In response to the remarks made by Prime Minister Lawrence Wong the previous day, Mr. Singh said on Tuesday that it would be “harder to advance Singapore’s interests” in a world where “might is right” if the PAP had a weaker mandate.
Nonetheless, Mr. Wong said that “my team and I can speak up for Singapore confidently, and we will do our utmost to ensure this little red dot continues to shine brightly even in a troubled world” because of a “clear mandate” from Singaporeans.
When questioned, Mr. Singh said, “I believe that shows a very unsatisfactory appreciation or assessment of Singaporeans.”
“I think this red dot will remain a bright, shining red dot as long as we are rowing in the same direction, even when there are different points of view in parliament.”
Mr. Singh said that he had spoken to many individuals who were “quite conscious” of the need for Singaporeans to cooperate, even PAP members.
“A more divided Singapore won’t come from a more balanced parliament. There will be others who believe that our nation is worth defending,” he said.
“It is worth fighting for, and we will all come together as one united people and contribute what we can.”
