Learning From Singapore S Multiracial Group Parliament Seats

---

 


What can Malaysia learn from the recent Singapore elections?
Apart from the sharp rebuke against two PAS leaders trying to stoke up religious politics there.
Perhaps we can explore how their elections are done. One way Singapore discourages racial politics is to have multiracial Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs).
In Malaysia, politicians who represent seats mainly of one ethnic group often push narrow racial issues.
ADSPerhaps having multiracial group seats or GRCs will encourage them to talk in a more multiracial way?
This mechanism may also address the blatant imbalance between urban and rural seats in Malaysia and the attendant racial overtones.
There are wide disparities within Selangor itself. For example, the rural Parliament seat of Sabak Bernam had 51,000 voters in the 15th general election (GE15) while another rural seat, Tanjong Karang, had 62,000.
In contrast, far more voters were crammed into Chinese-majority urban seats – 195,000 in Petaling Jaya, 240,000 in Damansara, and 230,000 in Subang.
This means that one vote in Damansara during GE15 was worth five times less (21 percent) compared to one vote in Sabak Bernam in electing one member of Parliament (MP).
Malays also unfairly treated
But the disparity between rural and urban seats also affects Malay voters.
Take the ridiculous size of the semi-urban Bangi seat of Selangor with a whopping 311,500 voters (as at April 2023)!
Yet, this is actually a Malay-majority seat with 62.2 percent bumiputera, 28.7 percent Chinese, and 8.4 percent Indians according to government statistics.
This means that Malay voters in Bangi have only 16 percent (one-sixth) of the voting power of the farmers and fisherfolk of Sabak Bernam.
We have to ask, how will the nation’s future be affected if rural folks have much greater say in choosing the nation’s future leaders, even as more Malays are migrating to towns?
One person, one vote
ADSFairness for Bangi voters means that their voting power should be equal to those in Sabak Bernam.
This is the basic democratic principle of “one person, one vote”.
Our Federal Constitution says electoral seats in the same state should have an “approximately equal” number of voters (Subsection 2(C) of Schedule 13). This was pointed out by Sunway University political analyst Wong Chin Huat.
Don’t forget that “Keluhuran Perlembagaan” or “Supremacy of the Constitution” is one of the five key principles of our Rukun Negara.
Obviously, more seats should be created in densely packed urban areas. But the problem is that this is deemed a “sensitive matter”.
The reason is that these areas are still seen as being “dominated” by non-Malays. But in reality, this is no longer accurate
I’m not even talking about Shah Alam and Kuala Terengganu. Kuala Lumpur itself has a balanced mix of 47.7 percent Malays, 41.6 percent Chinese, and 10 percent Indians, according to the government’s own Statistics Department.
Yet 3R politicking continues over seat boundaries. For example, in March 2021, Khairuddin Aman Razali was unabashed in declaring that PAS wanted to redraw election boundaries to benefit Malays so that Perikatan Nasional could win a two-thirds majority.
Different solutions
Given how touchy racial issues are, how do we solve the imbalance between urban and rural seats?
The traditional way is to break up the huge Bangi seat into five different seats with about 60,000 voters each. But this will create some so-called “Chinese seats” and may be controversial.
Another solution is to have a “proportional representation” (PR) system which reflects the votes that different parties received in Selangor overall, rather than in particular seats with unfairly drawn borders (gerrymandering).
The PR system was proposed by the Pakatan Harapan-era Electoral Reform Committee. This is a fairer system that has been discussed before.
Allow me to suggest another solution to the Bangi problem - to become a “multiracial group seat”.
We don’t have to follow Singapore’s exact formula of GRCs (one minority representative), but we can create our own.
To be on par with Sabak Bernam, Bangi should be able to elect five MPs (about 60,000 voters per MP).
Following the racial makeup in this seat (62 percent bumis), three MPs will be bumi while two will be non-bumi. If that is deemed too many, how about two bumi MPs and one non-bumi MP?
On the Madani side, the candidates will come from either PKR, Amanah, Umno, or DAP. On the PN side, they will come from PAS, Bersatu, or Gerakan.
Multiracial cooperation
The Madani government can justify this move by saying it’s to encourage more harmony with multiracial teams for huge seats.
It’s also a matter of proper service. How can one MP be expected to cater to the needs of over 300,000 voters? It’s just not humanly possible! It’s unfair to deprive voters of closer attention from their MPs.
Group seats can also be done for other huge semi-urban seats in Selangor such as Kota Raja (245,000 voters in GE15), Kapar (190,000) and Gombak (207,000). These are all Malay-majority seats.
It’s politically unthinkable to create more “DAP seats” by breaking up the Chinese-majority constituencies of Subang, Damansara, and Petaling Jaya. So turning them into multiracial group seats will be more palatable.
Surely PN can’t be against having more healthy multiracial teams and cooperation? After all, our Jata Negara or Coat of Arms proclaims “Bersekutu Bertambah Mutu” or “Unity is Strength”.
However, to be frank, this will benefit Pakatan Harapan as they tend to perform better in multiracial seats.
The recent Ayer Kuning by-election also showed that Umno can win a seat where Chinese and Indians made up 36 percent of voters.
PAS and Bersatu will probably oppose this idea because they find it harder to compete in mixed seats due to the narrow racial politics they espouse.
And that is precisely the point - this structural change in our election system can encourage debate over crucial shared national issues like how to improve our education, economy, healthcare, and social services.
Not to be mired in endless unproductive polemics over race and religion. That only benefits those who “menangguk di air keruh” (fish in troubled waters), which refers to those aiming for selfish political gains by causing social turmoil.
Madani has been lampooned as “MAD About No Improvements”. Reforms have been lacklustre as it has been held back by racial political calculations.
Yet these are ultimately self-defeating as PKR can never be “more Malay” than PAS and Bersatu. So Madani should undertake bold electoral reform instead.
Not only because it’s the right democratic principle, but also to ensure their own survival in the next general election. - Mkini
ANDREW SIA is a veteran journalist who likes teh tarik khau kurang manis. You are welcome to give him ideas to brew at [email protected].
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---