Chan Chun Sing rejects Jamus Lim's proposal for enhanced transparency in electoral boundary review

Summary

The speaker addresses the issue of electoral districting, advocating for a fair and transparent system that avoids gerrymandering. They emphasize the importance of an electoral boundary review committee (EBRC) that operates independently of political parties, ensuring neutrality and objectivity. The discussion also touches on the potential for both intentional and unintentional gerrymandering, and the speaker proposes the use of scientifically supported tools to create benchmark maps. They question the PMO's stance on adopting such an approach and highlight the need for the EBRC to serve the interests of the people and Singapore, rather than political parties.

Takeaways

• 🗳️ The speaker acknowledges the imperfections in electoral districting systems but argues for improvements to achieve fairness and public perception of fairness.
• 🌐 The speaker suggests that benchmarking current electoral boundaries against mathematically sound models can enhance transparency and acceptance.
• 🤔 There is a call to question the underlying political values that lead to concerns about intentional gerrymandering, which can diminish the weight of certain voters' voices.
• 🗣️ The speaker emphasizes the importance of ensuring that all citizens' voices are heard equally in a modern democracy.
• 🏛️ The speaker describes the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) as an independent and objective body, free from party politics.
• 🛡️ The EBRC's composition and processes are designed to be insulated from political interference, unlike in other countries.
• 👨‍⚖️ Suggestions to involve a high court judge to enhance the EBRC's independence are considered but deemed insufficient to prevent political interference.
• 🔍 The speaker distinguishes between intentional and unintentional gerrymandering, with the former being assuredly absent in the EBRC's approach.
• 📊 The proposal to use scientifically supported tools to produce benchmark maps is presented as a method to counteract potential unintentional gerrymandering.
• 🤝 The speaker invites consideration of whether the EBRC should serve political parties' interests or the broader interests of the people and Singapore.
• 🌟 The primary goals for Singapore and Singaporeans are identified as having MPs who can take care of, represent, and form a functioning government to look after the nation's interests.

Q & A

What is the primary goal of the electoral boundary review committee (EBRC) according to the script?

The primary goal of the EBRC is to serve the interests of the people and Singaporeans, ensuring that every electoral division is a microcosm of the nation, reflecting national interests and not just sectoral interests.

How does the EBRC ensure independence and objectivity in its work?

The EBRC is composed of senior civil servants with no party allegiance, and it does not have access to voting information. It operates independently and objectively without consulting any political party, thus avoiding party politics and gerrymandering.

What is the speaker's stance on the use of mathematical models in electoral boundary delimitation?

The speaker is open to the idea of using mathematical models to adjust electoral boundaries, as long as it is uninformed by actual voting preferences and aims to create a microcosm of Singapore in each electoral division.

What are the two forms of gerrymandering mentioned in the script?

The two forms of gerrymandering mentioned are intentional and unintentional. Intentional gerrymandering is purposefully manipulated for political advantage, while unintentional gerrymandering occurs naturally through population movements and may inadvertently affect electoral outcomes.

Why does the speaker believe that involving all political parties in the EBRC's process could be counterproductive?

Involving all political parties could politicize the entire process, leading to horse trading and gerrymandering, which would move the process backwards rather than forwards, away from the goal of serving the interests of the people.

What concerns does the speaker express about having a high court judge oversee the EBRC?

The speaker is concerned that a high court judge's involvement could politicize the judiciary, leading to debates about who appoints the judge and whether the judge has any political leaning or bias, which could undermine the independence of the electoral boundary delimitation process.

How does the speaker define fairness in the context of electoral boundary delimitation?

Fairness, according to the speaker, is defined by the process rather than the outcome. It is about ensuring that the process is transparent, objective, and serves the interests of all Singaporeans equally.

What is the speaker's view on the importance of transparency in electoral boundary delimitation?

The speaker believes that benchmarking existing electoral boundaries against those that have passed mathematical muster will improve transparency and make the maps more acceptable to everyone involved.

What is the speaker's opinion on the role of the EBRC in ensuring that the voices of all citizens are heard equally?

The speaker emphasizes that the EBRC should aim to ensure that the voices of all citizens are heard equally, reflecting the democratic aspiration of giving equal weight to the votes of those living in different geographies.

What suggestions does the speaker make to improve the electoral boundary delimitation process?

The speaker suggests introducing scientifically supported tools to produce benchmark maps as a reference, and exploring various models to ensure that the electoral divisions are a fair representation of the national pattern.

How does the speaker address the issue of unintentional gerrymandering?

The speaker acknowledges the possibility of unintentional gerrymandering due to natural movements in the electorate and suggests the use of mathematical models to adjust the boundaries to mitigate this risk.

Outlines

00:00

🗳️ Electoral Boundaries and Gerrymandering Concerns

The speaker discusses the impossibility of a perfect electoral districting system and the need for proposals that foster fairness and public perception of fairness. They argue for benchmarking current electoral boundaries against mathematically sound ones to enhance transparency and acceptance. The speaker also addresses the issue of intentional versus unintentional gerrymandering, emphasizing the independence of the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) from political influences and the importance of political neutrality. They suggest using scientifically supported tools to create benchmark maps and question the underlying political values that lead to gerrymandering concerns.

05:01

🤔 Purpose of the EBRC and Representation of Interests

This paragraph delves into the purpose of the EBRC and whom it should serve. The speaker questions whether the EBRC should cater to political parties or the interests of the people. They assert that the primary goals should be to have MPs who care for and represent the people and a functioning government that advances Singapore's interests. The speaker rejects the idea of using voting preferences to adjust electoral boundaries, arguing that it could lead to gerrymandering. They emphasize the importance of ensuring that every electoral division reflects the national interests and is not skewed by sectoral interests, and they express openness to exploring various models while maintaining the focus on a fair process rather than a favorable outcome.

Keywords

💡Electoral Districting

Electoral districting refers to the process of dividing a country or region into geographical areas, each of which is represented by one member in the legislative body. In the video, the speaker discusses the imperfections of current electoral districting systems and the need for a fairer system that is perceived as just by the wider electorate.

💡Gerrymandering

Gerrymandering is the practice of manipulating electoral district boundaries to favor one political party or class. The term is used multiple times in the script to highlight the potential for unfair representation in elections, either intentionally or unintentionally.

💡Perceived Fairness

Perceived fairness is the idea that a system is not only fair in reality but also appears fair to those it affects. The speaker emphasizes the importance of perceived fairness in electoral systems to ensure public trust and acceptance.

💡Benchmark Maps

Benchmark maps are reference maps that have been vetted for fairness and accuracy, often using mathematical and scientific methods. The speaker suggests using such maps as a tool to improve the transparency and acceptability of electoral boundaries.

💡Intentional Gerrymandering

Intentional gerrymandering is the deliberate manipulation of electoral boundaries to give an unfair advantage to a particular group or party. The speaker addresses this concept by discussing the assurance from the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) that it does not engage in such practices.

💡Unintentional Gerrymandering

Unintentional gerrymandering occurs when electoral boundaries are drawn without the intent to favor any party but end up doing so due to natural demographic shifts. The speaker raises this as a concern and suggests using scientific tools to mitigate its effects.

💡EBRC (Electoral Boundaries Review Committee)

The EBRC is a committee responsible for reviewing and determining electoral boundaries. The speaker discusses the independence and objectivity of the EBRC, emphasizing that it operates without political influence.

💡Political Neutrality

Political neutrality is the state of being impartial and not favoring any political party or ideology. The speaker asserts that the EBRC maintains political neutrality in its composition and processes, which is crucial for the fairness of electoral boundaries.

💡Judiciary

The judiciary is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law. The speaker mentions the judiciary in the context of suggestions to involve a high court judge in the EBRC to enhance independence, but argues against it due to potential politicization.

💡Microcosm

A microcosm is a small-scale model or representation of something larger. The speaker uses the term to describe the goal of having each electoral division represent a cross-section of the national population, ensuring a balanced and fair electoral system.

💡National Interests

National interests refer to the priorities and goals that benefit the entire nation rather than specific groups or regions. The speaker argues that elections should be conducted with national interests in mind, avoiding sectoral interests that could bias electoral outcomes.

Highlights

The speaker acknowledges the imperfections in electoral districting systems but argues for the pursuit of fairness and public perception of fairness.

Proposes the use of mathematically validated benchmarks to improve the electoral boundary setting process.

Advocates for transparency in the electoral boundary setting to make maps more acceptable.

Questions the underlying political values that lead to concerns about intentional gerrymandering.

Discusses the impact of gerrymandering on the weight of votes in certain geographies.

Calls for a modern democracy that ensures equal voice for all citizens.

Details the independent and objective composition and process of the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC).

Clarifies that the EBRC's recommendations are not based on voting patterns or party politics.

Suggests that involving political parties in the boundary drawing process could politicize it.

Considers the appointment of a high court judge to the EBRC but concludes it may not resolve political interference concerns.

Argues that the EBRC's work does not require a judicial officer due to the lack of legal issues involved.

Differentiates between intentional and unintentional gerrymandering and assures that the EBRC avoids the former.

Proposes the use of scientifically supported tools to prevent unintentional gerrymandering.

Questions the PMO's stance on adopting a mathematical approach to boundary setting.

Challenges the definition and understanding of intentional versus unintentional gerrymandering.

Reiterates the EBRC's goal to serve the interests of the people and Singaporeans, not political parties.

Discusses the importance of electoral divisions being a microcosm of the nation for national interest in elections.

Considers the use of mathematical models to adjust electoral boundaries without being informed by voting preferences.

Raises concerns about the potential for equal division leading to uniform election outcomes.

Questions the definition of fairness in the context of electoral boundary setting.

Transcripts

even if we accept that no perfect

electoral Sy districting system exists

it does not mean that we must be content

with the status quo the proposals I've

offered get us much closer to a system

that is both fair and perhaps more

importantly perceived to be fair by The

Wider

electorate this surely is a sort of goal

that everyone in this house and Beyond

would agree with benchmarking our

existing electoral bounds against these

that have passed mathematical muster

will improve transparency and make these

Maps more acceptable to everyone

involved of course perhaps we should

take a step back and question the

underlying political values that may

have led us to even have to worry about

the cancer of intentional

gerrymandering if Jerry mandering does

truly become endemic do we as a nation

accept this Jerry mandering effectively

means that the votes of those who happen

to live in certain geographies are

inadvertently given lesser weight simply

by Dent of the districting system do we

wish to be known as a modern democracy

that does not aspire to ensure that the

voices of all our citizens be heard

equally Miss poo Mr jamus have spoken

about suspicions of Jerry mandering and

reducing the potential of jry mandering

and use the word jry mandering quite a

few times let me address this

directly first let me touch on the EC's

process and composition which has

allowed the committee to do is work

independently and

objectively first the ebrc does not have

access to voting information and hence

does not make its recommendation based

on voting patents

the ebrc does not consult the pap or any

other political party Party politics do

not come into this

exercise the ebrc comprises senior

servil servants with no party

Allegiance therefore unlike other

countries where political parties are

involved in the boundary drawing process

ebrc compositions and processes are

insulated from Party

politics hence

we do not have the hor trading and jry

mandering that have taken place in other

countries and I must say if we get all

political parties

involved present or future it will

politicize the whole process and not

bring us forward but bring us

backwards Miss hazer suggested that the

ebrc be ched by a high court judge and

so did Mr pritam and Mr jamus

to enhance the independence of the

ebrc we have thought about this

carefully and we have look at the

experiences of other countries and we

don't think that this will resolve the

concern about political

interference other jurisdictions that

have done so continue to face

allegations and doubts concerning the

independence of their electoral boundary

delation

process their debate in state sinks into

question

on who appoints the judge and whether

the judge has any political leaning or

bias the Judiciary ends up getting drawn

into the political debate and the

Judiciary is

politicized besides there are no legal

issues in the EC's work which require a

Judicial officier to weigh it what is

required is political neutrality

integrity and objectivity

which I trust all my public service

officers have whether they are in the

ebrc or not for them to discharge their

duties without fear and

favor so I should clarify that there are

in fact two forms of Gerry mandering

intentional and unintentional Minister

Chan answered assured this house that

there is in fact no intentional jry

mandering as pursued uh by the ebrc now

even if we accept this position it does

not exclude the very real possibility

that natural movements in the electorate

200,000 in fact as Minister Chan just

shared might inadvertently inadvertently

give rise to an unintentional Gerry

manded outcome that's why I suggested

introducing scientifically supported

tools to produce Benchmark Maps as

reference so my question is what

objections does the pmo have to

instructing the ebrc to adopt this

approach in Singapore given how it has

been applied not just in theory but in

practice by other by jurisdictions

elsewhere first point I'm not sure I'm

expert to distinguish what you refer to

as intentional versus

unintentional as I've mentioned in my

speech

no system can ever claim that it is

perfect nor will

satisfy everyone who may choose to

contest in an

election the question

is what is the

purpose of the

ebrc and who must it

serve the fundamental question before us

today is this should the ebrc serve the

interest of political parties

or should the interest of C ebrc be to

serve the

interests of our

people should

ebrc as its primary goal serve the

political interests of different parties

or should the primary goal of ebrc to

serve the interest of Singapore and

singaporeans and what are the goals of

Singapore and singaporeans

first have a MP that can take care of

them

second have a MP that can represent them

third have a parliament that can form a

functioning government that can take

Singapore forward and look after

Singapore and

singaporeans so I will not go into

whether it's intentional unintentional

because I

cannot understand your definition of an

distinction between that but I want to

iterate one

point we have

we do not give

ebrc and ebrc have no access to the

polling results we have no idea what the

polling results or the voting pattern of

the 200,000 people that have moved

neither do we have data on how the new

electors in every election

cycle will

vote our goal is to make sure that every

division is roughly a microcosm of

sort so that we have

elections and people conduct and when

the elections is conducted people

consider the national interests so that

we don't have sectoral interest that

delates that defines a particular

division like other

countries we are open to all kinds of

tools as suggested by Mr jamus but

actually it's quite

interesting some of the ideas that you

have mentioned and I listen

carefully by one of your ideas your

suggestion is quite

interesting and I think fundamentally

you agree with

us but you may also not like the

result and that is this that every

electoral division should be a microcosm

of

Singapore and you say that we should

actually use mathematical models to

adjust the population so that they

reflect the national

pattern first of all if we use people's

voting preference to adjust the model

won't you agree with us that that is

precisely Jerry

mandering second if we indeed do that

and every division is exactly the same

then every election in every sorry every

division should give the vote share to

the incumbent that's roughly the same

and is that the outcome that we are

striving for so I think have a

care on how and what we learn from

others and how we use models we are open

to exploring all kinds of models but at

the end of the day is fairness defined

by the process or is fairness determined

by the outcome as to whether it is

favorable to me or not just a quick

clarification on my part uh what I did

say in fact was a suggestion about

adjusting by mathematical methods the

bounds uh which is the shape of these

electoral boundaries it is in fact

uninformed by actual voting preferences

which as uh Minister Chan said the ebrc

has no access to