The fascinating question of what the voters prefer in a walkover ward

Picture coutesy of MaXiAoLiNg.

For many years, Singaporeans have always taken for granted the results of a walkover victory. Those from the walkover wards who wished to vote are resigned to actually waiting for an opposition who will one day contest the PAP incumbents during the elections. There are a number of such wards, many of whom are GRCs, which have not seen contest over the years.

Perhaps, we may never know the sentiments of voters residing in such non-contested wards. Although such wards used to support the ruling party over the years, no one knows the impact of demographic and mindset changes over the intervening period especially whether if it has sustained or eroded support for the incumbents.

The choice of awarding a walkover victory to the ones who turned up for contest is a curious one per se. The first obvious criticism is that such may not go according to democratic principles. Imagine this scenario on Nomination Day. A serious bug struck all the candidates of the ruling party (touch wood) that all of them have to be hospitalized and unable to turn up for nomination. A five-man team comprising a leecher, a wife-beater, an alcoholic, a playboy and compulsive gambler turns up. Given the current rules, this five-man team of riff-raffs will be awarded victory due to walkover. Therein lies the problem with the walkover rule whereby even undesirable personalities who turn up for nomination will be awarded victory when no one else turns up other than themselves.

The second criticism is that such a ruling is not democratic in itself, and does not take the wishes of the electorate in that particular ward into consideration. This is effectively inter-connected to the first criticism in the sense that the electorate should be acting as an effective screen against undesirable characters.

At this point, an interesting thought experiment concocted by myself will come in. Supposed the elections organizers now change their mind and issue every voter in the walkover ward a voting slip. In the voting slip, the voters are supposed to indicate whether they want this five-man member team of riff-raffs to lead them or not. Basically, in the slip, the voters are answering yes or no to the question of whether they want the riff-raffs as their representatives. Thus, this experiment allows the voters to execute their choice of whether they want the walkover victors as their representatives.

Thus, going back to the current realities at some of those walkover wards, it will be interesting if we can hand a ‘voting slip’ to every eligible voter and request them to indicate whether they desire the incumbent party to continue representing them. No one knows the answer. It could be a positive response for the incumbents, or a negative one. It could even be neither positive nor negative!

However, the question is what happens if the response is a negative one? Obviously, as per wishes of the electorate, the walkover victor shouldn’t persist as their representative. But that would mean the electorate for the ward would have no representatives. What would be the course of action then? Perhaps, the ward can hold a delayed election in which a few potential representatives are identified and polled to identify the ones to helm the ward. Or a by-election is also another option.

Given the unique way our elections are being contested, it is imperative to come up with a system that can better represent the voters’ desires especially in those walkover wards. However, one thing for sure is that it is never safe to assume that the walkover victor is the natural preference of the voters.