RIGHT TO CHOOSE MORE IMPORTANT THAN ADMINISTRATIVE CONVENIENCE

	We have a fundamental right in a Parliamentary system of government to
choose freely our political representatives. Group Representation
Constituencies (GRCs) restrict our exercise of this right by denying us the
power to elect or reject individual candidates.

	The GRC concept is a realistic admission that our Singaporean identity is
not yet strong enough to transcend our disparate ethnic identities. However,
we have pledged to live 'as one united people, regardless of race'. Towards
this end, GRCs should only be a temporary measure to ensure adequate
minority representation in Parliament. An increase in the size or number of
GRCs is a retrograde step in nation-building.

	Our right to choose our representatives should not be curtailed for lesser
reasons than the fear of communal unrest. It must certainly not be
sacrificed to administrative convenience.

	Yet, arguments in support of enlargement rely mostly on administrative
reasons. Practically speaking, enlarged administrative units do not require
the political consolidation of more constituencies into larger GRCs. The
recent move by People's Action Party town councils to provide jointly
emergency and maintenance services is a fine example of the benefits of
co-operation without political integration. Moreover, since constituency
facilities are not politically controlled, there is no reason why different
constituencies cannot co-operate without political integration.

	Accordingly, the appropriate solution to over-sized constituencies is to
create more small wards with their own MPs. As long as the MPs co-operate,
administrative efficiency should remain high. This solution respects our
right to choose our political leaders on an individual basis. It also guards
against candidates without genuine support entering Parliament on the
coat-tails of their more popular colleagues.

	Some supporters of the enlargement proposal note that it is a double-edged
sword: the PAP could win big; but it could also lose big. They overlook the
fact that the blade is not equally sharp along both edges, nor are the
different parties equally vulnerable.

	Other supporters dismiss such concerns. As PAP MP Koh Lip Lin reminded us:
'The Government always has the advantage; it is not a question of fair or
unfair' [ST, 2.10.96] Of course, MRT commuters edified by public education
messages know that Mr Koh's view is refuted by no less a person than
Confucius, who advised gentlemen 'to think of justice and fairness when
accepting an advantage.'