One of the major complaints about GE13 being unfair was this thing called gerrymandering - essentially drawing electorate boundaries, both for DUN and Parliament, to favour a certain party. The example they always complain about is P125 Putrajaya which has 15,791 voters and P109 Kapar, which has 144,159 voters. They will also complain that Sabah and Sarawak Parliament seats have very small number of voters and there are too many seats in Sabah and Sarawak - for example, P207 Igan (17,771 voters). Well, Sabah (24 seats, 3.5 million people) and Sarawak (31 seats, 2.6 million people) has quite a number of parliament seats because of point 17 of the 18/20 points Malaysia Agreement which states: Point 17: Representation in Federal Parliament This should take account not only of the population of North Borneo but also of its size and potentialities and in any case should not be less than that of Singapore. Therefore, in keeping with point 17 of the Malaysia Agreement, it is not only the number of voters that determines the seats but also the size and potentialities - hence the number of parliament seats with smaller voter base in Sabah and Sarawak (24+31 = 55 seats which is exactly 25% of the total 222 parliament seats). But really, my question to Pakatan leaders and supporters is this: The last re-delineation was in 2003, except for Sarawak which was in 2005. Therefore in 2013 GE13 Elections, you would have already known at least 8 to 10 years in advance which seats have the smallest number of voters and wouldnt you have tried to target, cover and convince those seats with the least number of voters first? I thought it was logic that going after the smallest seats would be the easiest. So, if you didnt do this, why do you still complain about gerrymandering and unfair elections?
Posted on: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:12:55 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015