Singapore 's Upcoming 2020 General Elections Essay

Furthermore The First past the Post system gives rise to a coherent opposition in the legislature. In theory, the flip side of a strong single-party government is that the opposition is also given enough seats to perform a critical checking role and present itself as a realistic alternative to the government of the day. It advantages broadly-based political parties. In severely ethnically or regionally divided societies, FPTP is commended for encouraging political parties to be ‘broad churches’, encompassing many elements of society, particularly when there are only two major parties and many different societal groups. These parties can then field a diverse array of candidates for election. In Malaysia, for example, the Barisan Nasional government is made up of a broadly-based umbrella movement which fields Malay, Chinese, and Indian candidates in areas of various ethnic complexions.

On the 9th of February 1942, three divisions of Japanese soldiers landed in Singapore, which was at the time a major British military base and presence in the Pacific. Six days later, over 90 000 British, Australian and Indian troops were forced to surrender. It had been believed that Singapore guaranteed the security of Australia during the war, consequently, the fall of Singapore opened Australia to invasion. The fall of Singapore was significant in causing relations between Australia and the United States to increase as in lieu of Britain’s inability to provide economic and military assistance when it was required most, the United States’ capability to provide what Britain could not was instrumental in strengthening bonds.

Australia and Indonesia political systems are instrumental in shaping the development of individual nations. These systems determine the policies that are to be followed by the government and the governed and aim to establish political stability. Despite Australia is a constitutional monarchy and Indonesia is a republic, the two country have many similarities and differences in the political system. This extended response identifies and compares the key features of government system and election between Australia and Indonesia political systems.

FPTP is the voting system used for the election of MPs to 'seats' in the UK Parliament. It is a system in which the 'winner takes all' and usually gives a clear majority both at constituency and national level. This means that a candidate in a constituency only needs one more vote than the nearest rival to win the seat. Similarly, political parties only need to win one more seat in the House of Commons to have a majority.

In this essay I will assess the outcomes of Additional Member system, First Past the Post system and the Closed Party List system. The F-P-T-P system is used to elect the members of House of Commons and local government in England and Wales. Voters select candidates, and do so by marking his or her name with an ‘X’ on the ballot paper. This reflects the principle of ‘one person, one vote’. The Additional Members system is used in Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly, and Northern Ireland Assembly and Greater London assembly. It is a mixed system made up of F-P-T-P and party-list elements. The Regional party list (or the closed party list) is used to elect the

Since party politics began in Canada, the style in which leaders are elected is comparable to a horse race. Using the single member plurality (SMP), more commonly referred to as “first past the post,” method of seat allocation in both the House of Commons and each province's Legislative Assembly, whoever gets the most votes is asked to form the government; this only takes into accounts the number of seats a party wins, not the overall popular vote. In a political system not limited to two parties, like the United States, many times over 50% of Canadians do not want the party that won, to win. In this current electoral system, votes are wasted, smaller parties are terribly misrepresented and, in some cases, a party with a lower percent of

A number of issues plague the current state of Canadian democracy, such as poor voter turnout, the increasing polarization of politics, and even numerous scandals regarding the Senate. Yet, arguably the most important issue in relation to the Canadian electoral process is the debate over whether or not the state should implement electoral reform for federal elections, more specifically replacing the Single Member Plurality system (SMP) with the Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP). Some analysts, like Christopher Kam, defend the SMP system and claim that a number of the issues that are used as the basis for the support of MMP are actually the result of larger forces than simply the electoral format. And, that holding politicians

Canadian electoral system is largely based on the single member plurality (SMP) system which was inherited from its former British colonial masters. The system dates back to several years before the formation of the Canadian confederation. Some of the common features of the Canadian electoral system include election candidates to represent designated geographical areas popularly known as” ridings”, counting and tallying of the votes casted on the basis of the districts as opposed to the parties of the candidates (Dyck, 622). Finally, a candidate only needs a simple majority over the other candidates in order to be considered a winner, even if the winner has a small percentage of votes. This system has however been heavily criticized for its winner takes all way of judging victory. Critics argue that if the winner takes over the whole system, it may result into unfair representation of the various social groups, but it may also bring into power unstable minority participation in government. For example, a candidate can win even with barely 25% of all the votes casted, while the small parties may end up with no seats in the parliament.

The (FPTP) system is also known as the 'winner-take-all' system, in which the candidate with the most votes gets elected. FPTP voting methods can be used for single and multiple member elections. In a single member election the candidate with the highest number, not necessarily a majority, of votes is elected.

At this time, the Majority Liberal Government is looking into changing the voting system in Canada, moving away from a system that has led to their victory many times in Canadian history. Canada utilizes the plurality election system, colloquially known as “First Past the Post” (FPtP) which is named after a term used in English racing. The term FptP is quite literal in its name as the first party to reach the set amount of seats wins the right to be the party to run Canada. There have been (get exact number) a few attempts at changing the system since democratic votes started in Canada. However, it has never really became all that close to changing. Many believe that the voting process should be as representative to the people's votes as possible,

For decades, Canadians have been defending their right to have a fair and open electoral system. Since its creation in 1867, Canada has been proud to call itself a true democratic country, but today there would be many people who disagree with this statement. The Canadian electoral system, which uses First Past The Post (FPTP), has come under scrutiny for not being as fair as it claims to be. Over the past couple of decades, many countries have switched their system to Proportional Representation (PR) or some form of it. Based on successful results in other nations, Canada’s current FPTP system should change to Mixed Member Proportional (MMP), which is a form of Proportional Representation, as it will allow for more fair elections. The intent of this paper is to outline how an electoral reform from First Past the Post to Proportional Representation or Mixed-Member Proportional, will lead to more confidence in the government, more accurate seat-vote percentage, and better overall representation of the population.

Britain is considering changing current first past the post voting system (FPTP) to proportional representation (PR). The main reason is that FPTP is “quasi-democratic” voting system under which there is only one majority party ruling the government and it does not represent wishes of all voters as some votes are wasted. Whereas, PR seems to be the best alternative voting system with proportionality of seats in mandatory places, more parties ruling government and etc. Let us look at these two voting systems and analyze whether PR is suitable and alternative change for FPTP and do advantages of PR outweigh disadvantages.

There are numerous ways to improve the Malaysian electoral system both in fairness and efficiency. Currently, there is a lack in confidence in the validity or neutrality of the Electoral Commissions (EC). Members of the EC are elected by the Yang di- Pertuan Agong (YDPA) after discussing with the Conference of Rulers (Legal Research Board, 2013). However, according to Article 40 the YDPA can only act after receiving advice from the Cabinet or a Minister representing the Cabinet (Legal Research Board, 2013); in most cases it would mean the Prime Minister. Hence, it may seem that the politically neutral EC were to be pro-government. A solution to this problem would be to amend the Constitution so that the House of Representatives can debate on the nomination of the EC members, then their decision would be passed on to the YDPA. By doing so, the EC would comprise of members that have the approval of both the government and opposition, thus making the committee fairer. Aside from that, the EC should manage its own budget, and should be reviewed by the Auditor-General and not be dissected by the Parliament.

The New Zealand government at both a Local and National level is an excellent example of a modern, Representative Democracy. Different election systems, including First Past the Post (FPP), Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) and Single Transferable Vote (STV), are used to allow electors to select representatives to sit on Councils, Boards and in Parliament. Some elements of Constitutional Monarchy are present in the New Zealand system of democratically elected representatives within a constitutional Monarchy contrasts well with the dictatorship of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

There is a fundamental problem with democracy in Canada. The problem is rooted within our federal parliamentary voting-system. However, there is a promising solution to this issue. Canada should adopt the proportional representation system, known as the party list format (party-list PR), at the federal level if we wish to promote the expansion of democracy. If Canada embraces proportional representation in the battle for electoral reform then we will see beneficial results. Party-list PR will increase voter participation, which in turn will create more accurate representation in the parliament and ultimately a positive shift away from our disturbingly partisan dominated political culture.