Hot wards of GE2020 rejigged, parties ‘cannot fight old battles’ in potential May election: Observers

SINGAPORE – The hottest constituencies of 2020 have been rejigged ahead of the 2025 General Election (GE), with some new battlegrounds to watch out for in Jurong and Punggol, observers said.

These changes from the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee’s (EBRC)

report released on March 11

may scupper the plans of the opposition parties that fought the closest contests in constituencies such as East Coast GRC, West Coast GRC and Bukit Batok SMC the last round, they said.

The adjustments could also affect the incumbent People’s Action Party (PAP), given that the sitting MPs will have to manage the changes, they pointed out.

While it seems clear that large population shifts in certain regions had

sparked some boundary redrawings

, the changes might feel politically driven to some voters, said observers whom The Straits Times spoke to.

They noted that for the first time in decades, the committee took pains to explain the rationale behind the redrawing of the boundaries, adding that this was a positive step that could help Singaporeans better understand the changes.

The hot wards of GE2020, contested then by the Workers’ Party (WP), Progress Singapore Party (PSP) and Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), which have since indicated interest to return, had their boundaries significantly redrawn, following changes to adjacent constituencies that had rapid population growth.

Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) senior research fellow Gillian Koh said that the three parties “cannot fight the old battles of GE2020” in these areas in the upcoming election.

“In the revision of the boundaries, the PAP will be able to incorporate some of those areas into its stronger wards,” she added.

The opposition parties will have to strategise within themselves and across the parties, given talk of competing claims to constituencies, she said.

For example, the new Jalan Kayu SMC has already seen the People’s Alliance for Reform, People’s Power Party and Red Dot United staking their claims.

IPS Social Lab research fellow Teo Kay Key pointed out that the west region of Singapore has seen quite a number of changes in boundaries.

These include

a new West Coast-Jurong West GRC

that takes in parts of the current Jurong GRC while ceding areas in Dover and Telok Blangah to Tanjong Pagar GRC.

The rest of Jurong GRC

has also been redistributed into a new Jurong East-Bukit Batok GRC, new Jurong Central SMC and into the existing Holland-Bukit Timah GRC.

With parties like PSP and SDP contesting previously in constituencies that are no longer around or have been absorbed into other constituencies, there might be a lot of manoeuvring among these parties that have already been walking the ground there, Dr Teo said.

On the other hand, former PAP MP Inderjit Singh, who retired from politics in 2015, said that even if the changes benefit the ruling party with its two weakest constituencies from the last election being redrawn, the opposition parties could have also anticipated the moves.

“There was information on the population changes that were announced some time ago and, at that time, some of us predicted changes on the west and the east and it has happened,” he said.

“The opposition parties could have also anticipated this and focused on building their ground around the areas and not relied on (there being) no changes to the boundaries,” he added.

Another boundary change that may appear to have a harder impact on the opposition involves Jurong East-Bukit Batok GRC, which absorbs Bukit Batok SMC, where SDP chief Chee Soon Juan had won 45.2 per cent of the vote in 2020. Dr Chee had earlier publicly announced his intention to return to the ward.

Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan said Dr Chee may view this move as one that severely disadvantages him.

“But the EBRC cannot take into account party-specific particularities on the ground; otherwise, it would effectively be dictated to on where changes can or cannot be made,” he said.

As the redistribution of Jurong GRC creates new battlegrounds in the west, other changes in the east could also see unpredictable results.

Dr Mustafa Izzuddin, a senior international affairs analyst at Solaris Strategies Singapore, highlighted the creation of Punggol GRC out of the existing Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC as a “political banana skin” for the ruling party, as a newly formed GRC could have an unpredictability factor.

This was seen in the 2020 election, where the PAP lost Sengkang GRC – a newly created constituency that round – to the WP, he added.

More details on boundary changes a good move

Singaporeans – and opposition parties – have over the years called for more clarity and transparency on the redrawing of boundaries.

“The redrawing of boundaries of hotly tested constituencies such as West Coast, East Coast and Marine Parade will certainly give rise to the political perception that these changes are likely to favour the incumbent more than the opposition,” said Dr Mustafa.

This is why more transparency is key, with the details given in the latest report demonstrating that boundaries were redrawn for demographic reasons, rather than political ones, said observers.

A case in point is the minor tweak to Aljunied GRC – an opposition-held constituency, which typically does not have any changes to its boundaries – that sees it losing some of its polling districts to neighbouring Tampines GRC.

This change aligns the constituency better with its name, said Dr Teo, while independent political observer Felix Tan said the shift could show that the EBRC does not want to be seen as favouring any particular constituencies and is making its decisions based on rational considerations like voter numbers.

IPS’ Dr Koh noted that the “major recasting” of boundaries for GE2025 is “ostensibly for good reasons of wanting to ensure adequate representation of voters, population shifts, and bringing the GRC system closer to its rationale of adequate ethnic representation”.

This was also a trust-building exercise of sorts with the electorate.

“The members of the EBRC, arguably, are obliged to be politically neutral in their decisions, and respond objectively to the terms of reference they are given, and in the report, these are clearly set out,” she said.

“Ensuring their trust and support for this system is key, and it was therefore extremely useful that the EBRC put in more effort to explain its recommendations, referring to the terms of reference that they were given.”

For instance, there will be 97 elected MPs, up from 93, which is in line with the EBRC’s terms of reference to keep the average ratio of electors to elected MPs similar to that in the last election.

May election most likely on the cards

The EBRC report’s release on March 11 sets the stage for a potential May election, concurred a majority of the observers.

Associate Professor Tan noted that the current 14th Parliament is the longest-serving one in Singapore’s history, “so time is of the essence for all parties to get their election machinery roaring”.

He suggested that Parliament could have the final sitting of its term in the first week of April before it is dissolved, putting close to eight weeks between the release of the EBRC report in March and a potential Polling Day in early May.

Mr Terence Ho, adjunct associate professor in practice at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, pointed to recent elections since 2006 that have been held around two months from the date of the EBRC report’s release – excluding GE2020 – making May a reasonable guess.

Mr Singh suggested that while a May date is possible, June or July may also be a possibility.

However, given the usual time period between the report’s release and the election being called, the earliest the GE would be called would be in May, said Dr Teo.