The idea of allowing the citizens of a state to elect their parliamentary representatives is a fundamental feature of democracy. The citizens vote in a general election who to send into the highest policy-making body in their country to be their representative and to decide their future.
In a majority electoral system, the candidate with the highest votes in a particular constituency gets elected into parliament. By contrast, in a proportional electoral system, political parties are allocated seats based on the proportion of the votes their candidates win. In either system, the idea remains that members of parliament are elected. An unelected representative in parliament is therefore anathema to the concept of democracy.
NMPs ("Nominated MPs") and NCMPs ("Non-Constituency MPs") belong to a special category of parliamentarians. They exist only in our political system and nowhere else.
NMPs have not been elected by the citizens but appointed by Parliament to speak purportedly as independent, non-partisan voices. However, because our parliament is consistently overwhelmingly represented by one political party, the NMP is largely perceived to be nothing more than a political appointee for one party. They serve for two and a half years, representing sectoral interests in civil society and do not have to answer to the voters of any constituency. The NMP scheme has been around since 1990 and it is interesting to note that no former NMP has ever ventured to participate in the general elections despite having gained invaluable experience in parliamentary work.
The NCMP scheme has been around longer than the NMP scheme. It was implemented in 1984 and allows NCMPs (Non-Constituency MPs), who were unsuccessful electoral candidates at a general election, to be sent into parliament. NCMPs are deemed elected to the post by vitrtue of their standing as the highest election losers. Given that every electoral candidate contests to win a constituency and not to lose, it is hard to accept the argument that NCMPs are deemed elected to Parliament. The notion of an elected NCMP was finally demolished by Parliament's recent approval to transfer a NCMP seat from one losing candidate to another (Click HERE).
The two unelected MPs' schemes have drastically changed the concept of democracy as it existed in Singapore at the time when the first general elections was held in 1959. In the last 57 years, we have evolved a political system that has become a pale shadow of what it used to be - that was when all MPs must be elected by the people in a general election. The current electoral system is reminiscent of the colonial system of elections where the predecessor of our Parliament, then known as the Legislative Assembly, comprised of both elected members and appointees of the British government. Whether this circular evolution of our political system augurs well for the future of our young nation is something that only time can tell. And it would be hard to gainsay the suggestion that our generation will not be around to find out the answer.
Plans are now afoot to further tinker with the NCMP scheme by giving NCMPs the same voting rights as elected MPs (Click HERE). Many on the opposite side of the divide have expressed their misgivings about these changes. But from a practical perspective, an NCMP appears to stand in a more enviable position than an elected MP in that he/she is freed completely from the burden of running a town council and could dedicate more time in parliamentary work. NCMPs are also not prevented from continuing with their ground engagements with the voters in their chosen constituency and the only apparent disadvantage is that the elected MP would have more resources at his disposal and a wider reach to the same voters. This does not seem to be worthy of concern to someone who had already lost in the elections. At least as NCMP, he/she has now every opportunity to lend an alternative voice in Parliament.
The real question to ask about these changes to expand the number and role of un-elected MPs and future modifications in the same vein, is the extent to which our rights as voters in what remains of our democracy are being diminished when there are Members of Parliament who are not elected by us but have the privileges of speaking and voting on all matters that concern us. If we carry these changes to their logical conclusion, will Parliament end up having the power to constitute itself without an election?