Saturday, February 02, 2013

I sent this letter to the Straits Times, but they declined to publish it.

28 January 2013

Forum Page
Straits Times

I understand that our election regulations allow any of the candidates to request for a recount if the 
difference between the candidate with the most votes and that for any other candidate is two percent or less
than the total number of votes cast. 

The results of the Punggol East by-election held on 26 January was earlier scheduled to be announced
by 10 pm. but was delayed due presumably to a recount. I had, therefore, expected to results to be quite close, 
with a margin of less than two percent between the top two contestants.

I was surprised that the margin was more than 10 percent. 

I like to ask the Election Department, if there was indeed a recount, and the reason why it was allowed, 
in infringement of the election regulation? If there was no recount, why did the results take so long to be 

Tan Kin Lian 


yujuan said...

Internet chats revealed 2 counting stations were neck to neck in the race, that warranted a recounting.
The final overall results came as shock to everybody, even more to PM Lee, as PAP generally thought this BE would run similarly like the PE, i.e. very close, leaning towards PAP winning with a close margin.
Story going round that Uncle Teo Chee Hian objected to the early timing of the BE, but PM went ahead, he wanted the BE out of the way quickly, so that he could push out the White Paper to work its magic for some years before he faces the big GE of 2015/2016.
Impatience is the PM's weakness, revealing cracks within the PAP if the story going round is true.

Lye Khuen Way said...

I too have wondered why the long delay and which party or parties requested for a recount.

If it was KJ and or Desmond, why keep numb.

If Iit was between the WP and PAP, the final results of 10% difference beg more need to be transparent.

It is precisely this type of unanswered questions that have given the Authority, be they government agencies or the "coverment", poor trustworthiness perception.

Blog Archive