I dont know about automatic registration. But automatic qualification to vote can be a mere technicality. Then again, this may be a matter of terminology – qualification or registration. They could well be the same in substance. I would propose the following mechanism to achieve the susbtance.

All malaysians who on attaining 18yrs of age would automatically go on to the electoral roll and be qualified to vote. The data for the roll may be fed directly by the national registration dept. And by default, their constituency would be dictated by their respective addresses in the dept’s record (i.e. as indicated on their NRICs).

There are several issues here. (1) There must be a cut-off date for the data feeding by the national registration dept. To my mind, the electoral roll update must take place a reasonable time before general election. (2) That means the dates for dissolution of parliament and for holding election must be determined and disclosed way in advance. Not a problem really but to umno that would tantamount to losing an ace card. (3) Voter’s must be allowed a reasonable time to inspect and change their particulars recorded in the roll after the roll update is completed. This may be done online. Thereafter the roll would be deemed final and election would proceed on the basis of that final roll.

OrangRojak,
Please give me a few good counter-examples that can really prove that the government will always have the ready cash to give away without having to jeorpadise the financial position of the government. Please don’t cite the United Kingdom as a good example, for God knows how much national debt or international debt you British people owe now and have to hand it down to the next few generations before the huge debt can be fully redeemed.

Even a cash-rich country like Singapore sometimes finds it very difficult to have to give out cash too regularly to the citizens without jeorpadising the cash flow planning of the nation. Therefore we still find that Singapore Government tends to reduce the public servants’ bonus payout rate in the lean years!

If we are talking about robbing Peter to pay Paul, of course it seems that the Government will never have its financial sources of cash supply that can be immediately dried off so long as there are still some Peters to be robbed in the country. Notwithstanding, there will always be time that majority people of the nation will come to believe that they are indeed Paul and no Peter. Surely all Pauls will quickly rise up to fight against the Government if they are having the perception that they have been wrongfully treated as Peter and wrongfully robbed by the Government when by right they are supposed to be treated as Paul who will receive the donation or subsidy from the Government.

Redistribution of income among different income groups of a nation is not a 100% accurate science which you will have certain set of rules and scientific principles to follow. Whether a government is successful in giving a perception to the people that it is a good government which renders good governance will all depend on how far the Government manages to convince the people that the policy that is being or has been implemented by it is working to the best interest of the concerning individual in particular!

You may see that it is good for the Government to give out cash to each and every citizen but I may see it as a money-squandering behaviour which has to be put a stop before it turns habitual and starts to cultivate the lackadaisical human attitude among our production workers.

If the main objective of a Government policy is to eradicate poverty, then it is wise for us to identify the group of people who live in abject poverty or in absolute poverty and to concentrate all the Government’s effort in helping this underprivileged group. Surely giving out equal cash by the Government to each and every citizen without prejudice will not likely narrow up the income gap between the haves and the have-nots! It will defeat the purpose of eradicating the poverty when relative poverty will sooner or later become our main concern!

If any operators want to modernise their services by using steam trains, I would be happy to give them a quote

– a group of enthusiasts used their own time and money to build a new steam train and put it through the UK’s Rail certification process so that it can now run on the main line. I thought it was a wonderfully positive story!

Economic decision is a decision which involves with scarcity and choice. A promise to give away equal amount of cash to each and every qualified voter in order to attract the poor and less educated sectors of Malaysian society to come out and vote in election may sound very attractive. However, in most ocassions, a RM10 cash note may give a much higher utility value to the poor and the needy than the well-to-do person.

In order to attract the urban dwellers, incentives like housing subsidy and medical insurance reimbursement may be much more relevant, as some average income earners in urban areas are still poor in terms of purchasing power parity and the cost of living in urban areas is usually much higher than that of the rural areas.

To totally avoid giving away subsidy to the needies in order to avoid the practice of cronyism sounds like asking someone to stop eating and to stop drinking in order to heal the scouring problem. It simply won’t work in the long run because no one can afford to always pay out cash without prejudice and without selection of market segment which is the target to attract attention. Anyway, cash is still the thing in high demand and is always facing the biggest shortage situation. Therefore, Pakatan Rakyat leaders must be careful to evaluate the suggestion of cash offer as too low a cash amount will not likely attract too many city dwellers and too high a cash amount will most likely drain out all the cash flows of the Federal Treasury!

I’m not looking for an argument here, just want to know exactly what we’re arguing about!

Compulsory voting – Eerrr. Weeell its an oook idea, I suppose. Certainly it would be one way to increase voters turnout during GE. The question is ensuring adherence to that compulsory requirement, by qualified voters.

Automatic qualification alone could be sufficient to do the work of increasing voters turnout. Perhaps, not as effective as when compulsory voting is thrown in as well. But I am quite certain that an improvement from the current situation could be seen if qualification to vote is made automatic and not dependant on the extra step of registration.

As for the comments hurled at me by Undergrad2 @ jaswant, etc, you are just a person walking around with your shoulder almost dropping off, so do I need to comment further.

If such a scheme were to be implemented as subsidies, it would be ‘business as usual’ – money paid to cronies for a ‘benefit’ the recipient has no choice over. If it was means tested at all – by being offered as a discount – it clearly favours those more able to pay the un-discounted portion.

PR could use subsidies and discounts to avoid having to give money to people they don’t know, Onlooker Politics, but then they’d be repeating the sins of the past and failing to grasp new opportunities. It has to be cash, or the alleged non-voters from the poor and less educated sectors of Malaysian society won’t understand. And if they understand, I am of the opinion they would be right to be cynical if the ‘offer’ is anything other than cash.

With so much at stake, I think it’s important that the gesture should be unmistakeably generous, from the point of view of those who most need generosity.

1.Scandals like the PKFZ and losing RM100bil of the nation’s wealth.
2.Cheating states of their rights like oil royalties.
3.Subjecting school children to flip-flop education policies.
4.Exposing the public to dangerous/fatal building and bridge collapes.
5.Endangering the national security with the loss of important/undetermined military assets.
6.Allowing VVIPs to shift millions abroad in violation on money-laundering rules.

I am sure others can contribute to more items that can form at least 15 major components of an election campaign to retire the BN government.

Another instance, married couple of Singaporean citizens would be entitled to buy heavily subsidized HDB flat. Those citizens who made registration with HDB about their intent to get married would be given priority to buy heavily subsidized HDB flat. The Singaporean Permanent Residents are only allowed to buy HDB flat in accordance with market price from the open market, conditioning on joint buyers basis.

The Pakatan Rakyat leaders can look into the possibility of using the incentive of free medical insurance and public housing subsidy to encourage voting in the General Election.

I’m shocked!

So now we are to vote for a government that could better keep our public toilets clean and dispose off rubbish and empty our dumpsters faster than another?? We are supposed to vote in a government that could better instill civic consciousness among residents like helping old ladies cross the road??

Tell me more!

http://www.kln.gov.my/perwakilan/paris/news/1174

From the Malaysian Govt website, hence one of the many reasons I gave up Malaysian citizenship. Hence 11 million voters includes thoses who are overseas but cannot vote.

Frankyapp’s suggestion of registering to vote as a criterion is a nice compromise between forcing people to vote and doing nothing to encourage them to. My one worry about a ‘Cost of Living Allowance’ is that nobody would ever be able to agree that it is the right amount – ‘Cost of Living’ being highly variable from one person to the next.

How about calling it a ‘Citizenship Bonus’ or something that wouldn’t invite argument over the amount, and having some very simple criteria like submitting a tax return, having a bank account, keeping voting registration up to date, attaining a minimum level of competence in Bahasa Malaysia (not a simple test…), being in the country for 18 of the last 36 months? Maybe there are some other very simple criteria that could be considered.

Other countries have ‘Citizenship Tests’ (the UK’s one is terrible, in my opinion – too much religion and cricket). Why not have a regular checkup with a ‘reward’ for being a good citizen? I think the criteria should be very, very simple, so as to ensure as close as possible to 100% disbursement.

This feels like a brainstorming session!

However, we are talking about the election of choosing a representative in the state assembly or in the parliament here. It is important for each and every eligible voter of Malaysia to cast his/her vote in accordance with his own personal will in order to convey a clear message on the majority people’s aspiration. Without such a 100% information gathering mechanism, it will be quite difficult for most people to understand about the vision of the right kind of Malaysia the majority Malaysians want our political leaders to shape up for us in the future!

For instance, Najib was quite complacent to assume or presume that all Malaysians want “1Malaysia, People First, Performance Now”. However, if we are to allow the compulsory voting to be implemented in Malaysia, we may immediately find that the actual aspiration of majority Malaysians may be very much different from what Najib thinks or perceives as is! Who knows exactly what kind of Malaysia the majority Malaysians want it to be in a situation without having a thorough survey being conducted in a proper manner using the scientific method and accurate statistical analysis? Perhaps the majority Malaysians may just want the following vision:
“1Commitment, Stomach First, Money Come Now!” and not Najib’s hollow slogans!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_ballot#Secrecy_vs._reliability

One time I voted in a General Election in the UK, I had not long before moved house, and hadn’t updated my registration. The local council (if I recall correctly) employed casual workers to check the voting register against house occupants. A man came to my house and sternly reminded me that I should make sure my registration was up to date, as voting was an important right and a civic duty. I thanked him for reminding me, and promptly forgot due to the stress of buying a house that subsequently collapsed (it was 200 years old, and only the more recent interior collapsed).

Two weeks later the man was back and gave me a finger-wagging scolding because I still hadn’t updated my voting registration! I did it that very same afternoon! There was never any mention of voting a particular way from the angry temporary worker from the local council, only that I should take part in the vote. I can’t imagine – perhaps I’m not being totally fair – the same level of impartiality here.