Electoral Boundaries Review Committee

The Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC), previously known as the Electoral Boundaries Delineation Committee, is a non-standing body established to review and recommend changes to electoral boundaries in Singapore.

The EBRC's current name was adopted in 1988, when it recommended boundary changes for that year's General Election. It operates under the Prime Minister's directive pursuant to Section 8 of the Parliamentary Elections Act, reflecting its significant yet contested role in Singapore’s electoral process.

Unlike the Elections Department (ELD), which oversees the conduct of elections, the EBRC is solely responsible for determining electoral boundaries and constituency allocations.

The committee is convened by the Prime Minister before each general election and is dissolved after fulfilling its terms of reference.

The EBRC’s composition is determined at the discretion of the Prime Minister and typically includes senior civil servants, such as the Cabinet Secretary (Chairman), the Head of the ELD (Secretary), and senior officials from the Housing and Development Board (HDB), the Singapore Land Authority, and the Department of Statistics.

Terms of Reference and Independence

The EBRC operates within strict terms of reference issued by the Prime Minister, which specify the parameters for boundary review.

For example, the 2015 EBRC was tasked not only with redrawing boundaries but also with ensuring smaller Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs) to reduce their average size to below five Members of Parliament (MPs) per GRC.

While the EBRC provides technical expertise, the Prime Minister retains ultimate authority over how electoral boundaries are drawn and the allocation of electors per constituency.

This structure has drawn criticism over the EBRC's independence and transparency. As its composition, scope, and timing are determined by the Prime Minister, there is potential for partisan influence.

Critics argue that the lack of fixed legal criteria for boundary delimitation creates opportunities for practices such as gerrymandering—manipulating boundaries to favor the ruling party—and malapportionment, where the size of constituencies varies significantly.

For instance, in the 2015 General Election, Potong Pasir Single Member Constituency (SMC) had 17,389 electors, while Punggol East SMC had nearly double, at 34,410 electors. The EBRC's decision to allow a ±30% variation in constituency sizes, combined with the absence of legal requirements for parity, underscores these disparities.

Allegations of Political Influence on Boundary Changes

In a Facebook exchange with Andrew Loh, co-founder of The Online Citizen, over the Progress Singapore Party’s (PSP) motion, Bertha Henson, former editor of The Straits Times, recounted a conversation with Emeritus Senior Minister (ESM) Goh Chok Tong, who was then the Prime Minister.

According to her account, ESM Goh reportedly mentioned that he would ask the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) to redraw boundaries to facilitate a direct contest between Dr. Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), and then-Minister of State Matthias Yao of the People’s Action Party (PAP) in Marine Parade Group Representation Constituency (GRC).

A version of this arrangement was documented in a report by The Straits Times on 3 October 1994. The report stated: “He (Mr Yao) said he had sought and the Prime Minister had agreed to propose to the proper authority to have his MacPherson ward detached from Marine Parade GRC for this straight fight.”

There appears to be no public record of ESM Goh refuting this report.

Additionally, The Straits Times reported in November 1996 that the Mountbatten Single Member Constituency (SMC) was carved out from Marine Parade GRC specifically to enable a direct contest between Dr. Chee and Mr. Yao. This lends credence to the view that the Prime Minister may influence the decisions of the EBRC, particularly in cases where specific political outcomes are desired.

Timing and Impact on Elections

Another contentious issue is the timing of the EBRC's report, which often gives candidates minimal time to prepare for elections. Historically, the average interval between the report’s release and the Writ of Election was 22 weeks during the 1960s–1980s.

However, since the 1990s, this has dropped to an average of just four weeks. Notably, in 2001, the Writ of Election was issued a day after the EBRC’s report was published. Such short notice leaves opposition parties and independent candidates with limited time to plan their campaigns, select wards, and organize teams for GRCs, which may require between four to six candidates.

Election	Formation of EBRC	Announcement of EBRC	EBRC report	Dissolution of Parliament / Writ of Election	Nomination Day	Polling day
1968	1 May 1967	No disclosure	31 October 1967	8 February 1968	17 February 1968	13 April 1968
1972	1 April 1970	No disclosure	19 October 1971	16 August 1972	23 August 1972	2 September 1972
1976	1 January 1974	No disclosure	23 July 1976	6 December 1976	13 December 1976	23 December 1976
1980	No disclosure	No disclosure	25 June 1980	5 December 1980	13 December 1980	23 December 1980
1984	22 February 1984	22 February 1984	29 June 1984	4 December 1984	12 December 1984	22 December 1984
1988	No disclosure	No disclosure	14 June 1988	17 August 1988	24 August 1988	3 September 1988
1991	25 March 1991	30 July 1991	8 August 1991	14 August 1991	21 August 1991	31 August 1991
1997	No disclosure	No disclosure	21 November 1996	16 December 1996	23 December 1996	2 January 1997
2001	No disclosure	No disclosure	17 October 2001	18 October 2001	25 October 2001	3 November 2001
2006	3 November 2005	No disclosure	3 March 2006	20 April 2006	27 April 2006	6 May 2006
2011	30 October 2010	30 October 2010	24 February 2011	19 April 2011	27 April 2011	7 May 2011
2015	13 May 2015	13 July 2015	24 July 2015	25 August 2015	1 September 2015	11 September 2015
2020	1 August 2019	4 September 2019	13 March 2020	23 June 2020	30 June 2020	10 July 2020

Significance and Controversy

The EBRC’s work remains a cornerstone of Singapore's electoral process, influencing the political landscape by adapting constituency boundaries to demographic shifts and urban development.

However, the committee's constrained independence and the Prime Minister’s substantial influence over its operations have raised questions about fairness and transparency.

These concerns are amplified by the potential for gerrymandering, malapportionment, and the impact of last-minute boundary changes on electoral competitiveness.