COMMENT Welcome to Part 3! I swear this series will stop here so please bear with me for one last time. As usual, toothpicks are allowed for keeping your eyelids apart if you really need them.
 
Okay, so in this segment of delineation explained, we're going to talk about the possibility of the increase of Parliament seats as a result of delineation. "Population growth" is often used as a justification.
 
But... is "population growth" a valid justification? Let's see.
 
The common perception we have is - if our population has increased, the MPs could not address the needs of all constituents, we would need more MPs. In simple terms, we need a bigger Dewan Rakyat.
 
However... in reality, the time allocated for each parliamentary session would be the same. That would mean if there are more MPs, there would be less time for each of them to speak.
 
Research has also shown that on average, each MP will only get to speak for a total of two hours and 31 minutes in a year. So why should we, the taxpayers, fork out more of our sweat-earned money, for less service?
 
You might ask, then, how do we address the needs of the growing population? Easy, stop giving birth.
 
Okay, just kidding. Well, a more far-sighted and realistic approach would be to increase the allocation of funds for each MP to employ more researchers and staff to cover the needs of the people on the grassroots level.
 
We can't keep increasing the size of Dewan Rakyat as our population will never stop increasing, right?
 
Also, remember the moments where people used to hang out at the town's hottest mamak place and watch the drama in the Dewan Rakyat unfold?
 
Remember how some of our classy MPs dressed in well-tailored suits would shout some profanities across the aisle while those behind them cheered on with thunderous table drumming?
 
“You tak suka you keluar Malaysia”
 
“Mana ada bocor? Batu Gajah pun bocor tiap-tiap bulan juga.”
 
“Ini orang, kalau tak menjadi wakil Raja, jadi perompak mungkin.”
 
Yes I admit, they could be more entertaining than K-Pop dramas at times, but eh, are these episodes really worth the taxpayers' money? Considering the fact that most of us subscribe to Astro, I think the answer would be no.
 
I believe we need to improve the quality of our elected lawmakers as innocent cameramen had often unknowingly exposed some sleeping faces in the dewan while some slouched in their swivel chairs looking as if they had lost all hope in life. Also playing truant has also become a habit of our fellow MPs.
 
(Yes, can you believe they're the same people who visited markets and kampungs during the campaigning period, shaking hands of trusting grandmas while handing over bags and bags of rice, promising better roads and more street lamps?)
 
Now, wouldn't an attendance list and a wall of shame set up in the Parliament's lobby sound like a good idea?
 
In short, in the war of quality vs quantity, quality should definitely prevail.
 
Besides, take a look at the USA, their population has grown slightly more than threefold while their House of Representatives (their version of Dewan Rakyat) remains at 434 seats.
 
As for Malaysia, from the expulsion of Singapore to the last delineation in Sarawak, our population has grown about 2.7 times but our Parliament seats grew from 144 to 222.
 
Therefore judging by Malaysia's ratio (Parliament seats: population), India should be having 9,000 MPs by now!
 
So... do we really need to increase the number of Parliament seats in our Dewan Rakyat? Or should we improve the quality of our MPs instead? I leave that for you to answer.

Part 1: Delineation - in the words of a 19-year-old

Part 2: How our electoral boundaries are drawn
 

JEAN SIOW is a 19-year-old second-year law student and currently an intern with Bersih 2.0.