S Jayakumar
Singapore
“It is well and good for countries to announce various targets and emissions. But one vexing issue ultimately is: what will be the method for verifying compliance with each country's announced measures? Another vexing issue, of course, is the issue of financing.”
“I would appreciate it if she were to give me some specifics of the negative feedback. But the general feedback I have had about our judiciary, both of the Supreme Court and the Subordinate Courts, has been nothing but positive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the information that I have is that there is always medical advice present when caning is administered and that if the medical opinion is that caning cannot proceed beyond a certain point, that medical opinion will be observed and the caning will not proceed.”
“Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport in view of the recent announcement to make immediate improvements to the public transport system (a) whether the Ministry has set a timeline for the increase in frequency of feeder bus services; and (b) whether the Ministry can immediately target such services that are currently running at…”
“SCDF will continue to work with HDB and other relevant agencies to ensure that such older buildings with one exit staircase meet the prevailing fire safety requirements when they undergo major renovation or upgrading works. CIVIL SERVICE PENSIONERS 3.”
“The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mr Teo Ser Luck) (for the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Mrs Jessie Phua's and Dr Lim Wee Kiak's questions together as they both relate to the same issues.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,291 lines we hold for S Jayakumar, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 66.
“Other developments include Senior Minister's recent visit to Jakarta to attend a meeting of President Wahid's International Advisory Panel. He did so on the basis that Singapore-Indonesia relations must be kept steady, whatever temporary upsets there may be. Minister George Yeo also visited South Sumatra and Riau provinces last month to explore economic opportunities there. That again is relevant to what Mr Ravindran talked about in cooperating with provinces. As for what Mr Ravindran specifically asked for about regional autonomy, let me say that regional autonomy was introduced in Indonesia by law only on 1st January 2001. The rules and laws governing regional autonomy are still not clear. The central government and the provincial authorities are in the process, I believe, of fine-tuning this process, so as to ensure an effective and efficient system of regional autonomy. I think it will take some time. From our perspective, I would say that the conduct of diplomatic relations, as in the case of other countries, is with the central government in Jakarta. Any steps that we take to establish links with the provinces will be within this broader framework of bilateral relations with Indonesia. Of course, with regional autonomy, we can expect more Singapore businessmen to explore business opportunities in the region and to deal directly with the provincial authorities. Riau will be especially attractive to our businessmen because of the region's proximity to Singapore and the already extensive links which many of our private sector has in that area. In anticipation of the increase in Singapore's interests in the Riaus, we have recently decided to open a Consulate and Trade Office in Pekanbaru.”
“The fundamentals of that relationship, built up over 30 years of friendship and close cooperation, are strong. However, there will be ups and downs along the way. We have to take a long-term view of relations between Singapore and Indonesia and we should therefore be prepared to ride out any difficulties as they come along in this bilateral relationship. At the same time, we must keep ourselves open to opportunities for cooperation with Indonesia. Therefore, our approach is to work for mutually beneficial ties in the long-term, on the basis that we are sovereign equals. Indonesia is strategically important, not only to Singapore, but also to the region and ASEAN, a point that several Members have made this afternoon. Naturally, we hope that the situation in Indonesia will improve quickly. But please remember that Singapore is a small country, with limited resources. On our own, we cannot help Indonesia overcome its economic problems. What we can do is to play a catalytic role. Our economic assistance to Indonesia, something that Mr Ravindran mentioned, has to be seen in this framework. We hope that it might encourage other foreign investors to follow Singapore's lead and invest there. I should mention the recently concluded Asamera gas deal, worth US$8 billion over 22 years. It is one example of our long-term commitment to cooperating with Indonesia. The fact that President Wahid came personally to Singapore to witness the First Gas ceremony - and that was after his outburst - is a recognition of such mutually beneficial projects of cooperation. Only last month, we signed another agreement to purchase gas from Sumatra worth US$7 billion over 20 years.”
“Sir, in my reference to the strategic situation, I said that Indonesia is still grappling with serious political, economic and social challenges. New power centres have emerged in Indonesia's political landscape. The Indonesian Parliament (DPR) has assumed a more assertive check and balance role on the government. Furthermore, problems of security and stability have not abated. Last Christmas eve, there were bomb blasts in major cities in Indonesia. Members must have read of all the reports of the serious problems of killings in Kalimantan. Now, these political and security developments, together with the Indonesian government's differences with the IMF, do affect economic recovery and investor confidence. Feedback from investors is that they will continue to adopt a wait-and-see attitude until they are comfortable with the political and security situation in Indonesia. The Indonesian government has to deal also with the evolving relationship between Jakarta and the provinces. One challenge is to manage the implementation of the regional autonomy laws, something that Mr Ravindran alluded to. This is a complex exercise and would have implications on the shape and future of government structure. Members asked about the state of our bilateral relations. I think Members know that our relations with Indonesia have seen a rough patch recently. They would have noted the allegations that President Abdurrahman Wahid made against Singapore last November and, as I have said, we reacted by putting up factual statements in a measured manner to point out the inaccuracies of these allegations. We set their record straight. On bilateral relations, our position is clear. We have always valued our relations with Indonesia.”
“So whether it is between the civil services, professional organisations, non-governmental organisations, the totality of it supplements the formal government-to-government bilateral contacts. In fact, the informal contacts and people-to-people relationship sometimes may be equally important because they are not saddled with bureaucracy and forms of protocol, they can speak more frankly and more informal contacts. I would therefore welcome the suggestions in the spirit in which it was given, not only for Malaysia, but also other countries in the region. 3.30 pm”
“Like Mr Zulkifli, he has emphasised people-to-people contacts. It is consistent with what I have said. I also agree with him that if there are to be visits between Malaysia, Singapore and other countries, it should not be just confined to the top leaders. He is absolutely right. But let me assure him that with regard to Malaysia, for instance, these contacts have actually been beyond Government. For example, apart from the Bench and Bar Games, I know that the universities have had regular contacts. In fact, at the last Games in Malaysia, the university contingent, I believe, was led by our President in his capacity as Chancellor of the National University of Singapore. There are also many other interactions between our professional and uniformed services, eg, the Police, the Armed Forces, and the Foreign Ministry to Foreign Ministry Games. I believe MINDEF has games with its counterparts. The civil services also have their games. So, I agree with him. This is going on. Obviously, we should explore various other ways of enhancing these contacts. And this is precisely what Prime Minister Goh and Deputy Prime Minister Badawi discussed when they emphasised the idea of developing points of contact. So we would certainly want to go in that direction. I also agree with him that we should promote further interactions between our Members of Parliament and their backbenchers, and I heard recently that there were to be some golf games between our backbenchers and their MPs, and we would strongly encourage that. I know we have a backbenchers' club and the Singapore Parliamentary Society. Whether through this vehicle or even informally outside this channel, I would encourage Members to meet.”
“I would say, therefore, let us take things one step at a time, and Members, I am sure, know the Singapore Government's firm position on the legal nature of the obligations under the POA. We have made that clear in this House as well as to the Malaysians. Mr Charles Chong asked about the underground tunnel proposal. As I mentioned just now, we have, in principle, agreed to the idea of the tunnel proposal. But, naturally, there are many technical details to be ironed out, which we are awaiting and, therefore, I am not able to go into the details at this stage. On bilateral relations generally, Mr Zulkifli and Mr Chiam made certain suggestions. Mr Zulkifli gave certain proposals and ideas, which I take as increasing greater understanding between the peoples of neighbouring countries as well as other countries in the region. Some of his ideas, I am sure, can be taken up by the various agencies, such as his idea of do's and don'ts. We can ask the Tourist Promotion Board to look into it. I would say offhand that his ideas are well intentioned and we will have a look at them. But the main point I want to make is that Members ought not view the development of good relations between Singapore and other countries as the sole preserve or duty of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or any other particular Ministry, or of the Government. I have always held the view that the betterment of relations and the promotion of goodwill between Singapore and other countries partly depends on government-to-government interactions, but very much also depends on people-to-people relations and interactions, and it is in that context that I move on to what Mr Chiam said. Mr Chiam has made some equally well-intentioned suggestions. I welcome his suggestions.”
“In June 1997, the Prime Minister informed this House of his proposal for a framework of cooperation between Singapore and Malaysia to get around the impasse over the POA. Prime Minister Goh said he was prepared to vary the terms of the POA within a framework of wider cooperation between the two countries, in other words, on-going bilateral package negotiations. So, in answer to Mr Ravindran, this is precisely what is happening. We are discussing the water and other issues in connection with the POA. When the Malaysians move to Kranji, of course it will be a variation, but this must be done in the context of the other issues to be resolved. In other words, it is a total package. Our Prime Minister informed Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi that Singapore agrees to the request to move the station to Kranji. He was prepared to extend the POA deadline so as to allow more time to sort out details. But, of course, there has to be a finality to the process. And since the Malaysians said they need more time, we have agreed. Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi himself said, and I quote, "Both sides will work on an urgent basis and will try as hard as possible to come to an agreement." And I have just referred to the latest development, Dr Mahathir's letter to Senior Minister. Mr Hawazi, in that regard, asked whether we have not given a new deadline, it cannot go on forever, and so on. I would respond by saying that both sides are keen to resolve the package of bilateral issues as soon as possible so that we can put these issues behind us. Although there is no specific timeframe which we have set, I wish to assure this House that there is a sense of urgency on both sides. Both sides want to resolve these issues as soon as possible. This is a step forward.”
“At first blush, the differences do not appear that great. However, on water, we have to study the proposed price at which we purchase water from Malaysia under a new agreement that will cover the period 2011 and 2061, and, next, for the period after 2061, when the Johor River Water Agreement ends. Another matter is the mix of treated and raw water, although the volume or quantum will remain the same, as at present. These are matters that need to be resolved and put into a form of words in an agreement before we can finally put outstanding matters behind us. Sir, I would say that after all these years since 1997, there is now some forward movement on the bilateral package that can hopefully be finalised in the coming months through the same give-and-take on both sides that have got us closer to a settlement. Having said that, let me stress that apart from the supply of water, there are also other outstanding items that need to be settled at the same time, such as the reinstatement of airspace arrangements for RSAF flights, the location of Malaysian CIQ, the development of MRA lands and CPF monies of Malaysians. These have to be agreed as a package. Both sides should, therefore, strive to conclude the deal as soon as possible. Mr Ravindran asked whether any deadline has been set with regard to the POA. I think it is worthwhile recalling, Sir, that under the 1990 POA, both governments agreed that the KTMB railway station would be vacated and moved from Tanjong Pagar to Bukit Timah in the first instance, and then to Woodlands within five years when the MRT station reaches Woodlands New Town, which it did on 10th February 1996.”
“For example, both sides agreed on the need to develop contact points that will involve Malaysians and Singaporeans of various groups, eg, youth groups, student groups, parliamentarians, as well as business people, so as to bring Singaporeans and Malaysians together on an informal basis for greater interactions. I will come back to this later when responding to Mr Chiam's remarks. Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and Prime Minister Goh also discussed the package of outstanding bilateral issues. Members would have read that Malaysia had requested to move its railway station from Tanjong Pagar to Kranji. We have, in principle, agreed to the request, and the details would have to be sorted out. In connection with this, we have also, in principle, agreed to the construction of a tunnel between Johor and Kranji. Both sides stressed the need to settle the issues in the package as soon as possible, so that we could put them behind us and move relations further forward. On this question of package, Dr Ong Chit Chung and several other MPs asked what is the progress and whether I saw any prospect of any agreement being reached. Dr Ong Chit Chung recalled that the Prime Minister said in a press interview that Singapore had given our proposals to Malaysia and he had informal feedback that Malaysia was responding to the proposals. I wish to say, Sir, that we have indeed received a reply from Dr Mahathir to the Senior Minister. This reply, dated 21st February, was received by my Ministry on 7th March. As we received it only a week ago, we are still studying it. Our preliminary study shows that there are variations on some points between Dr Mahathir's reply and Senior Minister's understanding with Dr Mahathir during his visit to Kuala Lumpur on 15th August last year.”
“Sir, I wish to thank the Members who spoke on our relations with Malaysia. I recall that at the last Committee of Supply debate one year ago, I then described our bilateral relations as being in a "holding pattern". Since then, Members would know that there have been several developments in our bilateral relations with Malaysia. I would say that, on the whole, the atmospherics of bilateral relations have improved since the Senior Minister's visit to Kuala Lumpur in August last year. Malaysian Foreign Minister, Datuk Syed Hamid, had described the visit as an opportunity for strengthening relations. This improved atmosphere, in turn, paved the way for increased bilateral contacts between leaders and parliamentarians on both sides. Yes, there was a hiccup over Malaysian reactions to Prime Minister Goh's speech on the position of Malays in Singapore, but it did not change the overall tone of the improving relationship. The recent visit by Malaysia's Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Abdullah Badawi, to Singapore in February, at Prime Minister Goh's invitation, also helped to improve the relationship. Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's delegation comprised several Cabinet Ministers and Chief Ministers. In fact, he and his delegation met many of our leaders, including the Prime Minister, Senior Minister, Deputy Prime Minister BG Lee Hsien Loong, Deputy Prime Minister Dr Tony Tan, and several of our younger leaders and parliamentarians. The visit succeeded in throwing up several ideas for bilateral cooperation.”
“Our approach to the EU was that if they had a problem with Myanmar, if they had a foreign policy about Myanmar, by all means, engage Myanmar, but do not let that derail or jeopardise the long-standing ASEAN-EU relationship. I believe this call struck a resonance with many members, as a result of which, after the ASEAN-EU meeting in Vientiane, they have agreed that the next meeting will be held in Europe. On the ASEAN+3 process, it has been going on for some time. In other words, it is held back-to-back with the Summit, where ASEAN leaders meet with Japan, China and Korea, separately as well as collectively. Members asked whether this would lead, in future, to closer cooperation between ASEAN and the plus-three countries. I would say, yes, it is already happening, and these meetings that we have annually symbolise the close cooperation between ASEAN and the plus-three countries. With each country (Japan, China or Korea), sitting down with ASEAN, we review many projects for collaboration and cooperation. The idea of an East Asian Summit, of course, merits consideration in the longer term. In principle, I think it is a good idea, but our preference is for a gradual approach. Because, as Mr Ravindran mentioned, there are some ASEAN countries who are concerned about the plus-three process becoming an East Asian Summit too quickly. We need to address this and build up comfort level in the process, both within ASEAN and among the plus-three countries. It is not just a question as to whether it will diminish ASEAN's relevance and role in East Asia. But for the plus-three process and the summit to take place, ASEAN, first, will have to establish itself again and get its act together.”
“Thirdly, an Education "Train-the- Trainers" Programme, focusing on teacher and trainer development. Fourthly, doubling the number of Singapore scholarships under the Singapore Cooperation Programme from 30 to 60 per academic year. Finally, they are also planning student exchange programmes at both secondary school and youth levels. Another aspect of ASEAN touched on by Members is ARF. I would say that the ARF remains a very important forum for discussing security-related issues in South-east Asia and ASEAN. This is driven by ASEAN because every ARF is chaired by ASEAN. What are the prospects for ARF's development? From Singapore's point of view, we want to nudge ASEAN and other countries to move the ARF faster towards preventive diplomacy. In other words, move from the stage of confidence-building measures to preventive diplomacy. But we also have to be cognisant of the fact that we must do so at a pace comfortable to other members of the ARF. So we will with others see how we can get a consensus to advance from confidence-building measures to preventive diplomacy. Dr Ong Chit Chung asked about ASEAN-European Union meeting. As you know, this meeting was stalled for some time. It was to be held in Europe. There was a problem because the Europeans, due to the common policy on Myanmar, declined to give a visa to the Foreign Minister of Myanmar. ASEAN, of course, would not allow itself to be divided and turned up there without Myanmar. So there was an impasse. There were discussions which led to this formula, leading to the ASEAN and EU Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Vientiane. The meeting proceeded with all the ASEAN Foreign Ministers being there, including Myanmar.”
“Members asked about the recent informal summit which we hosted in Singapore. I think that it was a very useful meeting, coming as it did, during this uncertain period. The leaders set clear directions by making ASEAN integration their priority. Another point that was emphasised just now was on how do we avoid a two-tier ASEAN. Working closely to integrate our 10 markets and making our economy more competitive will certainly help reduce the gap within ASEAN and make ourselves more cohesive. There was agreement that those who are better off should help the less developed in ASEAN. As far as Singapore is concerned, we are fully committed to working with ASEAN to assist the CLMV countries (Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam). In this regard, the leaders agreed on an important project called the "Initiative for ASEAN Integration". To catalyse this initiative, Singapore proposed a package of proposals on human resource development, education and IT. The leaders also signed the e-ASEAN framework agreement as ASEAN's clear response to the global information revolution. Prime Minister Goh argued that e-ASEAN would transform ASEAN into one seamless and borderless market, instead of 10 fragmented markets. I shall not go too great into the details of the Initiative for ASEAN Integration. But let me say that the package of proposals announced by the Prime Minister at the informal summit is made up of two parts: skills development and educational development, which will stretch over a five-year period involving $59.5 million. It involves, firstly, skills development training institutes being established in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam. Secondly, a five-year package of IT "Train-the-Trainers" courses for these countries.”
“But, at the same time, I would caution against taking an unduly pessimistic view of ASEAN. We have to view matters in historical perspective. And when we look back at the initial years after ASEAN was founded, there were many pundits who predicted that ASEAN would not last more than a few years. They described ASEAN as being a group of so disparate countries, so divergent, that we were the "Balkans of Asia". But we have lasted, developed and evolved into the organisation that we are now. 2.30 pm ASEAN continues to remain a resilient organisation. It has nurtured certain habits of cooperation. There are some good institutions in ASEAN beyond the meetings of the Foreign Ministers. There are the meetings of the Finance, Economic and Environment Ministers. Through this network of meetings between Ministers and officials, there has been over the years a certain camaraderie, understanding and working relationship between ASEAN leaders and officials. I think the ASEAN meetings are also important for this interaction. We agreed last year that we should cut down as much as possible the pomp, the ceremonial part of ASEAN, and move into a more business-like functional mode. Therefore, we have held retreats, sometimes without officials. And we have also agreed that in between the annual Foreign Ministers' meeting, there will be a meeting of Ministers in Retreat, and this will be held sometime soon. I will repeat that Singapore will work with others in ASEAN during this interregnum. During this interregnum, what is essential is to keep the organisation together. It is important because there are many new leaders, many new Foreign Ministers, who have emerged in ASEAN, and we have to stay on track on important initiatives like AFTA.”
“ASEAN is of primary importance, but of equal significance is our need to reach out and engage with the rest of the world. Let me say that Singapore's FTA negotiations with Australia, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand and the United States can be said to come under this other part of our twin track approach. Dr Ong Chit Chung made an interesting point when he said that it is important for our people to be knowledgeable about what is happening in the region. I completely agree with him. Why do I agree with him? Because of the external situation we find ourselves in, and it will definitely affect Singapore. I think Singaporeans, as a community, ought to take an interest in what is happening beyond our shores, especially in our immediate region. And if Singaporeans at large are well acquainted with the issues in our region and have a realistic view of developments, I believe they will be better equipped to deal with any developments that take place. Sir, let me turn to the various comments made about ASEAN. I would start, first, by recounting why is it that many commentators and writers dubbed ASEAN, some years ago, as one of the most successful regional groupings in the world. I think there were two reasons. First members of ASEAN were doing well economically. Some were dubbed as the "tigers" or rising economies in Asia. Secondly, most of the countries were experiencing periods of political stability. With the regional crisis, things have changed. Countries are experiencing both political and economic uncertainties and instability. So if you ask me now, I think it will be misleading to paint any rosy picture for ASEAN. In fact, at last year's ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting, Singapore made a speech which was described aptly as a wake-up call for ASEAN.”
“Let me add also that India is also rising as an economic force with their centres of excellence in the field of information technology. Dr Ong Chit Chung mentioned the United States administration. Their key foreign policy directions have yet to be revealed, but it appears that they will remain engaged and committed in Asia. US policy in Asia, I completely agree with Dr Ong Chit Chung, will affect the existing triangular relationship between the US, China and Japan, a relationship which underpins the strategic situation in the Asia-Pacific. So we have to monitor this closely. Sir, these then are some of the matters in the radar screen, so to speak. With all these changes and uncertainties taking place in this region, what can we do in these uncertain times? I think there is no point in wringing our hands and lamenting on the problems in the region. So during this interregnum in ASEAN, I believe we have to be forward looking and to work with like-minded countries in ASEAN as well as some of our dialogue partners to keep ASEAN on track, and we have to prepare for the day when the region recovers. I think we have to take a twin track approach, what Dr Ong Chit Chung referred to as a balancing approach. In other words, while we take a long-term view of our commitment to ASEAN, we also have to press ahead in reaching out to other key countries and economies in the world. Being a small country in an increasingly globalised world, we have no choice but to engage global markets to make the world our hinterland. This is not new and has been our approach for a long time. I would say, together, these two facets make up the twin track approach in our foreign policy.”
“We have put out measured factual statements setting out our position on the facts. We have to take a long-term view of our relations with Indonesia, and we will continue to approach relations in a calm and measured manner. In Malaysia, we are also witnessing political changes, and as Malaysia deals with its domestic challenges, Members would have also noted the series of ups and downs in our relations with them in the past year. Notwithstanding these events, the leaders of both sides have maintained close and frequent contacts and have been able to put such issues behind us quickly in favour of moving ahead in our bilateral relations. With both Indonesia and Malaysia, despite occasional differences, which are unavoidable because they are close neighbours, let me say that we will continue to build on our relations on the basis of sovereign equality, and we will cooperate wherever possible towards mutual benefit. I have noted what Dr Ong Chit Chung said and I agree with him that it must be on the basis of prosper-thy-neighbour. And indeed we believe that such contribution can contribute towards lifting our region from its current uncertainties. Dr Ong Chit Chung pointed out that North East Asia is showing good signs of economic growth and healthy recovery from the economic crisis. The tensions in the Korean Peninsula have been easing in the past year. Not surprisingly, therefore, foreign investors are more attracted to North East Asia than South East Asia, and this is precisely what I have flagged to my colleagues in the ASEAN Foreign Ministers' meeting, that we have to take note and we have to get our act together in ASEAN. China's impending entry into the WTO will also present challenges and opportunities for countries in this region.”
“All I can say is that we have to be alert to the external developments and in various facets of our policies, we have to be agile and nimble in making adjustments. Members rightly pointed out that the region in South East Asia is going through a very difficult period. Even as we speak now, today, ASEAN's largest member, Indonesia, is grappling with serious domestic, political and economic problems. With recent changes in government, the Philippines and Thailand have also seen the emergence of new leaders as well as Foreign Ministers. With all these uncertainties, political and economic problems taking place, foreign investor confidence has yet to return to the region. But I would say, in reply to those who spoke about ASEAN, Singapore is committed to ASEAN, and we will work with others to overcome the present difficulties, to keep ASEAN on track in important projects, such as AFTA. At the fourth informal summit in Singapore, there was an agreement amongst the leaders, but also amongst the ASEAN+3, to cooperate towards integration of ASEAN. I will come to this in a moment. Within our limited resources, Singapore tries to play the role of a catalyst in ASEAN's recovery, and we do this through various projects, such as the initiative for ASEAN integration, the e-ASEAN initiative to help all of ASEAN engage in the new economy. Nearer home to Singapore, we are witnessing political changes in both our neighbouring countries. As I said, Indonesia is undergoing a difficult political transition in the face of economic, social, religious and ethnic problems. Such pressures have caused Indonesian leaders sometimes to lash out against us from time to time. But Members will note that we have not reacted emotionally.”
“Sir, I thank Dr Ong Chit Chung, Chairman of the GPC, Mr Ravindran and Mr Hawazi for their comments. I will first touch on Dr Ong Chit Chung's points about the overview of the strategic situation in our region. He is right when he says that there have been very dramatic changes in the regional landscape. The South East Asian region is going through very troubled and uncertain times. North Asia, as some Members pointed out, is proving to be more attractive to investors. There is a new administration in the United States. There are old flashpoints such as the unresolved disputes in South China Sea and the cross strait relations, which have not disappeared. And we have also seen inter-ethnic tensions in various places in the region. As I was listening to the debate in the past few days on MTI as well as the Ministry of Defence, there were certain recurring themes by both the Members and the Ministers who replied. The recurring theme was precisely about the uncertain strategic situation we find ourselves in. And now again, in MFA, this point is raised. What does it show? I think it shows that the regional backdrop is relevant, not just one aspect of Singapore's development, it affects many facets of Singapore - economic, security and defence, as well as foreign policy. We are affected by the external environment and circumstances, many of which are beyond our control. Dr Ong Chit Chung asked me to forecast the political weather. How I wish we had a crystal ball! There are so many developments in countries around us, the outcomes of which are uncertain, but the outcomes of which will certainly affect us, to a lesser or greater degree.”
“Given the rise in income levels in Singapore in recent years, I would like to suggest that it should easily be doubled, say, to $14,000, and that there should be a corresponding increase in legal officers assigned to the Legal Aid Bureau. Finally, Sir, permit me to acknowledge in this House the real contributions of the dedicated officers in the Legal Aid Bureau, who often work long and hard to help those who are in real need of their assistance. They perform both social and professional duties with dedication and enthusiasm.”
“Added to that have been significant changes in the approaches to the settlement of disputes, whether they be commercial or personal, criminal or civil. The quality of young men and women going into the law is among the best in Singapore. But all this comes at a cost. As Singapore's legal system and procedures develop, we see also rising costs. Lawyers now cost more. Global competition reduces supply and drives demand for lawyers. Procedures are more elaborate. Take a simple case in the Family Division. An uncontested divorce can now cost a couple of thousand dollars at least. A contested one many times more. There are now mediation sessions to resolve matrimonial disputes. If lawyers are present, they will charge for the time spent. Costs increase even though mediation may be free. It is not as if Singapore has a very sophisticated system of dealing with matrimonial disputes. In other jurisdictions, for example, child counsellors are employed to assess what would be the best solution to the dispute from the viewpoint of the child. Here, more often than not, the judge has to interview the child or children himself or herself. If we institute such a system, costs will undoubtedly increase further. Sir, my GPC colleagues will elaborate further on the issue of legal aid. But suffice it to say that one measure of the quality of a legal system lies in its ability to cater to as many of those who seek its assistance. I hope that the Minister will consider ways and means to improve the access to legal services by reviewing the means test, so as to allow more lower income people to be assisted by the Legal Aid Bureau. Currently, the disposable income limit is $7,000.”
“Toh See Kiat made some proposals on changing our laws. I am always open to suggestions but, at this stage, I can only give preliminary response to some of his points. He wanted landlords to be made liable for letting their premises to be used for selling pirated goods. I am not sure we really would want to expect landlords to constantly monitor the activities of their tenants. Whether we should go so far as the Member proposes, to impose the liability on landlords, is something we have to very carefully consider. And if I may take the analogy of theft, since IPR piracy has always been made an analogy with theft, there is presently no landlord liability provision concerning sale of stolen goods. He has also proposed introducing presumptions, eg, if somebody is selling IPR goods at very low prices, he is deemed to be engaging in piracy. Here again, we will consider his suggestion, but I would be very careful in making such a wide presumption that might affect legitimate business activities. Sir, in order to give time for the other cuts, I will pause here and let other Members speak. Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung: Sir, one of the desired outcomes stated in the Budget for the Ministry of Law is accessibility to justice for persons of limited means. This is the basis for Singapore's Legal Aid Bureau under the Ministry of Law. Sir, as I said earlier, the quality of a legal system is to be found in how accessible it is to those who seek justice. If costs are prohibitive for people of limited means, then the legal system will mean little, no matter how up-to-date it is. Singapore, in the last decade, has seen impressive improvements in the legal infrastructure. The use of technology has made Singapore's courts the envy of many in the world.”
“He also said that the long arm of the law in Singapore is impotent and the police are clueless and helpless in prosecuting IP offences. I am not sure I can agree with that either. Of course, we do not rest on our laurels but he should know that in order to undertake sustained and enhanced approach against IP violations, the police set up an Intellectual Property Rights Branch (IPRB), and the facts are that the IPRB has smashed seven syndicates island wide, seized more than $16 million worth of pirated articles and arrested 187 persons. This compares favourably with the statistics in previous years. Together with these improved enforcement measures, the Singapore courts continue to impose stiff penalties for copyright and trade mark infringements. Offenders are consistently given jail sentences of three months to four years, and fines ranging from $15,000 to $1.5 million. 4.15 pm As for his points about enforcement at trade fairs, these are licensed by the Ministry of the Environment, which specifically imposes conditions against such malpractices. If he or any other Members in the House know of such violations at trade fairs in their constituencies, I hope they bring it to the attention of the authorities. But when action is taken, I do hope Prof. Toh See Kiat and other Members do not then write in to the Minister appealing for waiver of the summonses. Another measure taken is the establishment of a new statutory board called the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS), details of which were given in the Second Reading speech on the Bill here. Finally, we have to raise IPR awareness, and this is being done not only by IPOS, but also IPOS in conjunction with other international organisations in organising workshops, seminars and so on. Prof.”
“Apart from the fact that this will increase competition, it will also have the effect of increasing the overall efficiency of our law firms and we hope that more and more of our lawyers, who are highly skilled professionals, would shift their focus towards higher value-added work as conveyancing becomes simpler with technological advances. Let me also say in response to Prof. Chin's comments on gearing ourselves to a knowledge-based economy that we have formed an inter-agency committee to coordinate efforts to develop competency and expertise in ICT law. The Committee will explore and develop new opportunities for ICT-related legal services and in positioning Singapore internationally as a reputable ICT law centre. In this regard, let me say that I would fully support the idea that he has raised of an IT and communication law centre in the NUS. I think this would be helpful in the overall scheme of gearing up our legal framework for the new economy. Let me now touch on Prof. Toh See Kiat's points on intellectual property. I would say first that we are fully committed to the protection of intellectual property rights and we have developed a three-pronged strategy. First, to implement good legal framework to protect IP; second, to adopt effective deterrence and enforcement against piracy; and third, to educate consumers and inculcate in our public a culture of respecting intellectual property rights. He says that our image in the world is still not very good. I am not sure I agree with him because we have been consistently rated as having one of the best IP regimes in the region. In fact, according to the ASEAN-Pacific Legal 500, an independent survey of regional legal markets, Singapore has the strongest and best enforced IP regime in Southeast Asia.”
“One important consideration, of course, is whether the course will be unduly long, given the present law course, and whether we can fine-tune it to achieve the benefits of a graduate legal education, for example, in the United States. Other aspects which we will consider will include the impact of graduate education on the quality of lawyers and the number of entrants to the legal profession. There are other options, for example, of permitting law undergraduates to read law and non-law subjects leading, for example, to a double degree. We are still exploring all these possibilities and a decision is someway to go yet. As I have said, the key approach is not to assume that what we have been doing all these years and the way we have been doing it is sacrosanct. We must be prepared to examine all aspects. Coming back to the point raised by Prof. Chin Tet Yung on other steps we have taken on our legal framework, I need to mention very quickly a major step we took last year about joint ventures and formal alliances. That was an important development to bring in top-tier legal talents from overseas to increase the pool of legal talents in Singapore. So far, eight joint law ventures and two formal alliances have been formed. Prof. Chin will also remember that in the course of last year, we have also allowed law firms to corporatise and to form themselves as corporations, and this would enable greater flexibility for them and in the short space of time since we announced it in October, at least four law corporations have been formed. Also, an important development was the move we took on the recommendation of former Justice Goh Joon Seng's Committee to abolish the conveyancing scale of fees in two years' time.”
“The Committee also recognises the importance of the Board of Legal Education being given wider discretion to recognise as qualified persons those with multiple skills and wide range of experiences, which will be desirable for our legal sector. This can also be a route to help meet any short-term demand in any specific area of legal work. I should inform the House that the Government has considered and accepted the Committee's report, the details of which will be released later today. These changes represent, in my view, a balanced and multi-pronged approach to ensuring that Singapore has sufficient legal resources to meet the continuing needs for its economy. While ensuring that our legal profession continues to take in talents and entrants of sufficiently high quality, we will continue to ensure that our legal sector will be able to play its part in supporting Singapore's growth and development. Mr Iswaran also asked about law being a post-graduate degree. Let me say that no decision has been taken. It is true that Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Tony Tan made a speech which included this point. But he did not make a definitive proposal. I believe his intention was to provoke thought and discussion. I believe he was right in doing so because in the legal sphere, just as in other important areas of Singapore's development, it is absolutely important to re-examine fundamental assumptions on which we have operated for many years. In that context, we should see whether our scarce resources are being optimised to the fullest extent and is there a better way of doing things. In that context, we will examine whether the law degree should be a post-graduate degree, as well as any other possibilities. We will look at all the pros and cons.”
“To bring a wider range of perspective and experiences to our legal talent pool, the Committee has recommended to include some Australian and New Zealand universities among the overseas universities to be recognised. In addition to the 15 universities, other universities from the United Kingdom would be added to the list. In all, 19 United Kingdom universities, 4 Australian universities and 2 New Zealand universities will be recognised for this purpose. This meets the point raised by Mr Chng Hee Kok about other universities to be included. Let me stress, and Mr Iswaran made an important point, that this exercise is not just about numbers. It must also be about quality. We must ensure that people of right standards and capabilities enter the legal profession. Therefore, we will continue to insist on Second Class (Upper) Honours Degree for graduates from the United Kingdom, and for the Australian and New Zealand universities, because not all of them grade their degrees in the same way as the United Kingdom universities, the Committee recommended that it requires graduates for purposes of practice to come within the top 30% of their graduating cohort. The Committee also made two other recommendations. First, it recommended the Board of Legal Education be allowed to recognise certain double degree programmes from scheduled universities for the purposes of admission to the Singapore Bar. I think this recognises the point made by Mr Iswaran about the complicated environment of the future where lawyers with inter-disciplinary backgrounds would be an asset.”
“Some years ago, with the Attorney General's Committee, which I would refer to as the first Committee, we revised the system on supply of lawyers and we had the system where 15 universities in the United Kingdom were recognised. For those who wish to practise law in Singapore, they must have a Second Class (Upper) Honours Degree and they must do a one-year Diploma course here. We also provided for NUS law graduates to practise law if they have a Second Class (Lower) Degree. Since some years had passed, we asked the Attorney-General to form a new Committee to review the situation and to propose changes necessary in the light of changing circumstances. The Attorney-General has presented the report of his Committee. Let me say that he found that there is now a current shortage of lawyers, largely due to increased demand for lawyers brought about by the formation of joint law ventures and formal alliances, as well as the fact that increased numbers of lawyers are leaving the profession, either to become in-house counsel or to pursue other careers. Furthermore, based on projections concerning the size of the Singapore population and the growth of the economy in the coming years, the Committee concluded that there would be an increased demand for legal services over the next 10 years. To help meet the projected increase in demand, the Committee had recommended increasing the annual intake of law students from the NUS Law Faculty, as well as increasing the number of overseas universities whose law degrees would be recognised for the purposes of practising in Singapore.”
“Sir, I will take the points raised by the GPC Chairman, Prof. Chin, Mr Iswaran and Mr Chng Hee Kok because they are related, and I will then reply to Prof. Toh See Kiat. First, Prof. Chin asked about the framework of our legal system, what changes are we making to gear up for the new economy. Let me say first that, as a general principle in our approach to the legal system, we consider the legal system to be important, not just for our people's security, safety and resolution of disputes. A sound legal system - and by that, I mean all sectors, the private legal profession, the legal profession, the judiciary and the public sector's legal services - is a critical supporting pillar of our economic growth to ensure Singapore's competitiveness. A legal system, which has people in all sectors of competence, of integrity, with a sufficient number of skilled people, is essential. That has been our approach, and in response to Prof. Chin, I would say that it is probably even more important now when advances in technology and globalisation have transformed the way we live and work. He is right that no sector, and certainly not the legal sector, is immune from these changes. Therefore, I completely agree with him when he says that the legal system, if it is to play a role in the new economy, must be geared to meet the challenges ahead. So, where do we start in explaining the various aspects of the framework which we are attending to? I will first start with the question of talents because if the legal system does not have enough skilled persons and sufficient numbers, it would not be able to rise to the challenge. Here is where I will deal with questions of supply of lawyers which all the three MPs have touched on.”
“All foreign investors, however, make decisions based on commercial considerations. Feedback from Singapore companies and financial institutions indicate that the general take-up rate of the package is unlikely to improve until and unless the domestic political and economic situation in Indonesia stabilises and investor confidence returns. Moreover, with countries in Northeast Asia adopting aggressive policies to attract investments, investors will naturally gravitate to them. Aside from the economic package, we will continue to build on our economic cooperation with Indonesia for mutual benefit. In January 1999, the West Natuna Gas Agreement was concluded between Singapore's Sembawang Gas Pte Ltd and Indonesia's state-oil company, Pertamina. This deal is expected to generate earnings of US$8 billion over 22 years and create employment for many Indonesians. WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS NUMBER OF PERSONS HANGED 1. Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam asked the Minister for Home Affairs if he will furnish the number of persons who have been hanged in Singapore for the years 1991-2000, giving the numbers year by year and splitting the number for each year into the various crimes for which they were hanged.”
“On the first part of the question: The Member will recall that we offered Indonesia a S$1.2 billion economic assistance package during PM's trip to Jakarta in January 2000. However, given the low take-up rate of the package, the Indonesians have expressed an interest to explore other means of implementing the package, in particular the S$400 million Loan Financing Scheme*. * The economic package comprised a S$400 million Loan Financing Scheme for Singapore investments in Indonesia; a US$500 million Singapore Co-Investment Fund for Indonesia; a S$2 million Tourism Cooperation Package; and cooperation projects in the Riaus. On our part, Singapore reiterated that the objective of the Loan Financing Scheme is to encourage Singapore companies to look for commercially viable opportunities in Indonesia. Loans are provided to Singapore companies interested to invest in Indonesia through Singapore-based financial institutions. That said, we are prepared to work with the relevant agencies in Indonesia to "match make" Indonesian and Singapore investors and SMEs. The idea is for the Indonesian Government to inform us of the sectors where there are possible investment opportunities and forward a list of potential Indonesian partners. We can then facilitate matching these Indonesian companies and interested Singapore companies. On the second part of the question: The S$1.2 billion economic assistance package will continue to be made available to Indonesia. The package is intrinsically sound, and there have been some cases of success. In March 2000, the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation participated in an international consortium, led by Cycle and Carriage (Singapore), by investing US$76 million in Astra.”
“Indeed, that is the hallmark of Singapore's foreign policy, ie, to be nimble and flexible. Let me assure the Member and the House that my Ministry constantly reviews how we should best represent and protect our interests overseas in all countries, including in Canada and Mexico, which are, as pointed out by the Member, countries with whom our economic and trade links have been increasing. PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT 35. Mr Tay Beng Chuan asked the Minister for Manpower whether his Ministry will allow foreign students studying in institutions of higher learning to take up part-time employment so as to ease the labour shortage in the retail and service sectors.”
“As a small country with a highly globalised economy, we take the issue of our overseas representation seriously. It is an issue that the Foreign Ministry reviews constantly and carefully. For Singapore, the key issue for our Foreign Service, in establishing new Missions, is that of human resources. There is a limited talent pool from which we draw our representatives and we have to send our best people overseas to represent Singapore. This is something we have explained to many of our foreign partners. We have to accept the fact that it will not be possible to open resident Missions in all 189 countries in the world. We have tried our best to balance our constraints with the need to advance Singapore's interests overseas. Therefore, we have several arrangements to represent our interests overseas, even when we do not have resident Missions. For instance, we have a system of appointing Non-Resident Ambassadors (NRAs). There are now 21 NRAs. These are successful and eminent citizens of Singapore who are based in Singapore but travel to their countries of accreditation regularly. For Mexico, we have had a Non-Resident Ambassador since 1997. As for Canada, our Permanent Representative to New York has been concurrently accredited as our High Commissioner since 1969. We also have a Consulate in Vancouver. These arrangements, given our limited resources, are working well. Let me stress that the issue of representation overseas is not a static one. Our representation must keep up with changes in the global economy as well as with trends in bilateral trade and economic linkages. If our economic partnership with certain countries strengthens and intensifies, then we will be prepared to review the current arrangements.”
“Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh asked the Minister for Manpower whether all foreign workers are required to undergo a medical examination, including HIV test, before an employment status is granted; and whether employers can legitimately terminate the services of their local and foreign employees who are subsequently found to be HIV positive.”
“A stakeholder holds the money on behalf of both the buyer and seller. If the sale is completed without incident, he will pay the money to the seller. If the sale is aborted through no fault of the buyer, the stakeholder returns the money to the buyer. In the meantime, neither the seller nor buyer can rightfully claim that the money, and the interest earned from it, belong to him as it is not certain who will finally be entitled to the money. Therefore, in a stakeholding situation, it is not meaningful to speak of "owner of the fund". The law allows stakeholders to retain the interest earned on the stakeholding funds as remuneration for the valuable service they provide to both seller and buyer. The stakeholder, who holds the money on behalf of both parties, is accountable to them for the safekeeping of the money. He must act fairly as between the parties and pay out the money only in accordance with law. This is especially important in cases where there is a legal dispute between the parties and they both lay claim to the money. As he provides a service which protects the interests of both buyer and seller, it is only fair that he is adequately remunerated. I should clarify that it is not only law firms who act as stakeholders in property transactions. For uncompleted units sold directly by developers, the Singapore Academy of Law acts as stakeholder. In other property transactions, parties are free to decide who the stakeholder should be, even though they usually appoint the lawyer. Whoever the stakeholder is, the law governing the treatment of interest on the stakeholding fund is the same. MEDICAL EXAMINATION FOR FOREIGN WORKERS 2.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it would have been obvious from my main answer that these are issues not to be considered by the Prime Minister or the Minister. These are essentially matters to be considered by the Attorney-General who, under the Constitution, is charged with the duty and function of prosecutorial decisions. FOREIGN DOMESTIC MAIDS (Psychological evaluation) The following Question stood in the name of Mr Chiam See Tong - 21. To ask the Minister for Manpower whether he will make it a requirement for all foreign maids to undergo a psychological evaluation before they can be given work permits in view of the reported deaths and other tragedies involving foreign maids.”
“Sir, I have listened to Mr Chiam and I thank him for his support. I think Members would share his views and comments on weapons of mass destruction, and I should add to what I said in my speech that Singapore has in fact signed all the key treaties and international conventions involving weapons of mass destruction. In addition to the convention, which is the subject of the Bill today, we have also ratified the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention as well as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). We have also signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) last year and we are now in the process of examining the ratification in due course. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Prof. S. Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. NATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 1.46 pm”
“International inspections are carried out by the international inspectors of the Organisation, OPCW, which can be of two types. They could either be routine or challenge inspections. Routine inspections are carried out at facilities using controlled chemicals to ensure that such use is consistent with legitimate purposes and with annual declarations made by a State Party. A challenge inspection is carried out when a State Party to the Convention requests the Organisation to conduct an inspection in any other State Party to the Convention. A request may be made if the requesting State Party has good reason to suspect that the other State Party has violated the Convention. However, to allay any concern over the intrusive nature of such an inspection, the Bill provides that an inspection may only be carried out with the consent of the person in control of the premises or with a court warrant. Other safeguards are set out in clause 24 of the Bill. Sir, the Bill will have limited impact on the commercial operations of our companies in the chemical and other industries. In fact, since 1997, they have actually been making annual declarations to the National Authority voluntarily and have already factored the making of such declarations in their work schedules. From information obtained in 1999, less than 60 companies will require licences for activities involving chemicals controlled by the Convention. Of these, only eight will be subject to routine inspections by the international organsiations as set up under the Convention. Trial inspections here and elsewhere have shown that they cause only minimal disruptions to the operations of companies. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“As required by the Convention, this clause also applies to acts and omissions of our citizens overseas and persons on board ships and aircraft registered in Singapore. Penalties for committing the offence are severe to reflect its seriousness and the devastating effects of the use of chemical weapons on lives and property. Clause 9 creates a licensing system for the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention or transfer of scheduled chemicals for permitted purposes. Permitted purposes include protective, research, medical, pharmaceutical and law enforcement purposes. The licensing system is administered by the National Authority, an office created as part of the Trade Development Board. The system will facilitate the gathering of information from chemical facilities to enable Singapore to make periodic declarations to the Organisation established under the Convention. For the same reason, clause 12 requires those carrying out activities involving such chemicals to keep appropriate records and provide certain information to the Director of the National Authority, and clause 13 empowers the Director to require any person with information relevant to such declaration to furnish the information to the Director. Any information so provided is protected from disclosure under clause 26. This is to give our chemical industry the assurance that commercially sensitive information will always be kept confidential. Part V of the Bill provides for two types of inspections of premises: national and international inspections. National inspections are carried out by the National Authority and police officers to determine if the Act and regulations have been complied with at the premises.”
“The Convention established the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). As a member of that Organisation, we can obtain technical assistance from other member countries if threatened with an attack by chemical weapons. Ratification is also expected to facilitate trade in chemicals which are controlled by the Convention. The Convention progressively prohibits transfers of these chemicals to States that are not parties to the Convention. However, as a State Party, our chemical industries are able to freely import or export these chemicals to and from other State Parties for legitimate purposes. Sir, Singapore does not produce or possess chemical weapons, nor do we have chemical weapons facilities or stocks to destroy, as required by the Convention. The verification measures required by the Convention have limited implications on parts of our chemical, pharmaceutical and other industries which I will elaborate shortly. The verification measures, which consist of periodic declarations of activities involving chemicals controlled by the Convention and inspections of facilities producing or using such chemicals, are necessary as a number of chemicals produced or used for normal commercial activities also have applications in the manufacture of chemical weapons. Therefore, these activities have to be constantly monitored to ensure that countries do not use their commercial chemical industry for the clandestine production of chemical weapons. Let me now touch on the salient provisions of the Bill. Clause 8 makes it an offence to use, develop, produce, acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer a chemical weapon. Singapore is obliged under the Convention to prohibit the carrying out of these activities.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, Singapore is a party to the 1993 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction, or CWC for short. We need to enact this law to implement our obligations under that Convention. The Convention banned a whole category of weapons of mass destruction and established a comprehensive verification scheme to ensure that member countries comply with their obligations under the Convention. The CWC is the result of 20 years of negotiations in the United Nations Conference on Disarmament. To date, it has been ratified by 129 countries, including the United States, China, Indonesia and Russia. Singapore signed the Convention in 1997. Sir, I need not spell out for Members the horrifying effects chemical weapons can have on human life. To make matters worse, chemical weapons are cheap and can be easily produced, requiring little by way of technical expertise and raw materials. Unlike nuclear weapons, they can easily be disseminated using commercially available equipment. Chemical weapons have been used in a number of armed conflicts in the past causing death and injury to millions. The best known examples are during World War I, the Holocaust and the Iran-Iraq War. A few years ago, the Aum Shinrikyo cult released Sarin gas into a Tokyo underground, causing 5,000 casualties. It highlighted the fact that a country remains at risk from a chemical attack even during peacetime. Singapore ratified the CWC in 1997. Besides the obvious security benefits in a world that is free of chemical weapons, there are also other advantages to ratification.”
“Sir, when we want to prevent a two-tier ASEAN, the other ASEAN countries have to help these newer countries to integrate with the rest of ASEAN and in this regard, I should say that, firstly, we have a special Indo-China Assistance Fund under our Technical Training Programme specifically dedicated to the Indo-Chinese country. And secondly, on the figure that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that we train over 2,000 persons every year, more than half are for ASEAN countries.”
“We shall do our best to be active in foreign policy - to advance our interests, to be a responsible international citizen and to have constructive ideas on issues, whether in the region or in international organisations. Having said that, let me say that if we are elected to the Security Council, we will do our best to contribute to the work of the Council by bringing to the Council - and I think this is Mr Simon Tay's question - the perspective of a small country, and we will try to demonstrate wherever possible that a small state can also play a useful role in the Council. And we will work with like-minded countries in the Council, including those from the Non-aligned Movement and the G77, on issues of common interest. As the endorsed candidate of the Asian Group, naturally we will also work with the Asian Group to reflect their views and concerns in the Security Council. Mr Simon Tay asked whether on issues we would side with the big powers. I think our record speaks for itself. In all these years, people consider Singapore to have taken positions on the basis of principle and that we would have an independent foreign policy, and we shall continue to do so, whether we are in the Security Council or we are not in the Security Council. I will now ask your permission, Sir, for my colleagues Dr Ow Chin Hock and Mr Zainul Abidin to deal with the remaining issues.”
“Because it is in Asian Group seat, and there is no rival Asian candidate competing with us, and the Asian Group earlier has endorsed Singapore's candidature as the Asian Group's agreed candidate, I would say that the prospects of us being elected are very good. But we are not being complacent. We are continuing with all our efforts to talk to other countries in other regions to ensure that we have a good result when voting takes place in the United Nations. But I am reasonably confident that we will be elected, and the election is for a two-year term starting in January 2001. But I would like to say this. If we can get elected to the UN Security Council, we should not get carried away by the fact that we will be in the Security Council for two years. And it does not mean that we have suddenly arrived or that for two years we will have some magical power status bestowed on us. That is not the case. During the two years, if we are on the Security Council and thereafter, we will still continue to be a small country and we cannot pretend to be otherwise. I thought I should emphasise this. We should have a sense of proportion and not have any delusion that we are not a small country. And the reason why I make this point is yesterday, as I was listening to some of the comments, questions and observations in the cuts on Foreign Affairs, I thought that there was a little lack of proportion, a little lack of realism. When I listened to some of the comments, say, "look, can we send so many more military missions, peacekeeping operations, can we expand our technical assistance, not just human resources but also try to influence the policies in these countries", and so on, I would say, you better come down to reality and remember that we are a small country with limited resources.”
“30 pm Our position on Myanmar vis-a-vis the European Union is to tell the Europeans that they are free, and should feel free, to take whatever position they want with regard to Myanmar, but to distinguish their relations with ASEAN as an organisation from their relations with Myanmar. Just as when we held meetings here, as I chaired the meetings last year, we had the Myanmar Foreign Minister and the European Union here, and they had no difficulty in sitting down in the same meeting with Myanmar Foreign Minister. So this is a real problem. We have persevered with European Union. There are many countries in the EU who would like to break this impasse and get back to the productive ASEAN-EU relationship. So we will work with them to see how we can revive this ASEAN-EU Ministerial process, and many behind-the-scene discussions are going on. I believe Mr Charles Chong also asked, if we should have a "tit for tat", and will ASEAN take a similar position on the Austrian government. I cannot speak for the rest of ASEAN, but I doubt it. Because if ASEAN wants to be consistent over the position we have taken with EU on Myanmar, then it should follow that ASEAN's relationship with EU, which is a bloc-to-bloc relationship, should not be contingent on whether a particular government or a particular Minister is in that government. Mr Simon Tay and a few others asked about our United Nations Security Council candidature. First, to give an update. Singapore is bidding for a seat, which is in Asian Group seat, for the United Nations Security Council, non-permanent member. The election will be later this year, around October or so.”
“I understand that they are concerned over Myanmar's economic slowdown as a result of a combination of various factors including the Asian financial crisis. He asked about ASEAN's role and constructive engagement. I have explained in this House before that being an ASEAN member, Myanmar has greater exposure and opportunities to come into contact with the other countries in ASEAN. We take this opportunity to have a quiet, frank discussion. Many of us, individually and separately, quietly exercised some suasion in trying to persuade Myanmar on the ways of achieving normalcy, as in some of the other ASEAN countries. But we do not take the approach of some other countries like in the East who are inclined to imposing their views and insisting that various measures be taken. We think it is better to have quiet diplomacy. Notwithstanding the help and encouragement Singapore and other ASEAN countries can give Myanmar, in the end the pace of reform measures must still be left to them to decide. Mr Charles Chong asked about ASEAN-EU relations. It is true that there is a difficulty and that difficulty is because the EU has a common policy with regard to Myanmar. Because of the common policy, they maintain that they will not be able to allow the Myanmar Foreign Minister to attend any meetings held in Europe. Therefore, for the first time last year, the ASEAN-EU Foreign Ministers' Meeting, which has taken place regularly for many years, was cancelled. It was to take place in Berlin. It was cancelled because the European Union insisted that they would not give a visa for the Myanmar Foreign Minister but the rest of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers could come. Naturally, ASEAN could not accept that condition, and the meeting therefore did not take place. 1.”
“We intend to build what has been achieved in Manila. I doubt if we want to have some grand visions or themes. Rather, we hope to focus on the message that ASEAN has to renew itself. On the ARF, responding to Mr Simon Tay, I agree with him when he says that moving into preventive diplomacy is very important. Singapore is very mindful of that and Singapore supports the practice of preventive diplomacy. For the other Members who might not be very au fait with ARF, the ASEAN Regional Forum had three phases of evolution. First was confidence building measures. The second phase is preventive diplomacy, and the ultimate objective is to make the ASEAN Regional Forum into a body which can be engaged in conflict resolution. For the past few years we really have been focusing on confidence building measures. Some of us, like Singapore, feel that we should now nudge ourselves into the preventive diplomacy phase. So I agree with Mr Simon Tay when he says that Singapore should support preventive diplomacy. I want to assure him that we are ready to do our part in terms of preventive diplomacy. But in terms of Singapore itself engaging in preventive diplomacy, that is a slightly different matter because he knows that in international practice and international law, preventive diplomacy, if you offer yourself as good offices, depends on the consent of whichever parties are disputing. You just cannot impose yourself on disputing parties. We will work with the other ARF countries to see how we can accelerate slowly the process of ARF moving towards preventive diplomacy. Mr Ravindran asked about Myanmar. I can say that the situation there is generally calm and the State Peace and Development Council remains firmly in control.”
“As regards Singapore's role during our chairmanship and after our chairmanship, I would say that we have tried to play a constructive role by coming out with practical ideas to advance ASEAN's role. For example, Members will recall that the Prime Minister proposed, and the leaders accepted, the idea of sending missions or road shows abroad to demonstrate to Europe, America and elsewhere that ASEAN is determined to get back on its feet. These missions were agreed upon, and one mission already took place to Japan led by Malaysia with other members of ASEAN. BG George Yeo, the Minister for Trade and Industry, will lead this ASEAN mission to the United States in May. Thailand will also lead the third mission to Europe in May. Singapore will be represented in all these missions. Other Singapore's initiatives and efforts which were agreed upon were the Prime Minister's e-ASEAN initiative, which is intended to transform ASEAN into a borderless and seamless market instead of 10 fragmented markets. They also endorsed Prime Minister's proposal to accelerate AFTA. So Singapore continues to play a constructive role in ASEAN by coming out with ideas which have been agreed upon. Also to indicate how ASEAN is trying to adjust, the leaders agreed that we should have an ASEAN Troika. Because once you have 10 members and if you meet once a year at Foreign Ministers' Meeting, and leaders meet once a year, how do you deal and respond to fast changing events? So it was proposed at the Leaders' Meeting that we should have a troika of three members to have a faster mechanism for ASEAN's response. This was agreed to. What was Singapore's major task ahead this year for ASEAN? I wish to inform Members that we will be hosting the Fourth ASEAN Informal Meeting in November this year.”
“This is an important challenge and ASEAN will have to demonstrate that it is relevant to the region, and relevant to the external players. As I have mentioned in my answer to Dr Ong Chit Chung on the strategic situation, ASEAN has been relevant in the past because of its ability to engage key powers in discussions on security in the region. If ASEAN does not live up to this challenge, then it will be marginalised and it will be just another one of those many organisations that we have seen in the world today. But I am confident that ASEAN will face this challenge squarely. Questions were asked about Singapore's chairmanship of ASEAN for the previous year, which culminated in our hosting the ASEAN meeting and the ARF meeting. As Chairman of ASEAN, we initiated an honest reappraisal of ASEAN at the meeting which Singapore chaired. It is precisely because of these difficulties that ASEAN is going through that I introduced, with the agreement of the other Ministers, for the first time ever, an ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Retreat, in other words, just the Foreign Ministers without officials at all. We had a frank exchange of where we are going. The consensus was that this was a very candid exchange of views. To indicate the candour, we took note of the danger of ASEAN becoming a two-tier organisation, in other words, some of the new entrants like the Indochinese countries on the one hand, and on the other hand, the original ASEAN member states. It was important that we should prevent ASEAN from becoming a two-tier organisation. To prevent that, it was important to concentrate on efforts to integrate and assist the newer members of the organisation.”
“In any case, ASEAN membership has to be decided by consensus. They have to follow a procedure. There has to be an application first. Usually the country becomes an observer, after that they apply for membership and membership comes after undertakings to adhere to certain basic ASEAN agreements, including the Bangkok Declaration, the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and various other agreements. There are some six agreements which aspiring members will have to undertake to be bound. Members then asked about ASEAN. A common question was: has ASEAN outgrown itself? I think Dr Ong Chit Chung asked that. Mr Ravindran asked: have we expanded too fast? Because of the expansion, has ASEAN slowed down? These are valid questions which even members in ASEAN are asking themselves. I would say that ASEAN is going through an important testing period. It is going through a difficult period because, firstly, many of the countries are recovering from the financial crisis. Secondly, ASEAN has been touted for many years as the most successful regional grouping. If it was considered as the most successful regional grouping, it was because many of the members were doing well economically, and there was political stability. That is not so now: Economically, some of the countries are having problems. Politically, some of the countries like Indonesia are going through very difficult challenging times in their political transition. The perception is that ASEAN's reputation has been dented. It has lost its shine or lustre. So the challenge for ASEAN is how it can reorganise itself, re-invent itself, so to speak, to recover its relevance as a vibrant regional grouping.”