S. Rajaratnam
Singapore
“There are two already there! BG Lee Hsien Loong: Well, we see the future before us. The proposal to have a 4% interest rate on HDB loans without a corresponding drop in CPF interest paid on the deposits is the first step to raiding the reserves.”
“This concern for the 15-20% was taken up in the President's Address by the new Cabinet. Many of the new and older MPs who preceded the Member for Queenstown have spoken eloquently and constructively on this subject. Quite a few had come forward with suggestions on how this goal could be achieved and it is constructive criticism.”
“Just two minutes. So the Member for Queenstown ended his vision of the future in what I thought was an apocalyptic note, and I would like to quote, I hope he does not deny this: 'Water [he said] can carry a boat but it can also sink a boat. Respect the people and attend to their needs at all times and the people will carry you far.”
“You will have time. You will be here for four years, five years. Do not worry. If you are serious about alleviating the lot of the less fortunate, then the politics of envy and hypocrisy is the surest way of ensuring that this goal is not reached.”
“It is incredible. He wants us to set the example that he wants to follow, to prove that he is a man who is prepared to render service. He can put us to shame (i do not think he will) by just voluntarily, one-sidedly, unilaterally, as a man of principle, sacrificing $3,000. That is nothing. it's peanuts to him.”
“May I finish my speech? - and which has the distinction of being the first political party in this country or in any other country which has been brought to a state of bankruptcy by a politician.”
The complete record
Every one of 375 lines we hold for S. Rajaratnam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 8.
“In fact, Mr Raman has fooled him so completely that even after Mr Raman admitted publicly that he was a communist, Mr Jeyaretnam stated publicly that Mr Raman was not a communist. So when one can fool a man to the point where he makes a fool of himself, that is fooling with complete success. Maybe Mr Jeyaretnam knows Mr Raman's mind better than Mr Raman does. If Mr Leong and Mr Raman can so completely fool Mr Jeyaretnam, then I do not believe that even tomorrow, after listening to this, he will withdraw his public statement that Mr Raman is not a communist. He will still persist in believing that Mr Raman is not a communist. So if they can fool Mr Jeyaretnam to make foolish utterances, then that is all the more reason why we should redouble our efforts to educate our people about the reality of subversion and its devious ways. And this is one of the reasons why so much of time and space is being devoted in the newspapers to publicising the statements, the admissions, by Mr Raman. Tomorrow it will be Mr Arun, and I do not know who else during the coming weeks.”
“The reason therefore why we are arresting people like Mr Leong and Mr Raman and making public their admissions is not that we need these confessions to bolster our standing with the people but really to educate our people, especially the so-called liberals, about political realities which must be taken into consideration in the formulation of our foreign policy. That is why, Mr Speaker, Sir, we waited till after the elections before taking action against them. We knew and suspected that something of the kind of either black operations or subversion was going on. Had we done so before the elections, such action would have been seen as the desperate act of a Government unsure of electoral support in the last elections. Not only must our people realise that they must live with the reality of subversion for a long, long time but they must also know how subversion works. Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, not many people believe this. There are still many people in Singapore who are easy prey for subversives. After all, in the last elections thousands of people were taken in by Mr Leong Mun Kwai and his friends into voting for their candidates or the candidates they supported. After all, Mr Leong, as did Mr Raman, did succeed in impressing a very intelligent man like Mr Jeyaretnam and his friends in the Workers Party that they were true and loyal Singaporeans working for Singapore and many people did vote for Mr Jeyaretnam. True, Mr Jeyaretnam claims that he is no fool, but the fact remains that Mr Leong and Mr Raman did fool Mr Jeyaretnam. They must have, for it could not be, I hope, that Mr Jeyaretnam knew what both of them were up to.”
“More so in a period of great and small power rivalries in our region - rivalries not only between communist and non-communist nations but also between communist nations. So in this battle, Singapore will always be a target for influence by these countries and therefore an object for subversion. Singapore may be small but in the power game control over Singapore is. for a rival power or nation, the key to the control of Southeast Asia. That is how the British saw Singapore in the hey-day of British imperialism and that is how the Japanese saw it during their brief hour of glory in Southeast Asia. Singapore in Singaporean hands may not be a threat. But Singapore in the hands of a great power or some other power is a key to the control and dominance of Southeast Asia. So the day Singaporeans or their government are persuaded that subversion, whether from the right or from the left is a bogey, is a figment of the imagination of a desperate government, that day will mark the beginning of the end of an independent Singapore. Once the people develop cynicism towards the periodic arrest and detention of communists, that is the day the communists will have succeeded in their purpose of getting our people to believe that there is no such thing as subversion. In any case there is no need for the PAP Government with its decisive electoral strength to play up the communist bogey to win elections or maintain popular support. We have no need to do that.”
“In addition to low level mercenaries like Mr Leong and Mr Tan Wah Piow, there are more deadly ideological operators and pseudo revolutionaries. They work, with the active or passive support of foreign governments, to further one of the many varieties of communism. Singapore is and will continue to be a target for this kind of subversive operations. Misguided liberals, disgruntled politicians and alienated intellectuals are additional grist to the subversive mill. The latter generally tend to dismiss all references to communist subversion and periodic arrest and detention of subversives as bogies raised by a government intolerant of dissent. This is precisely the frame of mind the dedicated communists encourage and foster among the less dedicated who take up revolution as part-time recreation or as a form of psychotherapy. Hence the readiness with which this kind of revolutionary breaks down and spills the beans when, with the first arrest, he discovers that revolution is a deadly business. The fact that these are misguided weaklings does not make them any less dangerous to Singapore. By helping to confuse the people about the ultimate objectives of the dedicated communists they, whatever their intentions, objectively further the communist cause. Once the communists win, these liberals will be among the first casualties. We only get these weaklings to own up publicly to their stupidities but the Communists, once they are in power as had happened in countries in our region, treat them as dangerous vermin to be exterminated. With reference to the earlier part of the question, in the conduct of our international relations the Government and the people must never lose sight of the fact that an independent Singapore will always be a target for subversion.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the last part of the question, may I say that relations between Singapore and the countries from which black operations were directed have not suffered to any appreciable degree. This is because we are satisfied that the governments concerned were not involved in these unfriendly activities. I refer in particular to the cases of Mr Leong Mun Kwai and Mr Tan Wah Piow, both of whom have been used for black operations not by governments but by hostile groups and individuals in friendly countries. If hon. Members would read Mr Leong's disclosures very carefully, it is clear that he had been directed by officials and politicians who appear to have acted without the knowledge or approval of responsible people in authority. The case of Mr Tan Wah Piow is slightly different. Unlike Mr Leong, he was more successful in doing a bunk and finding sanctuary in a friendly country. Hence we were not able to interrogate him and confront him with such evidence as we have. But, in my view, he is of the same breed as Mr Leong. Though Mr Tan Wah Piow transgressed British laws by entering the country with an ineptly forged passport, he was lucky enough to have had some rather influential friends in that country. Instead of being hauled up on criminal charges, he has been rewarded with a place in Bradford University where he is dedicating himself, I understand, to the study of the intricacies of British law. Despite this, we are satisfied that the responsible leaders of government in the United Kingdom could not have been parties to the rewarding of a forger, a black agent, an army deserter and an architect student who failed to make the grade in our University.”
“Encik Abdul Aziz Karim asked the Minister for Communications if he will appoint a competent officer of his Ministry to thoroughly examine the books and transactions of the Singapore Bus Service (Private) Limited before he authorises bus fare increases; if he had caused such an examination to be made before authorising the last bus fare increases on 10th February, 1974; and if he was satisfied without any doubts that the operating losses of the company as reported were unavoidable, true and correct.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first, I think it is necessary for the Member to appreciate that national territorial waters are very jealously guarded by the nations that claim these waters. In fact, there will be a number of international conferences held under the auspices of the United Nations and developing countries of the world to resolve law of the sea matters arising out of territorial water claims. Therefore, the proposal by the Member is not likely to be acceptable to the nations concerned, since the basic problems underlying fishing rights have yet to be resolved in the context of the law of the sea. With regard to the Member's suggestion that my Ministry might negotiate with the governments concerned to allow Singapore fishermen to enter their territorial waters to fish, I wish to inform the Member that this has already been tried. The Ministry of National Development went even further and proposed payment of royalties to a number of countries where our fishermen are allegedly intruding into their territorial waters to fish. The response to such approaches, I am sorry to say, has not been favourable because of defence and security requirements. There are also problems relating to piracy and the control of nationals of these countries fishing in their own territorial waters. Since the Government has failed to obtain an agreement for licensing of Singapore fishermen in such territorial waters, it might be perhaps better that the applications by individuals to do so would be given more favourable consideration, and I propose that the Member could take up this proposal with the fishermen concerned. SINGAPORE BUS SERVICE LIMITED (Examination of books and transactions) 2.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1974 to 31st March, 1975, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Sir, I think the Member for Bras Basah himself is sophisticated. That is precisely the point. I think he understood my reply, more or less as he had summarised, or he has asked a rhetorical question. In view of that, Sir, there is no need to make further comment. But, of course, I am quite sure that at the next Budget session the same question will come up.”
“Sir, I think the comments by the Member for Kim Seng do not require an answer because he was telling us how he would run the Foreign Ministry. He was not questioning my foreign policy. Therefore, there is very little to answer. Nevertheless I would like to say that some of his thoughts would be taken note of, some I would think about, and some perhaps require second thoughts. Anyway, I am grateful to the Member for putting forward certain points which have been illuminating and for saying some indiscreet things which I would not have said myself. As regards the Member for Bras Basah, probably he was not here earlier when one Member did bring up this question of representation and diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China. In my answer I understood that, by watching some of the nods to my reply, they agreed with me. But obviously the Member for Bras Basah was not here then.”
“This Committee is now working on a cumulative rule of origins for ASEAN which will enable ASEAN countries, including Singapore, to take advantage of the EEC GSP requirements. The special committee is also studying the implications of the 1974 GSP offer in order to put up proposals for more concessions and improvements in the 1975 GSP offer. It seems, Sir, that though the ASEAN progress was rather slow and imperceptible during the first four or five years, I think the pace of co-operation on specific projects tended to increase and gather momentum during the last two or three years. I am quite sure that in the coming years if nothing untoward happens, ASEAN will be a significant factor in the history of the individual countries comprising ASEAN.”
“On shipping, the Permanent Committee on Commerce and Industry has finalised the draft agreement for the facilitation of search for ships in distress and the rescue of survivors in ship accidents. There are expert groups on bulk shipping, marine pollution, containerisation, shipping statistics and information and related matters. The Permanent Committee on Commerce and Industry is also undertaking tourism and has a five-year tourism marketing plan with an annual budget of US$300,000 to promote ASEAN tourism. These are under study and there are arrangements for concessional air fare rates for ASEAN representatives travelling on ASEAN duties. It is intended to establish ASEAN centres of trade, investment and tourism in Western Europe. There are also plans for a Manpower and Training Facility Survey on ASEAN regional tourist development and plans for training of hotel management and executives. The Permanent Committee on Transportation and Telecommunications has set up a sub-committee to finalise ASEAN telecommunications projects and to study regional satellite communications system. Also under study is the establishment of a common telephone line signal system. So, too, the Permanent Committee on Food and Agriculture is convening a meeting of senior officials on rice and a meeting of experts on fertilisers and pesticides. So, too, the Permanent Committee on Science and Technology is working on a project for soya bean processing and another on low-cost protein-rich food for children. There will be an experts' meeting on ASEAN regional atlas and compendium on climate statistics. 5.45 p.m. Finally, a Special Committee has been established to co-ordinate ASEAN trade matters.”
“ASEAN is becoming an important market for our domestic exports which rose from $510 million in 1969 to $717 million in 1972 and accounts for about 22 per cent of our domestic exports to the world. We are conscious, therefore, that this increased trade with ASEAN countries is a consequence of vigorous economic growth and growing prosperity in ASEAN countries. Therefore, if regional co-operation can accelerate economic growth in the region, then it is in Singapore's interest to play a meaningful and positive role in ASEAN economic co-operation. In regard to the positive steps Singapore and its partners in ASEAN have taken during the past years, I think Members are aware that economic action in ASEAN is conducted through permanent committees which control various functions of ASEAN. There are a number of ASEAN permanent committees. But the major ones are the Permanent Committee on Commerce and Industry, the Permanent Committee on Transportation and Telecommunications, the Permanent Committee on Social and Cultural Activities, the Permanent Committee on Science and Technology, and the Permanent Committee on Food and Agriculture. For example, the Permanent Committee on Commerce and Industry has met once since the last ministerial meeting in April last year. But a number of projects which the Permanent Committee has initiated are now in the process of being implemented or completed. For instance, the ASEAN Products Display Centre in Bangkok is now in the final stage of completion. The working group on trade liberalisation met in January 1974 and its work is continuing. The training of ASEAN personnel in export promotion techniques is in an advanced stage of preparation.”
“Because of the importance of ASEAN to us and to the region, I hope I would be permitted to say a bit more than I have done in other cases because apart from regional organisations sponsored by the United Nations in Asia, the only effective and coherent Asian regional organisation is ASEAN. There is no comparable organisation in Asia where a number of Asian countries work together to promote regional co-operation. I think to this extent ASEAN is unique even in the history of Asia. In so far as progress is concerned, since its founding in 1967, it is my view that ASEAN has progressed far more in the direction of regional co-operation than, say, the European Economic Community was able to do during its first seven years. The rationale for ASEAN economic co-operation has been set out in the Report by the United Nations team which completed its Report and submitted to us in April 1972. It covered trade, industrial, monetary and financial co-operation, and the various ASEAN permanent committees -- there are a number of them - have been studying this Report during the past two years with a view to implementing gradually many of the proposals put forward by the United Nations team. As far as Singapore is concerned, it is convinced that regional co-operation is both rational politics and sound economic doctrine and that recent events have tended to confirm the fact of inter-dependence of nations, regionally as well as internationally. I think the oil crisis and the difficulties of obtaining raw materials cheaply are really a reflection of the growing inter-dependence of nations today. ASEAN is not only our largest trading partner today, but it also accounts for about a third of our total trade.”
“But 1 hope that once the Causeway is widened, then the administrative controls which are now necessary would be mitigated, or qualified, so that there would be a greater flow of traffic between Singapore and West Malaysia as, I hope, is being done in the ASEAN countries to regulate and make smoother the free flow of people into the countries comprising ASEAN. In regard to the question of our relations with the People's Republic of China, I think it has been stated before that it is our policy to establish friendly and closer relations with all countries, including the People's Republic of China. But Members are well aware of the situation prevailing in South-east Asia, and because of that there are certain rather delicate problems in regard to Singapore's position in South-east Asia. We have said that we would be prepared to move in this direction after our neighbouring countries have moved first. I think Members are quite sophisticated enough to understand why this is necessary. In regard to our relations with Britain as a result of the advent of a Labour Government, in itself I think that does not materially alter our relations with Britain unless, of course, the new Government introduces new policies which necessitate adjustments on our part. But so far no material changes have taken place in regard to foreign policy as enunciated by the Labour Government. Therefore, as far as I know, things are very much as they were before. Now, two Members have raised questions in regard to a topic which is of great interest to all of us, including my Ministry, and that is, in what way has ASEAN benefited us? What is the role that Singapore intends to play in ASEAN?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I always find it very difficult to disagree with the Member for Sembawang because invariably he begins his statement by unnecessarily exaggerating my successes as a Foreign Minister. Nevertheless I think, out of deference to his feeling, I would not disagree with him on that score! In regard to the number of points and questions he has raised with respect to my tour of West Asia, that matter has already been dealt with in my reply to the Member for Serangoon Gardens a few days ago. In regard to the question by the Member for Toa Payoh about greater travel facilities to West Malaysia, first of all, I would like to say that every country has the right to regulate how many people should be allowed to enter the country and how it should be - i.e, its immigration rules and regulations. However, they are good and necessary regulations, just as we ourselves have immigration regulations to regulate, to a certain extent, the free flow of people from West Malaysia to Singapore and vice versa. So we should not query the right of any country to impose whatever regulations it thinks fit because there are so many considerations, from security to administrative problems. Having said that, I agree with the Member for Toa Payoh that greater liberalisation of these regulations both from our neighbour in West Malaysia and us, would be to the good. Some of these problems, I think, arise Out of the fact that the flow of traffic is very considerable. It is not like Malaysians or Singaporeans going to Japan or the United States. It is a daily affair. Thousands of people go across daily, and we have a rather small Causeway which was built for the days when there were no immigration regulations between the two countries.”
“Sir, the chances of Singapore getting cheaper oil are as good as the chances of other countries getting cheaper oil. SINGAPORE BUS SERVICE LIMITED (Measures to improve service) 2. Encik Abdul Aziz Karim asked the Minister for Communications if the Government (a) will consider the withdrawal of the licence granted to the Singapore Bus Service (Private) Limited, in the public interest; (b) will take over the rights and interests of the Singapore Bus Service (Private) Limited; (c) will take steps to establish a statutory corporation to operate the bus services and, if necessary, the other public transportation systems, in which the Government should hold a reasonable proportion of shares directly or indirectly; (d) will carry out a proper valuation of the assets of the Singapore Bus Service (Private) Limited and allocate to the owners an appropriate number of shares in relation to the valued assets at the material time of share allocation and such shares shall be disposed to the Government if required; (e) will invite the participation of other interested parties and groups as co-operative members; (f) will take all possible measures to make the operation viable and efficient; (g) will ensure that the statutory corporation works in the public interest; and (h) will take all measures, including the provision of funds, to develop an efficient mass rapid transit system in the next one to two decades to supplement the bus system.”
“Sir, my Ministry has always considered such matters. But I have no doubt that, as our relations with the West Asian countries grow and develop, the establishment of missions at different levels would be given more serious consideration during the coming years. Mr Ho See Beng (Bras Basah): Sir, in view of the Minister's reply that Singapore and the Arab countries are friendly, what are the chances of Singapore getting cheaper oil?”
“However, during the course of our discussions the leaders of West Asia thought there were residual areas for mutually beneficial cooperation between Singapore and the oil-rich countries of West Asia. Like many developing countries, they are wary of becoming too dependent economically on a few industrial nations. The leaders of West Asia were unaware, until it was pointed out to them, that Singapore had some expertise in such things as port development, public housing, banking, ship-repairing, shipbuilding and industrial development, which would be more relevant to developing countries because Singapore itself was a developing country. With regard to the third part of the question, the scope for improvement of relations with West Asian countries will depend largely on ourselves and our entrepreneurs. We cannot expect the West Asian countries to court Singapore because they have more suitors than they can cope with and with far more to offer. It is, therefore, up to us to take the initiative and convince the countries of West Asia that mutually beneficial relations could be developed with us. In this connection I am happy to note that our Chambers of Commerce, industrialists and bankers are organising a trade mission to visit West Asian countries to study and explore prospects. However, this should be supplemented by exchanges of cultural missions and promotion of tourism between Singapore and West Asian countries which quite regrettably our citizens are inclined to bypass on their way to Europe.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with regard to the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the two joint communiques and statements issued during the course of our tour. If he would read them, he would discover that they refer to discussions being conducted in a "friendly atmosphere and in a spirit of mutual understanding" and that there now existed favourable conditions, according to the communique "for the promotion of mutually beneficial relations based on understanding in many spheres, particularly in the economic and commercial fields". Though our visit to these countries took place at a time when they were preoccupied with the winding up of the Arab-Israeli conflict and receiving an unending stream of more distinguished visitors, the Singapore delegation was warmly received, entertained and afforded generous time for discussions with very busy Ministers. In regard to the second part of the question, the personal contacts with Arab leaders and officials enabled the Singapore delegation to clear doubts and misunderstandings in regard to Singapore's stand on issues which the Arabs consider crucial. It is my view - which is borne out by the two joint communiques - that such misunderstandings as may have existed have now been cleared. The visit also enabled us to learn directly from Arab leaders of their political and economic aspirations and in what way these could be assisted through co-operation with Singapore. Our discussions brought to surface the large areas of ignorance the Singapore and West Asian countries had as regards potentialities for economic cooperation. I should, however, stress that much of Arab aspirations in the economic and technology fields would be met by the major and wealthier industrial countries.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Singapore Government does not regard the Australian Radio Intelligence Unit in Singapore as an espionage unit set up by the military services to undermine and/or subvert the security of Singapore and its neighbours. It is a normal practice of military establishments of all countries to maintain radio intelligence units to serve their defence requirements. In view of this, I see no grounds for concern that our non-aligned policy has been prejudiced in any way. SPECIAL BUS SERVICES FOR SCHOOL CHILDREN 3. Mr P. Govindaswamy asked the Minister for Communications if he will look into the feasibility of the bus operators providing some buses for school children only on their bus routes, particularly at the end of the afternoon school sessions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there were discussions between the Singapore and the Australian Governments prior to the recent announcement by the Australian Government of its decision to withdraw by the end of February next year all but 600 Australian troops based in Singapore. However, by April 1975 all but 150 of these 600 men would be withdrawn. The decision by the Australian Government has been as expected. The Australian Government has said that after April 1975 the remaining 150 men would help to facilitate programmes of combined exercises and to support those engaged in such projects. The Australian decision will affect the present Five-Power Defence Arrangements, hut the usefulness of the defence arrangements remains because of the contributions which the other partners will continue to make. The Prime Minister of New Zealand, in a statement on 4th July, has reiterated that there is no question of New Zealand forces being withdrawn as long as Singapore wants them. The United Kingdom similarly will continue to maintain forces at their present level. This being the case, the Singapore Government is of the view that the Five-Power Defence Arrangements can make useful contributions towards peace and stability in the area. AUSTRALIAN MILITARY FORCES IN SINGAPORE (Setting up of espionage unit) 2. Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether the Government is aware of the fact that a so-called military electronic espionage unit had been set up by the Australian military forces in Singapore; and what steps the Singapore Government proposes to take to ensure that no such unit may be allowed to be set up here and furthermore that our non-aligned policy is not prejudiced.”
“Sir, I think the trade offices may be the first step towards establishing diplomatic relations with Indo-china. We may have to do it progressively in the Indo-chinese states. As you know, a trade office is less political than a diplomatic mission. Sometimes it is better to enter through the non-political gate first, before moving into much closer relations at once. We may set up a few others, but we are not quite sure yet. Perhaps in Europe, if the need arises, but there we do not yet know how our relations with the EEC would develop. So it may be possible. But primarily this vote is really for Indo-china.”
“Sir, the increase in the provision for the year 1973-74 is really to finance ASEAN training awards which, as the Member knows, started in 1971. Over the years the call on Singapore to train people from ASEAN countries has steadily increased. According to statistics that I have, for the first year there were 17 places in various fields of studies, like poultry training, public works, road construction, building construction, sewerage, and so on. For the second year, it increased to 41 places for some 13 courses such as botanic studies, fire-fighting, librarianship, market gardening, prison work, public health, nursing, social welfare, and so on. For the financial year 1973-74, there will be some 47 places in 16 different courses and, therefore, this increase is to meet such demands as we feel would be made on us to train. I think this is a good thing and Singapore is doing far more in this respect. The money is worth the goodwill, and it also affords an opportunity for Singapore to pass on on what skills as it may have to our neighbouring countries in the spirit of ASEAN co-operation. This money is well spent and we hope that if further calls are made to increase the sum next year, we shall be happy to do so.”
“Sir, as far as I know, this is a charge for the hire of a photocopying machine. For financial reasons, it is cheaper to rent this machine than to buy one. Because of the various sizes of documents to be copied and the large numbers required for distribution to our missions, we have found that the small machine which we now have is quite unsuitable for this purpose. On the other hand, the cost of purchasing a big machine, advanced enough to handle the material for copying, would be unduly expensive, in fact, almost prohibitive if we are to add yearly depreciation to the cost. It is felt that for the time being, an expenditure of $5,000 a year on rent is more economical than to buy one. But if, at some future time, the volume of material churned out by my Ministry for distribution justifies this, then we may consider purchase of the machine. For the moment, I understand it is not at all economical to buy the machine. Tuan Haji Mohd. Ariff(In Malay): Sir, in view of the reply given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, in view of the fact that our stated policy is to be friendly with all countries, I hope the fears that the Member for Anson has manifested in regard to the security of our ambassadors overseas would not be as serious as that. We are relying mainly on the Vienna Convention which governs diplomatic relations under which the host country or the receiving state must guarantee the security of both the personnel as well as the mission in the country to which it is accredited. However, in the normal course of events we have taken certain elementary precautions, not because we believe that we are in a hostile territory and not because we fear any hostile acts against us, but because we want to ensure the normal security, like making sure of the bona fides of visitors, fencing of missions where we can, and taking normal security precautions with regard to documents, confidential reports and so on. Apart from that, there is no likelihood, I hope, of Singapore embassies in foreign countries suffering the same fate as that of the Saudi Arabian embassy in Sudan.”
“What has fallen short is that we ourselves have not been in a position to reciprocate. It is largely because it is not feasible or financially possible for us to send cultural missions abroad as frequently as other countries do. But I hope that in the near future we may venture a little bit more than what we have done in the past and send some cultural missions, especially in Southeast Asia. If we define "culture" a little bit more broadly, we do have cultural exchanges. We have students who come and study here. The Institute of Southeast Asian Studies holds seminars and affords an opportunity for intellectuals and experts in various fields to meet together to discuss and understand one another's problems. In the field of cultural exchanges, we are not doing too badly, although it is quite true that we can always do better.”
“Even if the canal is going to be a fact, it will take at least ten years before anything can be done. Therefore, I think we can afford to be a little bit more relaxed about the problem. We can give it serious consideration only if it is going to be a fact. The Member for Delta raised the question of four missions which are without Heads of Missions at the moment. He wants to know whether this is because the conditions of pay and service are not attractive. I can assure him that this is not the case. We have no difficulty in finding Heads of Missions if we want to. But what we are concerned is to have a Head of Mission who can perform his functions effectively in the country to which he will be sent. It is more a question of the quality of the person. A Head of Mission may be very effective in one country, but he may not be able to perform or fulfil his functions equally well in another country because of language or the personality of the man in relation to the place. For example, an ambassador in Washington must behave differently from an ambassador in Moscow. They have different approaches. That is the problem we are confronted with. It is really a problem of finding suitable persons for the particular countries, and not the conditions of service. However, I think it is quite likely that some of these missions, in fact all of them, would have Heads of Missions fairly soon. 4.00 p.m. The Member for Katong raised the question of encouraging cultural relations and having treaties with other countries. As a matter of fact, we have cultural treaties with a number of countries. Some countries do not sign such treaties but we still have cultural exchanges, whether in terms of visiting troupes of musicians, painters or artistes. Over the years, this has tended to increase.”
“Broadly, what I said last year is still valid, except that clearly the establishment of closer relations between China and the countries of South-east Asia is far more imminent now than it was last year. But in view of the particular character of Singapore society and the particular image of Singapore among some countries in Southeast Asia, I think it would be convenient and definitely prudent for Singapore to allow other countries first to establish diplomatic missions. We can then follow suit soon after, without undue difficulties for ourselves. This is one of the reasons, as the Member for Anson has quite rightly pointed out, why the ASEAN countries had an understanding - not an agreement -- that before any such move can be made by any one of the ASEAN countries to establish a diplomatic mission in China, there should be consultation. However, in the case of Indonesia, I must point out that they had diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China before, and they suspended it only because of the difficulties they had a few years ago. But in view of the fact that in the present context establishing diplomatic relations with China will have repercussions of varying degrees on some of our neighbours, it is only fair and proper that, before any member-country makes such a move, it should discuss the matter with the other ASEAN countries with a view to determining whether or not such repercussions may affect their own security, national interests or stability. Singapore's position at the moment is this: we are prepared to be at the tail-end of the queue. With regard to the Kra Canal, this matter was discussed even when I was a school boy. It is a perennial subject which comes up from time to time. But, as far as we know, only a survey is going to be carried out.”
“Foreign policy is something which you change according to changing circumstances, bearing the four constant objectives in mind. Now, with regard to the specific questions asked, first, by the Member for Sembawang. He has asked how many new missions we intend to set up. At the moment, as Members know, we have about 17 missions. It has been the policy of the Government not to establish missions for the sake of prestige or establishing a mission just because everybody is doing it. We only establish a mission when there are specific political, financial or security interests involved. If we feel that any of these interests can best be promoted and safeguarded by having a mission, then we will have it. We are rather cautious about establishing missions. Over the years we have gradually increased the number of our missions as our relations expand. This year, as far as our thinking goes, we intend to establish two new missions in Europe, one in Paris and the other in Bonn. This is because of the emergence of the European Economic Community not only in world politics but possibly also in the economic development of our region. This is an important factor, and therefore we feel that we should establish these two missions. It is also possible that we may, if not this year then later on, have to establish some kind of mission in Vietnam. This will depend on how things work out in Vietnam. If it works out according to the terms of the peace agreement, I think there should be no problem at all in establishing a mission either in North Vietnam, South Vietnam or in one Vietnam. The Member for Anson has asked what is the latest with regard to our developing new forms of relations with the People's Republic of China.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I always like to listen to the Member for Sembawang because every year he gives me a diploma for my performance! In fact, his estimation of my performance is even better than my own estimation of myself. However, a number of Members have asked a general question about Singapore's foreign policy in view of the end of the war in Vietnam. Obviously, the settlement of the war in Vietnam creates new conditions and new problems for us, because it will definitely bring Vietnam into Southeast Asian politics for the first time since the end of World War II. In regard to our objectives, of course, they have always been consistent. First, it is to promote the national interests of Singapore, whatever the changes in the environment. That is our constant goal. Secondly, it is to promote Singapore's security. Thirdly, to make friends with all who want to be friends with us, and fourthly, to join with all nations, both in this region and outside, who would ensure peace, stability and progress in the area. These are constant objectives. But we cannot be assured of what the concrete situation in the region would be, whether there will be one Vietnam or two Vietnams, and whether the end of the American intervention in Vietnam would automatically end all conflicts in Southeast Asia. I do not know. It is obviously clear that we would first have to wait and see what the outcome of the peace agreement is. Will there be peace? If there is peace, then things will be much easier for Singapore and for this region. But if there are new conflicts, then we must study the nature of these conflicts to see how they will affect any of the four objectives that I have outlined, and we would have to make adjustments accordingly. There is no finality about foreign policy.”
“However, we have made a representation to the Ministry of Finance to help Heads of Missions to meet additional expenditure arising from the increased cost of living in the countries where they have been posted. I hope the Ministry of Finance will, on both financial and humanitarian grounds, pay considerable attention to our representation. Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am happy with the reply of the Minister, and I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $11,366,250 for Head 0501 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with reference to the Member's query as to why we have established a mission in Brussels, he was quite right in saying that it was established primarily, though not wholly, for commercial considerations. I am not quite sure whether he meant that as a criticism or a commendation; I hope it is a commendation. However, the Head of the Mission will be at ambassadorial level. It may well be that since it is the first mission in Continental Europe, our mission in Brussels will have concurrent accreditation elsewhere in Europe, if it is possible. As regards Medan, our Mission there is at Consulate level and, therefore, there is no question of an Ambassador. We want to be in the best of terms with our Indonesian neighbour. The main function of a consulate is to promote the potential for trade and, in particular, tourism. The other comment by the Member concerns the emoluments of Heads of Missions, and I have dealt with this subject. I think the lines for setting a standard for what is comfortable or what is not, may vary. I have also been to what he has called "a little flat" of the Ambassador in Tokyo. As far as I can see, most flats in Japan are "little flats", because their concept of size is quite different from other countries. Many very prominent and wealthy people live in little flats in Tokyo. However, I get the point made by the Member, and that is, in countries where the cost of living is high our Ambassadors should get appropriate allowances. The cost of living index was formulated at the time when things were fairly stable in Singapore. Many of our bureaucrats tend to think that the cost of living is also stable in other parts of the world. But in many other countries, the cost of living has risen considerably.”
“Sir, I think I have said on previous occasions that our Foreign Service must be re-modelled on the basis that it is not a trade union purely for professional diplomats. We must have a mixture of professional diplomats of M.P.s, Ministers of State, politicians, businessmen, university dons, etc., so that this wide strata of our society can bring in the various valuable expertise. Our main concern in Foreign Service is the development of commerce and trade with some countries. So there is no use sending a politician to conduct matters where commercial acumen and industrial understanding is the more dominant function of an ambassador. As it is, I can say that, by and large, this experiment in recruiting bankers and industrialists has produced far greater results than having a purely professional cadre of diplomats. 5.00 p.m. I believe that in many other countries too, including the United States, it is not the custom to take the old approach that the diplomatic service is completely and wholly staffed by professional diplomats. Until we have reason to believe that this present system does not work, we will continue to adopt this present form of approach to the diplomatic service.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think what the Member for Anson has been saying is less than fair to our Ambassadors. They work very hard, regardless of whether their salaries are increased or decreased. However, since both Members have raised the question of emoluments for our Ambassadors and High Commissioners, I would like to say that, as far as I know there have been no complaints from them as regards salaries. But there have been complaints and grouses regarding their overseas allowances. The grades and salaries of Heads of Missions are equated with the Civil Service Superscale Grades D, E and G, i.e., salaries of $2,170, $2,070, and $1,920 respectively. This is to avoid upsetting the Government salary structure and to provide prospects of advancement to higher grades. The total emoluments of Heads of Missions who are married with, say, three children, range from $3,944.50 to $5,903 per month for a Grade II Ambassador or High Commissioner. In addition to all these, he is provided with rent-free furnished accommodation, a chauffeur-driven car for his exclusive use, and adequate financial provisions for entertainment and representational activities. Generally, the rates for overseas allowances depend on the cost of living index applicable to the country o posting. However, in view of the complaints from some Heads of Missions that they are not adequate, my Ministry has made representation to the Ministry of Finance for an interim revision of the existing overseas cost of living allowances and this, as far as I understand, is under active consideration by them.”
“There must be uniformity of agreement in regard to the status of all straits of international importance. The alternative to an international agreement is a dangerous scramble for the carve up of not only straits, but of oceans as well. Hitherto, most conflicts known to mankind have had to do with the carve up of land and rectification of land frontiers. Now that most of the world's land mass have been carved up, there could well be a scramble for the carve up of straits and oceans. And once the principle is conceded that the oceans are open for picking by those with power and might and strength, and to declare portions of these oceans as their preserves, then small countries - whoever else may win- will certainly be the losers. That is why Singapore is strongly of the view that the status of all straits, including that of Malacca and Singapore, should be settled by mutual accord and agreement in a rational way at the United Nations Law of the Sea Conference tentatively scheduled for next year. Were the future of the oceans and straits of international importance to be settled on the basis of unilateral carve ups on the principle of "finders keepers", then the seas of the world - they make up most of the world - could well become areas of anarchy and contest where right must be and will be largely on the side of those who have the might which, in technological terms, means those who have the biggest navy, the largest submarine fleets, and the greatest air power. So for this reason, we believe that the Straits of Malacca and of Singapore should not be made a cold war problem or a power conflict problem, but largely a problem of communications.”
“In other words, while Singapore stands for unimpeded passage of all ships of all nations through the Straits, it also feels that those who use it must, in turn, agree to observe certain rules and regulations to ensure safety, security, and avoid risks of collision in the Straits. With this end in view, the three countries held discussions in November last year and agreed to establish a body composed of their representatives to coordinate efforts for the safety of navigation. The three countries agreed that the problems of safety of navigation and the question of the so-called internationalisation of the Straits are two separate issues. Indonesia and Malaysia were of the view that the Straits of Malacca and of Singapore are not international straits, while recognising the use of the Straits for international shipping in accordance with the principle of innocent passage. Singapore, however, could not go any further than to take note of the views of our two neighbours. The reason is that, in Singapore's view, the status of the Straits of Malacca and of Singapore should not be considered in isolation but in conjunction with the status of some 114 straits scattered throughout the world and which are considered vital links in international sea communications. These straits are spread over all continents and adjoin many countries, such as Canada, Denmark, United Kingdom, United States, the U.S.S.R., Japan, China, Australia, New Zealand, and many others. We feel that it would be premature to settle the status of the Straits of Malacca one way or the other without reaching agreement on the other 113 such straits which are considered by the U.N, to be of international importance.”
“I do not need to draw the attention of the Member, if he had been reading the papers recently, that we are coming close to a cold war over the Straits of Malacca, and by that I mean that there are incipient murmurs of such a possibility. This will be tragic, since, as a result of the detente between China and the United States, the prospects of running down the old cold war in Indochina and in South-east Asia are generally better than they bad been for many years. Therefore, it will be tragic if we start a new cold war in our region. As Singapore sees it, the Straits of Malacca and of Singapore is a vital lane for sea communications and trade between Europe, Africa and Western Asia on the one hand, and the Far East on the other. 4.45 p.m. We believe that this lane should be freely accessible to all nations without discrimination. It has been used as an international waterway for centuries and has become a major artery of the network of international communications and trade. To do anything or to say anything to disrupt this is to disrupt international communications and trade seriously. But Singapore, together with Indonesia and Malaysia, are concerned with some of the problems affecting our national interests which have arisen as a result of increased traffic through the Straits. There is need to ensure safety of navigation, to avoid danger of collisions as a result of larger vessels and increased traffic. There is also the danger of oil and other forms of pollution, which can have disastrous consequences for the three countries bordering the Straits. There are also problems of security arising from naval rivalry of big powers.”
“As regards the question by the Member for Anson about establishing diplomatic ties with the People's Republic of China, I have stated on many occasions that, in principle, since we have recognised and supported China's admission to the United Nations we must, sooner or later, have other forms of relation with them. But we are an island-state situated in South-east Asia. We have many neighbours whose interests and views must be considered should we want to enter into negotiations to establish a diplomatic mission in the People's Republic of China. And as some Members here may be aware, the members of ASEAN have discussed this matter and there is general agreement that before any member of ASEAN enters into diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China, he must consult the body and co-ordinate his action. The Straits of Malacca and of Singapore is a topical issue at the moment, but it is not necessarily the be-all and end-all of the issue. It is imperative that the Straits of Malacca and of Singapore should not become the catalyst for a new cold war. It could well become one, if the discussion and approach to this issue and the problems connected with it were discussed in terms inviting cold war postures by countries within or outside the region. Once such postures and attitudes are taken then it becomes, as it always does, an intractable cold war issue. Then rational solutions which are now open to us to resolve some of the real problems connected with the Straits may be closed, if not forever, then at least for a long time. The real problems could well be lost sight of, once the question of the Straits of Malacca and of Singapore is befogged by cold war considerations.”
“Programme as part of our cultural activities with ASEAN. A number of countries participated jointly in the ASEAN Pavilion at the 1971 Jakarta Fair, which is part of a joint effort to promote trade and commerce among member-countries. In regard to civil aviation, four project-teams of aviation experts visited the ASEAN capitals to survey operational and airport facilities available in each country, with a view to co-ordinating such services among member-countries so that each country can provide a better service for air traffic operations within the region. We have training courses, workshops and seminars relating to a variety of subjects, such as seminars on production and fisheries. Apart from these benefits, there are 11 Permanent Committees, all of which continue to exchange information relevant to their fields. During the year a number of them consolidated their activities by establishing clearing houses for collection, processing and dissemination of information and publications. We have also requested a United Nations Study Team to make a study and to report on the fields of trade and industrial co-operation, monetary and financial co-operation, forestry and forest industry, agriculture and shipping. The final report of this U.N. Study Team is expected to be ready sometime at the end of this month. Apart from all this, there have been the granting of scholarships under the ASEAN scheme and, as far as Singapore is concerned, there are a number of ASEAN scholars studying in Singapore. For example, there are 15 in the University of Singapore, eight in Nan-yang University and 74 Pre-University students. These are some of the activities, not very dramatic, but obviously progress is being made and this is a bit better than making no progress at all.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I must say that I am always very glad to listen to speeches from the Member for Sembawang, because his estimation of my capability is higher than that of my own. This is rather reassuring! In regard to his question as to how many embassies we now have in the different countries, there are at present seven Ambassadors and five High Commissioners in Commonwealth countries, one Permanent Representative in the United Nations, and one High Commissioner in Hong Kong. As regards whether we have any plans to set up new embassies or missions, we have set up an embassy in Brussels, and there is a consulate in Medan. As far as I know, we have no other plans to set up any more missions, unless there is the need for it. As the Member probably knows, we do not set up missions or embassies for the sake of prestige but only where there is a clear need, either political or economical, or otherwise, to set up such mission. As I have said in the past, sometimes you are able to promote the best of relations with other countries without having to set up embassies or missions in them. The other question which the Member asked was what benefits have we derived from being a member of ASEAN. ASEAN has been undertaking a number of projects during the past year for the mutual benefit of member-countries, but these are mainly in the field of tourism. In fact, a number of activities were conducted as part of the "Visit ASEAN Year of 1971". We have conducted trade seminars in Auckland, Sydney and Perth, for the tourist industry there. There was the Visit ASEAN Year commemorative stamps. Then also there was the ASEAN Film Festival held last year. The competition was organised to select an ASEAN musical team to introduce joint-ASEAN Radio and T.V.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, under the Factories Ordinance, every registered medical practitioner who is called to visit a patient who, in his opinion, may be suffering from any industrial disease is required to report to the Chief Inspector of Factories. He must state the particulars about the ailment which the patient is suffering from. He is entitled to a fee of $5 for each notice, payable from public funds. Since the number of these reports cannot be projected, we have only a token sum of $10. If we do not have enough funds, as was the case last year when there were 13 such notices of industrial diseases, we can find the money elsewhere. We have just put in a token amount here so that we can vary it as the circumstances demand.”
“Sir, as far as I can gather, compensation is paid out of this vote. It seems to me that the accidents are not particularly serious. The amounts of claims vary between $100 and $200. Except for one claim of $6,000, the others are small amounts. I suppose the standards of precaution in Government departments are considerably higher than those found elsewhere.”
“Sir, the Member for Katong is correct in assuming that the vote of $27,000 under this subhead is in respect of claims against various Government departments. I am not quite sure whether I can give any details of the nature of these accidents or who was at fault, because I do not have the data with me. But I can say that altogether some 36 claims were made against various Government departments and about $31,000 was paid as compensation. I would also like to take this opportunity to enlighten the House on the question of the revision of the Workmen's Compensation Ordinance which was raised earlier. The revision is almost completely processed, and is just waiting for certain formalities. It is the intention of the Government to revise the compensation upward by roughly three times the present amount. For example, in the case of an injured worker below 40 years of age, the present maximum lump sum compensation of $7,200 will, I think, be raised to well over $21,000. So if Government employees continue to get involved in accidents, the provision of $27,000 may be much more at the next budget session.”
“I will take note of what the Member says and tell the officials to say, "Well, don't see your M.P.!"”
“So if you press the Registrar to make a decision now, you do it at your own risk." Some of them never believed me and sure enough when they pressed for a reply - the officer had to make a decision - he was forced to make a decision and under existing policy it must be "no". So this is the advice I give and Members should give to their constituents, that where no decision has been made, it is best to let sleeping dogs lie and do not force the officials concerned at the moment because the policy is a clear one. But if the applicant is going to be an economic liability, the answer is no. An hon. Member: No news is good news! Mr Rajaratnam: Yes, no news is good news. This briefly sets out the Government policy in regard to the granting of citizenship. There has been no change in policy and we are not going to change it until we are satisfied that during the next one or two years, the British withdrawal and other factors are not going to create serious economic difficulties which will involve our citizens first. Once we are sure of that, we may be prepared to make some adjustments to our current policy in regard to citizenship.”
“The over-riding principle is whether he will be an economic burden to Singapore. If today a man is a hawker and is just able to provide for himself and his family, that does not mean that a year from now he will not constitute an economic burden to the state. But if we are convinced that this man will, on a reasonable assumption, continue to provide for himself, and all members of his family are Singapore citizens, then his case will be sympathetically considered. I know of a number of cases where favourable consideration was given to one member of the family who for one reason or other could not be a Singapore citizen. In reply to the Member for Telok Blangah who wants to know how many applications for citizenship have been approved or rejected, I cannot say offhand, but if he will write in, we can provide the necessary statistics. May I give Members the advice that I give to members of my constituency? I get lots of people who, for one reason or other, come to see me about citizenship. I give them one very sound piece of advice which has been referred to as criticism of the Ministry. Lots of people have made applications and they get this ritualistic reply saying, "It is under active consideration." The people come to me saying, "I have been under consideration for the last two years." I tell them, "I can give you a note to the Registrar of Citizens asking him to look into your case, but the chances are that if you press him to make a decision now, he must reject it under the existing policy. The fact that it is under consideration means that if, at some future time, for a variety of reasons, we find that we can let in more non-citizens, then, if you are still under consideration, maybe you will be among those who will be able to g-et in.”
“A point that has repeatedly been made is that if a person is a non-citizen, he is starving. I say that any non-citizen, and especially those who hold blue identity cards, can get work permits to work in Singapore today. Unless the man is incapable of work or cannot contribute in any way to the economic well-being of Singapore, he can get work. Therefore, to that extent, even if he is a non-citizen, he can earn a living if he is prepared to take the kind of work that is offered to him. Therefore, that point raised is not a cogent reason for opening the doors to citizenship. If it were only to a few hundred cases, we would have said, "Open the doors and change our policy." But it involves tens of thousands. Regarding the specific cases that have been mentioned - there were so many of them - I am always loath to make judgments purely on the presentation of the case from one side. I have been a newspaper man. I know how to write stories which are factually correct but which are not true. So a case may be right, or it may be wrong. I would not like to make a pronouncement unless and until those Members who have given the instances refer them to me or to the Minister of State for Labour, and we will look into them. 6.45 p.m. It may be that the Members are right, in which event we will give these cases consideration. It may be that most of the stories related in this House are not correct, in which case the applications will have to be rejected. A number of the cases no doubt conform to the principle of our policy, that where all members of the family are Singapore citizens but one who, for one reason or other, missed the boat but who will not be a burden to Singapore, his application will be given sympathetic consideration.”
“But it is a choice we have to make. Let me say that the policy has never changed. We never said that we were going to change the policy. But in the implementation of the policy, as far as is possible, we do make adjustments and exercise discretion, but it must not infringe the basic principle that we enunciate, that the applicant for citizenship does not constitute a burden to Singapore. I think it was the Member for Mountbatten who said that in case of doubt, give the applicant the benefit of the doubt and therefore create more citizens. We are not prepared to treat citizenship in such a light-hearted fashion where we give the benefit of the doubt to not one or two but tens of thousands.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this is one of those items in the budget where I have to repeat what I said during the last two years. I am quite-reconciled to this ritual because I do not think I am going to convince Members of my point of view. There is no doubt that I will remain unconvinced as regards their points of view. However, let me say that we are well aware that the rigid application of our citizenship laws does cause hardships. But there are many laws and a law is a general principle applied to specific situations and invariably there are individual cases which do not fit into the general structure. Ask any lawyer, and he will tell you that there are no other ways of formulating laws. Sir, in the case of citizenship laws, we have to balance one principle against the other. If I may repeat what I have repeatedly said, Singapore is a small island and we have serious economic problems affecting two million people, and until we are quite convinced that we can cope with and satisfy and protect the interests of our citizens first, we are not going to open our doors to citizenship for whatever reasons (some of them are no doubt cogent) for -- I cannot give the exact figures - but probably they are in the region of 20,000 to 30,000 cases. This problem will cease to exist as the years go on, because this is a problem which resulted from our separation from Malaysia, and is one of the consequences we have to accept. The principle always is that if we grant citizenship to a non-citizen, the primary consideration must be and will be: is it in the interest of Singapore? Will he constitute a burden to Singapore? Because if you make an exception in the case of one, you must be prepared to make an exception for the others. It is an unfortunate and difficult matter.”