Vivian Balakrishnan
Singapore
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not issue advisories on wait times at overseas airports. Travellers may wish to monitor airline and airport websites, as well as news reports for real-time information on wait times and potential disruptions at specific airports.”
“When the conflict in the Middle East deteriorated and commercial flights were halted in March 2026, the Singapore Government mounted four repatriation flights from Muscat, Riyadh and Jeddah to bring stranded Singaporeans home.”
“The Government has stepped up public engagement to explain our foreign policy fundamentals and responses to key international developments to Singaporeans and to hear their views. We do this through dialogue sessions across segments of society, including students, youths, businesses and community leaders.”
“And the larger point during the Committee of Supply was that precisely, because the world is in such a difficult, prickly, volatile and dangerous state, actually, if we keep our wits about ourselves, we maintain unity and we continue to have this clear eye-realistic, but principled, approach, there are many opportunities for Singapore.”
“Well, in short, I completely agree with you. And that is why we have indeed been hosting these events and in your own capacity as a national athlete and also as an official now, you have seen how it works in practice.”
“Since 2022, about half of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) employees are women. The proportion of women in senior appointments has remained stable at about a quarter. We recognise that overseas postings are disruptive for officers with families, especially female officers who bear greater caregiving responsibilities.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,437 lines we hold for Vivian Balakrishnan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 17 of 49.
“The answer to the first question is that we are in touch with the Bangladesh government. Again, at the UN meeting last week – in fact, there were several side meetings as well – my sense is that there are commitments for additional humanitarian assistance by various countries, including, as the Member quite rightly said, the US. But my concern goes beyond just humanitarian assistance. You actually need a long-term solution. And a long-term solution is a political solution. In addition to that, you also want to have deterrence from future bouts of violence. That is why having Independent Commissions of Inquiry and holding people accountable are important. The Member's second question on our support for UNHCR, we are one of the countries that make voluntary contributions. We have raised our contributions in 2016. But I do not want to over inflate the importance of that. We will do our part and we will work with UNHCR.”
“Singapore is not currently a Council member on UNHRC. So, these decisions, we are not party to. The unfortunate fact is that the Myanmar government does not recognise or accept the decisions, in particular, with respect to this particular situation. For instance, the Fact-Finding Mission did not have any cooperation from Myanmar. So, all the accounts which are contained in the report are based on interviews conducted with refugees outside Myanmar. My approach to this is to be practical. That is why we focus on the fact that Myanmar herself has appointed an Independent Commission of Inquiry. In this Independent Commission are two foreigners – one, a Filipino ambassador and another one from Japan. Both of them have reputations for being fiercely independent. As of now, we are waiting for the Independent Commission to begin its work, submit its report, and we will listen with great interest, particularly to the two independent members of the Commission. I think we have to be practical and we have to look for every opportunity in which not to inflame the situation, but nevertheless, can hold people who are responsible fully accountable. So, let us wait and see.”
“We also urged the government of Myanmar to step up its implementation of all the recommendations of the Kofi Annan Advisory Commission on Rakhine State, because the root causes of this conflict need to be addressed. And a conducive environment needs to be created so that all affected communities can rebuild their lives. You need circumstances in which there are opportunities for reconciliation for assurances of justice and equality and, ultimately, for better prospects for all communities. Otherwise, this long-term intercommunal complex situation will fester. And if this festers, it will create more opportunities for extremism and, ultimately, terrorism, which will not respect boundaries, and will represent a clear and present threat throughout Southeast Asia and beyond. In the meantime, the refugees in Bangladesh deserve and need assistance. Members will recall that, in fact, last year, we had sent a consignment of assistance to the refugees in Bangladesh. Depending on assessment of their future needs, we may have to do so again. In the meantime, I know that the private sector and people sector organisations within Singapore are also sending appropriate assistance to Bangladesh. I want to emphasise that, ultimately, the responsibility for resolving this must lie with the government of Myanmar; and this is a responsibility that we will hold them to account. And they do need to do the right thing and to do the right thing for all the vulnerable, defenceless and innocent victims. It is also a salutary warning to all of us in Southeast Asia. Race, language and religion are live issues and can always be exploited for short-term political gains. But an unfair share of the burden and of the injuries are sustained by defenceless people.”
“Thank you. The United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council (UNHRC) appointed a fact-finding mission in March last year. This fact-finding mission on Myanmar published its full Report on 18 September. This Report contained harrowing accounts of brutal and shocking atrocities committed in the Rakhine State that led to an outflow of refugees to Bangladesh. I just returned from New York yesterday. On 29 September, we had an Informal Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Foreign Ministers' meeting. In fact, because this topic was so sensitive, we convened a smaller group consisting of only the Ministers. We expressed our grave concern with these alleged acts of violence that had led to loss of lives, injuries, destructions of homes and displacement of large numbers of people. And to be brutally honest, this is a man-made humanitarian disaster and something which should not be happening in this day and age. The Foreign Ministers urged the Myanmar government that since the Myanmar government has appointed an Independent Commission of Inquiry, that this Independent Commission of Inquiry should be given a full mandate to investigate, and to hold all those responsible fully accountable. We also called on both Myanmar and Bangladesh which have, in fact, signed an agreement in November last year that they should provide for the voluntary, safe and dignified return of refugees. But to date, not a single refugee has returned under the aegis of that agreement. So, we emphasised that a key milestone now must surely be the start or the commencement of a repatriation of refugees to Myanmar. So, we are going to have to wait and see and hope that this will begin shortly.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will take Question Nos 3, 4 and 5 together?”
“We will continue to keep our channels with DPRK open, while fully complying with the UN Security Council Resolutions. We encourage DPRK to continue engaging with the international community through multilateral fora. We hope that all parties involved will continue the dialogue and efforts towards establishing lasting peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.”
“The ARF is a constructive platform for participants to promote confidence-building and preventive diplomacy in the region. It is currently the only ASEAN-led platform that DPRK is a member of, and we hope that their continued participation in the ARF would contribute to efforts in resolving the situation on the Korean Peninsula. The Singapore Summit has also helped broaden our relations with DPRK. Prime Minister Lee met Chairman Kim on the sidelines of the Summit, where the two leaders exchanged views on Singapore-DPRK relations, as well as developments in DPRK and on the Korean Peninsula. I also visited Pyongyang in the lead-up to the Summit, at the invitation of Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho. During my visit, I called on the President of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly Kim Yong Nam, and met Foreign Minister Ri. We had wide-ranging and frank discussions on bilateral relations, developments on the Korean Peninsula and global issues. I continued my discussion on these issues when I hosted Foreign Minister Ri on his visit to Singapore last week, in conjunction with his participation in the ARF. These engagements with DPRK have increased the mutual understanding between our two countries. At the same time, notwithstanding the positive developments on the Korean Peninsula in recent months, the reality is that United Nations Security Council sanctions on DPRK remain in place. All UN member states, including Singapore, are obligated to implement the UN Security Council Resolutions. We take our international obligations seriously and remain committed to fully implementing the sanctions. We look forward to concrete progress towards the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula, which would create an environment for the easing of sanctions.”
“I would like to take this opportunity to thank all members of Team Singapore who made this Summit possible. I am also grateful to all Singaporeans for your understanding and patience during the Summit. Let me now address the question on Singapore's role in the dialogue between the US and DPRK. We were not involved in the direct bilateral discussions between the US and DPRK that led to the signing of the Joint Statement between the two leaders in Singapore. Neither are we party to the ongoing discussions between the US, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), China, Russia and DPRK. Singapore welcomes the Joint Statement at the Singapore Summit, which is an important step forward, and we wish the US and DPRK success in implementing it. Of course, we are aware that the Summit is only the first step in a long and difficult peace process. We hope that the US and DPRK will continue to engage in dialogue and make efforts towards peace, building on the agreement forged during the Singapore Summit. The ASEAN Foreign Ministers have also issued a statement welcoming the successful conclusion of the Summit. Although Singapore is not party to the ongoing negotiations on the Korean Peninsula, anything that happens on the Peninsula will affect the rest of the region, including Singapore. It is in our collective interest to see a peaceful, stable and denuclearised Korean Peninsula, and we will continue to support efforts to these ends. What are some of these efforts? On our part, we encourage the DPRK's engagement with the international community, such as through participation in multilateral fora. One of these is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum (ARF), which was just held in Singapore over the last weekend on 4 August 2018.”
“Singapore acceded to the request by the United States (US) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) to host the Summit between US President Donald Trump and DPRK State Affairs Commission Chairman Kim Jong Un on 12 June 2018. We did so in order to facilitate peace and stability in the Korean Peninsula. Before I address the role of Singapore in future developments on the Korean Peninsula, allow me to highlight two key features of the Summit that resonated with some of the key attributes of Singapore. First, the choice of Singapore as the venue of the Summit reaffirmed our reputation as an impartial, reliable and safe country. We did not put our hand up or volunteer to host the Summit, but we were pleased to provide a conducive and secure venue which had the full confidence of both parties. The US and DPRK have publicly stated that they selected Singapore as host because we are politically neutral. Singaporeans can take pride in this expression of trust and confidence in us. We should continue to uphold our reputation as a credible, trusted and consistent partner that is able to play a constructive role on the international stage. Second, hosting the Summit highlighted the importance of a whole-of-Government effort. While the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) was the lead coordinating agency, an undertaking of this scale and nature is not something that MFA can do alone. We worked closely with other Ministries and agencies, including the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI), amongst others, to organise the Summit. The various agencies had to deal with the major security and logistical challenges, as well as facilitating the large global media presence.”
“These sums incurred are on top of the RM320 million – S$208 million at 1990 rates – that we paid to Johor in 1990, as compensation for the land used for the Linggiu Reservoir project and for the potential loss of revenue from logging activities, and as a one-time payment for the lease of that land for the remaining tenure of the 1962 Water Agreement. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore and Malaysia will always be closely intertwined and interdependent. We are committed to engaging and cooperating with the new Malaysian government. But we must work with each other on the basis that both sides will fully respect the sanctity of international agreements, and that any disputes will be resolved peacefully in accordance with international law. Provided this condition is met, I am confident that our bilateral relations will prosper, for the mutual benefit of citizens of both countries.”
“Hence, in 2002, then-Prime Minister Dr Mahathir, in his first incarnation, said that Malaysia did not ask for a review when it was due as Malaysia knew that any revision would also affect the price of treated water sold by Singapore to Malaysia. The then-Johor State Assembly Speaker Zainalabidin Mohd Zain also said, and I quote: "There was no point in [pressing for a review of the water price in 1986] because Johor was dependent on Singapore for its treated water supply, and Singapore would have also increased its price of treated water sold to Johor". The reason why I am taking pains to recite all these to Members is to make the point that Malaysia took a conscious decision not to review the price when they had the opportunity to do so. And this is why, in fact, even to this date, Johor buys more treated water than it is entitled to, strictly under the 1962 Water Agreement. These additional supplies of treated water that we have been selling to Johor, at Johor's request, are sold at the same rate stipulated by the 1962 Water Agreement. This sale is made on a goodwill basis, and without prejudice to our rights under the 1962 Water Agreement. In addition, if in 1987, Malaysia had exercised the right to review the price of water, Singapore would have made quite different investment decisions on developing the Johor River and its water catchment areas. One example of this is the Linggiu Reservoir. In 1990, PUB and Johor signed an agreement to construct the Linggiu Dam to increase the yield of the Johor River in order to enable reliable abstraction of PUB's full entitlement of 250 million gallons (mgd) of water per day. Johor owns the Linggiu Dam, but Singapore paid for its construction and continues to pay for its operation.”
“Any breach of the 1962 Water Agreement would call into question the Separation Agreement, and Members would remember that the Separation Agreement is the basis for Singapore's very existence as an independent sovereign state. Singapore will fully honour the terms of the 1962 Water Agreement, including the price of water that is stipulated in that agreement, and we expect Malaysia to do so. Members will recall that then-Foreign Minister Prof S Jayakumar and then-Foreign Minister K Shanmugam had stated our position on this issue comprehensively on 25 January 2003 and on 6 March 2014, respectively. Their key points remain as valid today as when they were first articulated. As was stated then, the core issue is "not how much we pay, but how any price revision is decided upon". It is worth reiterating this point. The core issue is "not how much we pay, but how any price revision is decided upon". Neither Malaysia nor Singapore can unilaterally change the terms of agreement between our two countries. Malaysia lost its right to review the price of water under the 1962 Water Agreement in 1987. Again, this is not a new point. We have made this point publicly on multiple occasions. In fact, Malaysia has previously acknowledged that they themselves chose not to ask for a review in 1987 because they benefited from the pricing arrangement under the 1962 Water Agreement. Johor currently buys treated water from Singapore at 50 Malaysian sen per 1,000 gallons. This price and, in fact, even the volume, are provided for under the 1962 Water Agreement. Members of this House will know that 50 Malaysian sen per 1,000 gallons is a fraction of the true cost of treating the water.”
“In recent weeks, however, Members would have seen a range of news reports and quotes from Malaysian leaders about the Malaysian government’s position on HSR. These include announcements that a “final decision” had been made to terminate the project, subject to discussions with Singapore, and yet other statements that the project has been "postponed" or "deferred". We have sent the Malaysian government a Third Person Note (TPN) requesting clarification of Malaysia’s position. However, the Malaysian government has not yet replied to our TPN. In the meantime, Singapore is continuing to incur costs on this project as we continue to meet our obligations under the bilateral agreement, whilst awaiting Malaysia’s clarification. We look forward to a prompt official response to our TPN from the Malaysian government. Should Malaysia cause the HSR project to be terminated, we will deal with the question of compensation from Malaysia for costs incurred in accordance with the bilateral agreement and with international law. I am sure Members of this House will agree with me that the Singapore Government has a duty to safeguard public funds by recovering these costs. This brings me to the third bilateral issue, the price of raw water imported by Singapore from Malaysia under the 1962 Water Agreement, a fundamental agreement. Let me reiterate Singapore’s clear and consistent position. We have stated this publicly many times before, including in this very Chamber, and our position is well-known to everyone, including to Malaysia. The 1962 Water Agreement is not an ordinary agreement. The 1962 Water Agreement was guaranteed by both Malaysia and Singapore. This guarantee is in the 1965 Separation Agreement, which, in turn, was registered with the United Nations.”
“We have also informed the Malaysian government that it can avail itself of due legal processes through our Courts to establish ownership and recover any assets seized in Singapore that can be traced to 1MDB. Second, the HSR. Members have asked several questions on this, and the Minister for Transport, Minister for National Development and Minister for Finance will all address them in detail. But here, I just want to emphasise that the crux of the issue is the sanctity of international law and agreements. I am heartened to note Malaysian Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng's comments on another project that his Ministry had undertaken with a foreign commercial party. He said that should the foreign commercial party not adhere to the terms of the agreement within the specified period, his Ministry would be entitled to take certain actions. To quote Mr Lim: "I think we should look at the agreement. We are bound by the agreement". So, the point is, Minister Lim Guan Eng, himself, recognises the importance of maintaining the sanctity of agreements. When Malaysia proposed the HSR in 2013, Singapore studied the proposal carefully, all the more so because of its very large financial commitments. Subsequently, after due diligence and study, we agreed to pursue the HSR because we were convinced of its benefits to Singapore and Singaporeans. We signed the legally binding HSR Bilateral Agreement in 2016 in good faith, after both sides had carefully, painstakingly, meticulously negotiated and agreed to all the provisions, including those pertaining to the implementation of the project, as well as those dealing with the eventuality that the project is terminated.”
“Members will recall that Singapore has, in fact, been thoroughly investigating 1MDB-related offences that were committed in Singapore since 2015. We have taken firm action against both institutions and individuals who have broken our laws, including pursuing criminal prosecutions. We have shut down two banks and levied fines on other banks for regulatory breaches, and we have jailed and fined individuals who have been convicted on 1MDB-related charges. So far, we are the only jurisdiction in the world to have done so. We have, in addition, cooperated fully with Malaysia’s official requests for information on 1MDB-related transactions. We received numerous requests for information from Malaysian authorities between March 2015 and August 2016. We responded to each and every single request fully. We have also proactively provided the Malaysian authorities with additional information on 1MDB-related fund flows on multiple occasions. In total, we provided 1MDB-related information in over 30 exchanges with Malaysia during the period, as was, indeed, acknowledged by Malaysia. Further, since the change of government in Malaysia, over the past few months, Singaporean and Malaysian agencies have met on several occasions on 1MDB matters. In fact, the Malaysian authorities have expressed appreciation to Singapore for our cooperation. We took these investigations and enforcement and regulatory actions not for political calculations, but because it is in our own enlightened national interest to reaffirm and protect Singapore's reputation as a clean, transparent and trusted international financial centre. We do not tolerate the misuse of our financial system as a refuge or conduit for illicit funds. We will continue to assist the Malaysian government in its own investigations.”
“The second principle is that any disputes – here, I must add – in the nature of all relationships, from time to time, disputes will arise, but the principle is that these disputes, if and when they arise, should be resolved in accordance with international law. The recent Pedra Branca cases are illustrative of this principle. The previous Malaysian government had requested the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to revise its original 2008 judgment, and separately to interpret the 2008 ICJ judgment. On the Singapore side, we were confident of the correctness of the original 2008 ICJ judgment, and we were confident of our case. We were fully prepared to argue our case at the ICJ. However, the new Malaysian government requested to discontinue their applications to the ICJ. We agreed. The key point is that both sides followed due legal processes, handled this issue in accordance with international law, and put the matter to rest amicably, as it should be. The third principle is that we must uphold Singapore's reputation as a credible, trusted and consistent partner, a country that abides fully by our international obligations. This reputation for Singapore, developed over decades, is crucial for our political and economic space, is crucial for Singapore and Singaporeans, and all the more crucial because we are an international financial centre. These are three fundamental principles that undergird the way we conduct diplomacy and the way we deal with foreign policy issues as and when they arise. With these in mind, let me turn to the three current specific bilateral issues. First, 1MDB. Malaysia’s investigations into this issue have intensified following their general election.”
“But Members may have heard or read various reports on the new Malaysian government’s investigations into the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB)-linked financial flows, Members may have heard of their intentions to cancel or postpone the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High Speed Rail (HSR) Project, and some Members would also have heard – in fact, I think all of us would have heard – of their expressions to revise the price of water sold to Singapore under the 1962 Water Agreement. I think it is quite appropriate that Members of this House, citizens of Singapore, would be wondering about these issues, and wondering, as Mr Christopher de Souza has said, how they will affect our bilateral ties. Before I address these specific issues, I want to highlight three fundamental principles of Singapore’s foreign policy that are especially salient for our relationship with Malaysia. First, upholding international law and respecting the sanctity of international agreements. This is a critical principle for a small state like Singapore. Our very existence as a sovereign independent state is derived from the Separation Agreement of 1965. International agreements, solemnly entered into by countries, are sacrosanct and underpin relationships between sovereign states. They make it possible for countries to co-exist peacefully, build trust and work together for the long-term good of our citizens, regardless of changes of governments or circumstances. The alternative, in which countries can unilaterally revise or abandon terms of agreements, is manifestly a recipe for disaster.”
“Mr Speaker, Malaysia will always remain our closest neighbour. This is a geographical fact. Our long-term relationship will always be bound by the ties of kinship, culture, history and economic interdependence. Following Malaysia's 14th General Election (GE14) on 9 May 2018, the country's ruling coalition changed. We will, of course, work with the elected government of the day. A stable and prosperous Malaysia is good for Singapore and for our region. We have generally enjoyed a positive and constructive relationship with successive Malaysian governments and leaders, and we believe there is still much for us to achieve together. There has been a high tempo of bilateral exchanges since GE14 in Malaysia. Prime Minister Lee and I visited Malaysia on 19 May 2018. We had a good meeting with Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Dr Mahathir updated us on his immediate domestic preoccupations. Prime Minister Lee emphasised that Singapore wanted to continue cooperating with Malaysia for mutual benefit and that we hoped to keep up our bilateral exchanges, including the annual Leaders’ Retreat. We have also invited the new Malaysian leaders to visit Singapore. Several of their Ministers have visited Singapore recently, including Defence Minister Mohamad Sabu who was here for the Shangri-La Dialogue in June 2018, the Communications and Multimedia Minister Gobind Singh Deo for the Smart Nation conference on 7 June 2018, and Housing and Local Government Minister Zuraida Kamaruddin who made a working visit earlier this month. I look forward to welcoming my counterpart Foreign Minister Saifuddin Abdullah at the end of this month for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Ministerial Meetings.”
“The SCP's capacity-building programmes aim to reinforce Singapore’s relevance and role as a responsible member of the international community. MFA will improve the delivery of consular support to overseas Singaporeans through innovative technology and outreach initiatives. We will step up engagement of Singaporeans both at home and abroad to help support our diplomacy. This includes combating deliberate falsehoods from external parties that seek to influence Singapore’s domestic and foreign policy decisions. Amidst an uncertain external environment, MFA is closely monitoring potential threats to regional peace and stability, including trade wars, terrorism and the situation on the Korean Peninsula. MFA will continue to expand our diplomatic, political and economic space, and work with other Ministries as part of a whole-of-Government effort to preserve and advance our interests in a fast-changing and unpredictable world.”
“We will also deepen people-to-people links through educational, cultural and youth exchanges. With Indonesia, we will promote closer economic links, including through investments, skills training, tourism and the digital economy. We will explore new areas of cooperation with Indonesia’s regions. Promoting free trade and regional economic integration remains an important part of MFA’s work. Amidst rising protectionism, we will work with like-minded partners in international groupings, such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Group of 20 (G20), and Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), to maintain a rules-based and open multilateral order. We will push for progress on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the European Union-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (FTA), as well as for negotiations with the Eurasian Economic Union. We will enhance relations in emerging markets. This year, the 3rd Singapore-Sub-Saharan Africa High-Level Ministerial Exchange Visit will focus on building partnerships in smart city development. With South Asia, we will deepen economic engagement after the signing of the Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement in January 2018. We will continue to deepen our economic links with Latin America, including through FTA negotiations with the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur. We will also maintain a consistent position in upholding international law and supporting the peaceful resolution of disputes. We will continue to develop the Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP) as a showcase of Singapore’s wide range of expertise, including good governance, aviation and port management, and liveable and smart cities.”
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs' (MFA's) mission is to safeguard Singapore’s Independence and expand overseas opportunities for Singaporeans. As the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Chair this year, Singapore will focus on strengthening ASEAN’s collective resilience and promoting innovation. Our Chairmanship will emphasise the importance of ASEAN’s unity and centrality in the evolving regional architecture. A key initiative is the ASEAN Smart Cities Network to promote ASEAN’s connectivity and attractiveness as an investment destination, and to improve the livelihood of ASEAN citizens. We will also enhance ASEAN’s cooperation in areas, such as cybersecurity, counterterrorism and people-to-people linkages. We will continue to deepen engagement with regional and key powers for Singapore’s long-term security and prosperity; cultivate a wide network of international friends; play a constructive role in multilateral fora; and expand Singapore’s mindshare and value proposition on the international stage. With China, our cooperation is deep, long-standing and substantive. Besides building on the existing bilateral mechanisms and three Government-to-Government projects, we will pursue cooperation on a wide range of areas, including the Belt and Road Initiative. With the United States (US), we will build on our long-standing relationship that is underpinned by robust defence and security cooperation, as well as deep economic linkages. Relations with our immediate neighbours remain of utmost importance. With Malaysia, connectivity projects like the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High Speed Rail and the Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit System Link will give both sides a greater stake in each other’s success.”
“There is a North Korean embassy in Singapore. I personally have not met the Ambassador. North Korea also attends our ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) meeting. But our approach, as I have explained earlier, is to just fully comply with UNSC Resolutions. That is our regulatory and our enforcement approach. Let me paint the larger dimension behind North Korea. If North Korea effectively nuclearises, quite apart from the dynamics with the US, the other consequential effects are what it means for South Korea and Japan, and whether they will also take the view that they need to have their own deterrence. Again, to use the Cold War analogy, when you have two superpowers working on deterrence based on mutually assured destruction, well, we survived. But can you imagine a Northeast Asia, which, as Mr Low Thia Khiang will know, unfortunately, historical wounds not fully healed, and all of them nuclear-armed and all promising mutually assured destruction, I think it is a very dangerous situation. So, as I said, we do not have a say, but we will comply with all UNSC Resolutions.”
“In terms of style, we will continue to adopt a quiet, friendly but firm style of diplomacy. We will be honest, competent, reliable and constructive partners. Most of all, diplomacy begins at home. Our foreign policy rests on a domestic consensus on our national interests. I will continue to work with all Members in this House to reach out to Singaporeans to build a deeper appreciation of the fundamental truths, the hard truths, that underpin our foreign policy, and to develop a shared national instinct against external attempts to pressure, influence or divide us. [Applause.]”
“I also want to thank Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Cedric Foo for their questions on MFA officers and resources. I think Members have noticed that MFA is the Ministry with the smallest budget. It is okay, I am not asking for more. I am actually very proud to have some of the most talented and dedicated officers. Over the years, MFA has worked on a rigorous selection system and an equally rigorous nurturing system. This includes even bringing in mid-career entrants with the relevant skillsets and experience. It is up to us to optimise our limited resources to provide our officers with continuous training. But I think, most of all, what really motivates our officers is that sense of meaning and significance that they are advancing Singapore's interests, protecting sovereignty, expanding opportunities for businesses, looking after Singaporeans who get into trouble. And that is especially for our consular services, which, for most Singaporeans, is the public or human face of MFA. I would like to add that the MFA families pay a very heavy price – the trailing spouse who has to compromise his or her career; the children of MFA diplomats who are deprived of a Singaporean childhood. We should bear in mind that this is a family enterprise. What I have tried to do in my time there is to give credit and to emphasise family, and to tell my officers that they never need to be embarrassed about saying that they need to do something or that they need to take some time out because they need to address family needs. I am sure you would all agree. 7.15 pm Let me conclude by saying we must maintain a realistic view of the world as it is, not as we hope it to be. We have to seek the right balance, promote regional unity and pursue global economic opportunities wherever these arise.”
“We hope that the recent talks between the Republic of Korea (ROK) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) will help them arrive at a peaceful resolution and, ultimately, we hope that there will be a denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula. How we in Singapore weather external shocks boils down to our domestic resilience and unity. I think it was Mr Sitoh Yih Pin who asked about domestic support for foreign policy. So have the Members of Parliament (MPs) from the Workers' Party. Ms Joan Pereira asked about our public diplomacy efforts. Members' questions are really centred on whether we can maintain domestic support and unity for our foreign policy. That is why I said I am grateful that there is bipartisan support in this Chamber. International issues will increasingly be dragged into the domestic discourse. Our open, multiracial and multi-religious society gives many opportunities for foreign actors who are trying to test our resolve or even undermine our unity. Singaporeans must be well-informed not only about the multitude and diversity of views but must also appreciate the corresponding tradeoffs that we have to weigh up. Singaporeans also have to be discerning towards "fake news" and not allow ourselves to be distracted and divided. I wanted to quote our former President Dr Tony Tan at the S Rajaratnam Lecture last year. He said that when someone sends you a message, take some time, reflect on the message, and ask yourself what it really means. Think carefully about who stands to benefit from the proposed message and whether it is in Singapore's own national interest. On this front, MFA has been stepping up its outreach to Singaporeans at various levels. And we do need strong and informed support from the public because foreign policy begins at home.”
“Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong will be going to Australia later this month. Our close friendship with Australia is underpinned by shared historical experiences and shared strategic perspectives. We elevated our ties with Australia to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2015, and implementation is well on track. One point I would just highlight is that no other country provides as much space for us to train in as Australia. When you go there, it is multiple times the size of Singapore. Mr Low Thia Khiang mentioned the emerging importance of India. India's population will exceed that of China, I think, by 2024. And unlike China, India remains young. India hosted an ASEAN-India Commemorative Summit in New Delhi in January, which the Prime Minister attended. We have made good progress on the India-Singapore Strategic Partnership, particularly in smart cities and defence. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to deliver the keynote address at the Shangri-La Dialogue in June this year. We look forward to discussing ways to further expand our bilateral ties. Senior Minister of State Mohamad Maliki will give Members more details. Let me conclude by saying that our diplomatic relations are in good order, and Members would have noticed, I have been more relaxed last year than in the previous year. But we need to stay alert to known unknowns and unknown unknowns or "wild cards". What are these known unknowns? The tensions on the Korean Peninsula. Singapore has been implementing the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions fully and faithfully.”
“And this CIA is a unique long-standing arrangement that has brought economic benefits for both Brunei and Singapore. It has lowered business costs and allowed us to interoperate. Prime Minister Lee attended the Sultan's Golden Jubilee celebration last October, which is another occasion to reaffirm our close relationship. Members may have heard that Brunei had a Cabinet reshuffle recently. We are familiar with many of the new Ministers because we have had regular exchanges over the years. And we are looking forward to working with the new team to further take our special relationship to new heights. We continue to foster close ties among the younger generation of Bruneian and Singapore leaders through the annual Young Leaders' Programme, led by His Royal Highness Crown Prince Billah and Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean. There were some questions on relationships with other key partners – Japan, Australia and India. With Japan, our relations are close and multifaceted. Last month, we hosted Foreign Minister Taro Kono. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam visited Japan in February, and the Prime Minister will be there in June. We are elevating cooperation in traditional sectors like trade and connectivity and also examining emerging areas like science and technology. They have the Japan Society 5.0 vision which is very similar to our Smart Nation effort, and because of their lead with technology, we are looking at this as another platform for cooperation. And both of us are ageing societies and that is another common challenge. We will have to see how we can reorganise our societies and use technology to deal with this. Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull made an official visit in June 2017 for the 2nd Annual Leaders' Summit.”
“Singapore remained Indonesia's top foreign investor in 2017, with realised investments at US$8.4 billion. We are each other’s second biggest source of tourists. The recently launched joint venture in Central Java, the Kendal Industrial Park, is doing well. Thirty-six companies have committed as tenants, with investments valued at over S$600 million, and with the potential to create 5,000 jobs. We are also working with Indonesia on a digital industry cluster in Batam and to participate in the tech startup ecosystem in Jakarta which, by the way, has quite a thriving digital scene. We also continue to work closely to strengthen counterterrorism efforts. And since I used to be the Environment Minister, I need to say that we appreciate the concerted efforts of President Joko Widodo and the provincial leaders to manage the haze situation. This year, it is better. We are committed to working with Indonesia to tackle this transboundary issue. I just visited Jakarta last month, had a good series of meetings with my counterpart Ibu Retno Marsudi and other Indonesian leaders across the political spectrum. There is consensus across the board that the Singapore-Indonesia partnership is valuable and brings mutual benefits, and so long as we can continue this positive tenor, we can manage the inevitable differences which still remain. Overall, we believe in the "Prosper Thy Neighbour" policy. We want Malaysia and Indonesia especially to succeed – good for us, good for the region. Brunei is a close and special friend. We celebrated the 50th Anniversary of the Currency Interchangeability Agreement (CIA) in July 2017, during the fourth State Visit of His Majesty the Sultan.”
“We also signed the Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit System (RTS) Link Bilateral Agreement. The RTS Link, when completed in 2024, will dramatically change the way hundreds of thousands of travellers who shuttle between Johor Bahru and Singapore each day. Then, we also have the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High Speed Rail which is also progressing well. The tender for the Assets Company was called last December. It will close in June. The results of the tender will be announced in about a year's time and will be conducted in a fair, open and transparent manner. Such long-term strategic projects enhance our interdependence, give us all a greater stake in each other's success and demonstrate the tangible benefits of stable and positive ties. There have been questions even about Pedra Branca at the International Court of Justice. Let me just put it very simply. We will not let this issue define or derail our relationship. The most important point is this, that when we have a difference, we seek peaceful resolution according to international law. I should say or should remind Members that Malaysia will soon hold its General Election. Again, we know from past history that every time election rhetoric heats up, sometimes, Singapore becomes part of the political fodder. On our part, we must ensure that we do not get drawn into their domestic politics, nor will we allow the import of foreign countries' politics into Singapore. With Indonesia, our bilateral cooperation remains deep and multifaceted. Last year, Singapore and Indonesia commemorated "RISING50" – the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations. We have been working to enhance economic linkages in digital economy, tourism and skills training.”
“Members would also know that we just signed an FTA with Sri Lanka last month. There are some complexities involved with the EU-Singapore FTA that we are sorting out. It has been signed and it is just a question of ratification. Singapore is an associate member of the Pacific Alliance, which consists of Chile, Columbia, Mexico and Peru. Mercosur is also looking at exploring an FTA with Singapore as a step, ultimately, perhaps to a regional agreement between Mercosur and ASEAN. I have been in this business long enough to know that when I used to go to South America 10 or 15 years ago, they were not interested in FTAs with us or with ASEAN. Yet, the mood has changed. The tide has changed. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim asked about our immediate neighbours. So, let me report, first, Malaysia and Indonesia. We know these are our closest neighbours, of utmost importance. And with the right spirit of cooperation, we embark on win-win initiatives, strengthen bilateral ties and allow our companies to tap on the dynamic Malaysian and Indonesian economies. But you know as well as I do, our relations will always be complex, and issues will surface from time to time. When they do, again, have a sense of perspective. Do not let a single issue derail the overall relationship. With Malaysia, we have continued to set new milestones recently. At the 8th Singapore-Malaysia Leaders' Retreat in January, Prime Minister Lee and Prime Minister Najib Razak officiated the opening of the Marina One and DUO joint venture developments, which have a combined Gross Development Value of S$11 billion. Members will remember that these projects came about as sequelae to the settlement of the Points of Agreement on the Malaysian Railways (KTM) land.”
“I have been told that, so far, that plan had 609 measures and 536 of them have been implemented. But without getting into the fine print, the point is that AEC is an attempt to enable our companies to better access ASEAN's dynamic market of more than 600 million people where, as I have said earlier, 60% are below the age of 35 and there is enormous investment opportunity. Fundamentally, I am glad that we do not argue about this in Singapore because, in Singapore, trade is our lifeline. No other state has a trading volume that is three-and-a-half times its GDP. It is trade that allows our companies to expand beyond our small market and to create jobs for Singaporeans. Although I have said that global consensus is eroding, the outlook is actually not so bleak. For instance, the 11 remaining parties of the TPP have concluded talks and, on 8 March, in Chile, Minister Lim Hng Kiang will have to make a long journey to sign the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for TPP (CPTPP). Frankly, this exceeded my expectations. However, even with just 11 members because the US has pulled out, it still represents about 500 million people, and a $10 trillion-dollar economy collectively. We will continue to leave the door open for the US. We will wait and see. 7.00 pm In the meantime, we also hope to make substantive progress this year on RCEP. This RCEP comprises 10 ASEAN members and the six dialogue partners with whom we have existing FTAs, that means, India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. Some people have asked us if CPTPP and RCEP are two rival blocs or rival agreements. I say no. As far as Singapore is concerned, these are complementary building blocks because what we envisage ultimately is a Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific.”
“There will always, from time to time, be an issue that tests our fundamental principles and our ability to make a positive contribution. Another area that we are focused on right now is the ASEAN-China relationship. We are reaching the end of our third year of our coordinatorship of the ASEAN-China Dialogue relationship. In these three years, we have been able to strengthen the relationship despite the challenges, and it will culminate with 2018 designated as the "ASEAN-China Year of Innovation". This year, 2018, marks the 15th Anniversary of the ASEAN-China Strategic Partnership, which we will commemorate with a statement on the ASEAN-China Strategic Partnership Vision 2030. This sets a roadmap for the future of the strategic partnership. ASEAN and China will also commence negotiations on the Code of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea this year. This is a significant milestone. It will serve, we hope, to reinforce the rules-based regional order. And as ASEAN-China coordinator, we will continue to be an honest broker. We will work closely with all sides to narrow the differences. I cannot promise it will be delivered soon because of the complexities involved. Ms Sun Xueling asked about economic integration and free trade. Actually, free trade all over the world is unfairly blamed for the economic problems that, in fact, are the result of technological disruption. We believe – and we have been discussing it during the Budget Debate – that the answer is not to build walls or to retreat from global competition. We believe we have to double down on restructuring our economies, upgrading the skills of our people, supporting innovation and pursuing business opportunities globally. This is why the AEC is important. This was launched in 2015.”
“Secondly, if this problem is not resolved properly, we will end up creating yet another flashpoint, yet another sanctuary for extremists and terrorists, and it will become another transboundary threat. So, in our own quiet, behind-the-scenes way, we have to try to make a positive difference. ASEAN agreed to mobilise the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance (AHA) to deliver assistance to the affected communities in Myanmar and, when we delivered it, we insisted that it should be delivered without discrimination. All communities who need help should receive our help. To date, the AHA Centre has delivered at least two loads of relief supplies worth US$500,000 to the Myanmar government. We have also deployed an ASEAN Emergency Response and Assessment Team to assist in the humanitarian relief efforts. We had an ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Retreat last month. Myanmar gave us a briefing, and we urged Myanmar to continue implementing the recommendations made by the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State which was led by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. We encouraged the expeditious commencement of the voluntary return of the refugees. But it has to be done in a safe, secure and dignified way, without undue delay. Frankly, these are easier said than done when you consider what has already transpired on the ground. We have also emphasised that the responsibility for resolving this complex problem ultimately rests with Myanmar and the stakeholders within Myanmar. Singapore and ASEAN will continue to do our part by encouraging all partners to work towards a long-term and comprehensive political solution, and to create a conducive environment for affected communities to rebuild their lives. So, this is an example.”
“So, I take the Member's point that we do need to fly the flag more and to make our people appreciate how important ASEAN is to us. Our Chairmanship themes for this year are “resilience” and “innovation”. It expresses our hopes for ASEAN to meet future challenges, particularly to deal with emerging issues like digital disruption. After all, this is what we are also doing at the local level. How do we deal with the digital revolution? In fact, this is an opportunity for us to do more with our fellow ASEAN members. One key initiative is the ASEAN Smart Cities Network. We envisage it as a platform for ASEAN cities to share best practices, urban solutions, new technologies. But I think the most important thing is we are looking for interoperability, whether you are talking about e-payment systems, ASEAN single trade windows, facilitation of travel, facilitation of even the ASEAN self-certification regime in order to make it easier to export goods and services. We want to do all these because, in fact, there is tremendous potential for intra-ASEAN trade. Someone asked about the model ASEAN Extradition Treaty. Negotiations are not over yet but making good progress. As ASEAN Chair, we will have to work hard to maximise our common ground and keep ASEAN united. Let me also tell Members very honestly that it will be difficult. For instance, some Members ‒ I think it was Mr Louis Ng and Mr Christopher de Souza ‒ asked about the situation in Rakhine state. Members are familiar that one of the founding principles of ASEAN is non-interference in domestic affairs. So, we cannot directly intervene. But I would say this is a humanitarian disaster of the highest order.”
“Our Chairmanship of ASEAN is an important opportunity for us, in our own small way, to make a positive contribution to a substantive and forward-looking agenda. Ms Sylvia Lim mentioned her concern that, according to a survey, only 13% of Singaporeans expressed interest in ASEAN. I share her concern. But my own take is that I think we take it for granted. After 50 years, we have taken it for granted that there is no war in Southeast Asia, that we transact with one another, have mutual interdependence, investments, trade. When we have disputes, we go to the international courts and we resolve disputes according to international laws. That is at the political level. Actually, if you look at the people level and you ask yourselves, tourism numbers – Singaporeans are great travellers and ASEAN is our immediate neighbourhood. Huge numbers of Singaporeans travel to ASEAN. If you look at schools and you ask the schools about school trips, lots of trips. On service learning, the Singapore International Foundation (SIF) volunteers, even when you look at both formal and informal volunteer groups and what our students and young people do in the more rural areas, even in Indochina. If you ask our businesses what their investments are across Malaysia and Indonesia, actually, if you do a proper catalogue, I think we are fully invested in ASEAN. It is just that, I think, we take it for granted. But I take the Member's point. We need to raise the flag of ASEAN more. I am always intrigued that if you go to any ASEAN member state embassy, you will see us flying two flags ‒ our own national flag and our ASEAN flag. But you do not often see the ASEAN flag in Singapore.”
“The alternative, if we did not have ASEAN, is to become a bunch of vassal states operating on the principle of “might is right” and being an arena for proxy wars. I think Mr Low Thia Khiang also mentioned that yesterday. Therefore, ASEAN is a cornerstone of our foreign policy. We will work to strengthen the ASEAN-led regional architecture by working with our ASEAN member states and our dialogue partners. Our dialogue partners have proposed various regional initiatives. For instance, I mentioned the B&R Initiative just now. More recently, Members may have heard the US, Japan and India talking about a Free and Open Indo-Pacific. Without getting into the details, I would just like to share with Members how I view all these proposals. I basically ask three questions. First question: whatever the proposal is, whatever the label is, what does your proposal mean for ASEAN Centrality and unity? In other words, will these initiatives keep ASEAN at the core of the regional architecture of Southeast Asia, or will they, wittingly or unwittingly, pull ASEAN apart and force us to choose sides? That is my first question. Second question: whatever the plan or initiative is, does it facilitate trade, investment, infrastructure and connectivity? Clearly, an economic agenda, because ASEAN has got such growth potential in the next two to three decades. Trade, investment, infrastructure and connectivity are a strategy. Third question: whatever the initiative, does it support a world order based on international law? And for us, in particular, because we are a port, an island, a city-state, the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is sacrosanct.”
“I say this because you need to look for deeper trends beyond the headlines and the personalities. But the point we make is that the US has had a headstart here. The US has enormous investments in Southeast Asia; the US has significant reservoirs of goodwill. It is theirs to lose, even as they sort out their domestic political questions. For us, because of our close relationship with both the US and China, clearly, we hope that there will be a stable US-China relationship because, if they maintain the peace, there will be peace, stability and prosperity in the Asia Pacific. We enjoy good relations with both. We want, and, in fact, are well-suited to be part of the common circle of friends. Remember my earlier point about not being forced to choose sides. So, we must anticipate that there will be an element of competition between the US and China. But the big difference from, say, the Cold War, is that the US and China are highly interdependent in a way which was never present in the relationship between the Soviet Union and the US. So, we hope that both sides will see that there is too much to lose by confrontation and conflict. We, of course, view a trade war with great concern. We have seen some early salvos, for instance, the tariffs that the US is imposing on solar panels, even washing machines. The target was China and Korea. But because Singapore also makes solar panels, we also become collateral damage. This illustrates the danger of a full-blown trade war. Let me turn to ASEAN. It has always been a cornerstone for peace and prosperity in our region. ASEAN unity enlarges our strategic and economic space, amplifies our voices on the international stage, and promotes an open and rules-based inclusive regional architecture.”
“US exports to Singapore and Singapore investments in the US support over 250,000 American jobs. This is a statistic we shared with President Trump to make the point that he has real skin in the game in Southeast Asia and, especially in Singapore. Singapore is the second largest Asian investor in the US, second after Japan, and Asia’s No 1 buyer of US commercial property. And, I think, these are investments. Last month’s Singapore Airshow showcased our strong defence and economic cooperation. The US fielded the largest foreign delegation with 170 exhibitors. US aerospace exports to Singapore totalled almost US$5 billion in 2016. These deep economic linkages have given Singapore access to US markets and US technology and allowed Singaporeans to learn with and from the best in the US, including the academic and research institutes. Prime Minister Lee's visit to Washington last October reinforced these fundamentals. President Trump described Singapore as one of the US’ “closest strategic partners in Asia”. President Trump has accepted Prime Minister Lee's invitation to visit Singapore later this year. We look forward to receiving him. There have been questions about the US' commitment to the liberal world order and free trade as we know it. One statistic which I think Members of the House should be aware of is that, in 1960, the US GDP was 40% of global GDP. In 2017, although the US GDP has grown, as a proportion, it has shrunk to 25% of the global GDP. 6.45 pm The reason for giving Members these statistics is to make you all appreciate that it is a completely legitimate political exercise within domestic US politics to ask why they should unilaterally underwrite the global world order as we have known it for the past 70 years when their share is shrinking.”
“We are working together to connect the overland Silk Road Economic Belt with the Maritime Silk Road through a new "Southern Transport Corridor" which links Chongqing in western China, to Beibu Gulf in Guangxi. Our businesses can expand into western China through Chongqing, just as Chinese companies can use Singapore as a gateway into Southeast Asia. This creates a "mutual hub effect", which benefits businesses and people. And, as I said, by interconnecting the overland Silk Road with the Maritime Silk Road, it still maintains Singapore as a hub. Let me turn to the US. The US is a long-standing, close strategic partner. We have had mutually beneficial relations over the last 52 years. Defence ties form the backbone of the bilateral relationship. Let me give a recent example. When Hurricane Harvey struck last year, we quickly deployed four Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) CH-47 Chinook helicopters and 34 of our own servicemen from a training detachment in Grand Prairie, Texas, to help with the relief efforts. RSAF was able to work seamlessly with their American counterparts because of the regular training between both sides. We have 1,000 SAF servicemen training in various detachments in Arizona, Idaho and Texas on the F15s, F16s, Chinooks and Apaches. No other foreign state has more troops on US soil. Our strong trade, investment and business ties with the US are underpinned by the 2004 US-Singapore FTA. In 2016, the US was the top foreign direct investor in Singapore, with investment stock worth S$281 billion. The US is Singapore's largest trading partner in services and the third largest trading partner in goods. Our total trade with the US stood at almost S$140 billion. There are over 4,200 US companies here, which help create good jobs for Singaporeans.”
“Currently, we are negotiating an upgrade to the China-Singapore FTA. This will further enhance market access for our companies and create more jobs for Singaporeans. Of course, we also want to see more Chinese companies accessing opportunities in Southeast Asia through Singapore. Our multifaceted cooperation is constantly evolving. Both sides have identified new areas for cooperation. We have the Joint Council for Bilateral Cooperation (JCBC), co-led by Deputy Prime Minister Teo. We have now identified finance, legal and judicial sectors. One example was the inaugural Singapore-China Legal and Judicial Roundtable held last year. These initiatives will complement the existing high-level fora on economic cooperation, social governance and leadership. All, again, are incidentally chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Teo. These extensive and high-level engagements between China and Singapore epitomise the long track record that builds trust and confidence. The B&R Initiative is another major opportunity of cooperation. When I visited China in June last year, Foreign Minister Wang Yi and I agreed to establish three platforms to deepen B&R cooperation: first, on infrastructural connectivity; second, on financial connectivity and support; and third, to look for opportunities for third-party collaboration, including joint training for officials from other B&R countries to work and to exploit opportunities that the B&R Initiative provides. The potential is huge. Singapore accounted for 85% of total inbound investments to China from B&R countries. And nearly one-third of China's outbound investments to B&R countries actually flow through Singapore. I did not quite believe these figures. I double-checked with my staff and they said yes, these figures are from China itself.”
“And, as Mr Low Thia Khiang said yesterday, as people with Chinese ancestry at a cultural level and emotional level, we must take pride and joy in that achievement. But we are also aware that we are not Chinese citizens and Singapore is the only political entity, the only state in the world, where Chinese are a majority, but we are not under the Communist Party of China. We have always consistently supported China's strategic economic development. This is clearly evident from our unique government-to-government projects: Suzhou Industrial Park, Tianjin Eco-city and, more recently, the Chongqing Demonstration Initiative. In fact, surprisingly, Singapore has been the largest foreign investor in China since 2013. Of course, our role will have to evolve because, unlike the past two-and-a-half decades when we were investing and we were moving concepts and ideas into China, today, China has become a net exporter of capital and technology. So, our role inevitably must evolve to keep up with the times. The other point that we must anticipate and must expect from time to time is that there will be issues of differences between Singapore and China. After all, we are two sovereign states with very different national circumstances. So, we must expect differences in perspectives and we must not get flustered even when pressured. This is to be expected. This is almost par for the course in international relations because you cannot expect two countries’ interests to be completely identical. It is no secret. I mean we have had some bumps along the way, but I would say these episodes over the last two-and-a-half years have helped both sides to understand each other’s position better. I think it has made for a more mature relationship.”
“What this means is that we do not wish to be forced to choose sides, nor to be caught in proxy battles. Fourth, we promote and we believe in a global rules-based order with international law and international norms. If you think about it, this is essential precisely because we are a small state. Fifth, we must be a reliable, credible and consistent partner. For us, we do not have the luxury of changing, flip-flopping, changing our views quickly over time, or saying different things to different partners. We need to be reliable, credible and consistent. I will start by addressing our relationships with the major powers. Mr Amrin Amin asked about our relationship with China. Many Members have also asked about US-China relations and their dynamics, and how that affects us. With China, our relations, our track record of cooperation are deep, long-standing and substantive. Last September, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong visited Beijing at China’s invitation. The timing was significant because it was just a couple of weeks before China's 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. We did not expect that they would have the bandwidth; nevertheless, they invited the Prime Minister. When the Prime Minister met President Xi Jinping, President Xi emphasised that Singapore and China had no fundamental disagreements, no conflicting interests and no differences on basic principles. I am quoting him and we will convey the exact words in Chinese words to the media later on. In fact, this is our own long-standing belief. We have always believed that a successful China, a stable China, is good for our region. The rise of China and the elevation of hundreds of millions of people from abject poverty to middle class is the biggest story of our lifetime.”
“A shift in the global centre of gravity towards Asia, and that, basically, as Mr Low says, is China, India and ASEAN itself. Second, the emergence of new technologies and the impact it will have on jobs, the economy and even attitudes to free trade. Third, an ageing population. The ageing population is especially an issue that confronts Singapore and China, and the fact that, in contrast, for ASEAN as a whole, 60% of ASEAN is below the age of 35. These three trends present us with both opportunities and threats. What we are trying to do is that as Asia grows, to make use of our unique identity, unique position and even our unique cultural arbitrage in order to ride on our region's growth and dynamism. But even as we do this, we must also be mindful that there are multiple transboundary pitfalls. For instance, protectionist nationalism is on the rise. Terrorism is a clear and present threat. In the midst of the digital revolution, cybersecurity breaches and “fake news” have eroded trust in institutions and divided societies. In fact, sometimes, they have even become a tool of foreign policy. Singapore’s foreign policy, given our unique position, has always been guided by five key principles. First, Singapore has to be successful and vibrant. If we are not successful, we are not relevant. As Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said a long time ago, the world will not miss us if we disappear as a small state. There is no irreplaceable function that a small state provides the rest of the world. Second, we must preserve our ability to make independent sovereign decisions based on our own national interests, and we must not become a vassal state. We are not for sale and we are not going to be easily intimidated. Third, Singapore aims to be a friend to all.”
“Mr Chairman, now, to discuss my day job in MFA. I want to thank all the Members for your very insightful contributions and comments. I want to commend Mr Low Thia Khiang, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Pritam Singh for your also very constructive comments. In fact, I listened to you very carefully and I could not find anything to disagree with you. And I am sure our foreign partners will notice that there is bipartisan support for our approach to foreign policy. Indeed, as a small open state, we need the bipartisan support. So, I am grateful for your constructive contributions and for the bipartisan support that we enjoy. There are at least three key political issues, if I could summarise. First, how do we manage our relations with the major powers, given the rapidly evolving geopolitical balance of power? The second set of issues is, as ASEAN Chairman, how do we strengthen ASEAN’s unity, centrality and value proposition, and value proposition not just for outsiders but including our own people? The third political issue is that Singapore is an open multiracial, multi-religious city-state, a sovereign country in the heart of Southeast Asia. How do we protect our unique identity, our domestic unity and our sovereignty from the inevitable foreign influence and, especially from the primordial pulls of ancestry, race, language and religion? And yet, as Mr Low Thia Khiang mentioned yesterday, this cultural arbitrage is also Singapore's competitive advantage. So, we need to be aware of all the opportunities as well as the challenges that confront us because of our unique position. 6.30 pm In his Budget Statement, the Minister for Finance identified three major transformations. Members have heard about them.”
“I was simply referring to the SingPass mobile app that will make use of the biometric feature on your smartphone.”
“Basically, we have a league table, and we assess everyone's website and tell them which ones do not work, which ones are not ready and so on and so forth. Minister Yaacob Ibrahim and Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary will further elaborate on the MCI's digital readiness initiatives. Let me conclude. The digital revolution can be either exhilarating or terrifying, or both. It all depends on whether we are ready. That is why we have embarked on Smart Nation. That is why we need to do so with a great sense of urgency. We need to ensure that there are good jobs and opportunities for all. The Government will continue investing in infrastructure, creating open platforms, sharing open data, facilitating skills upgrading and encouraging our businesses to adopt the latest technologies. And you have heard the Budget provisions for that. Ultimately, this has to be done with an even greater sense of urgency as a whole-of-Government, whole-of-society, whole-of-nation effort.”
“Ultimately, our National Digital Identity and e-payments systems need to be open for private sector, not only to just log on, but to actually build innovative new services on top of these platforms. GovTech will conduct regular industry briefings to share the Government’s strategic ICT plans and the pipeline of projects. We have this programme called Innoleap. This basically allows the Government to go to the private sector or to the research institutes, set out a problem statement and let the companies offer solutions based on their own expertise. We will work with research institutes. We also have a grant called the Translational Research and Development for Application to Smart Nation (TRANS) Grant. We have a need; you have a capability; you have a service. Give us your best offer. If it works, we use it; we pay you; we feed our own local ecosystem. We invite the public and industry to contribute more ideas, more solutions, novel solutions, especially through Ideas!, which is a whole-of-Government crowdsourcing portal. I agree with Mr Zaqy Mohamed, Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Saktiandi Supaat that we must push ahead with digital technology but, at the same time, we must make sure nobody gets left behind, regardless of age and background and, I am also inclined to say, linguistic ability and special needs. We need to make sure that all our projects are inclusive-by-design. After all, if you pick up any modern handphone today, they are multilingual by design. They have assistive technology by design. And I am going to push to make Government services adopt that same inclusive approach. We will also be raising the standards of Government digital content, basically checking our websites, portals and services to make sure they are state of the art.”
“We also work with our business associations to promote cybersecurity, because it is not enough for the Government to be secure, but businesses also need to adopt good cyber hygiene and to make that a business priority. And, of course, we should remember that citizens also have to play their part. Minister Yaacob Ibrahim will share more details on our national cybersecurity efforts later. At its core, the Smart Nation is more than just the deployment of technology but really must expand opportunities and improve the quality of life, enhance jobs and raise salaries. Dr Tan Wu Meng highlighted the impact on the economy and jobs creation. We know that automation, robotics, data analytics and additive manufacturing, or 3D printing, will certainly disrupt manufacturing and logistics chains. For a place like Singapore, a city, an entrepot, a port and airport, surely, these have profound implications on us. We risk becoming irrelevant if we do not transform our infrastructure, systems and skills quickly enough. To do this, we need to ensure that workers all across the segments, as well as our SMEs, are able to take advantage of digital tools and master new skills. Minister Yaacob Ibrahim and Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary will share more details on our TechSkills Accelerator and SME Go Digital programmes. As Ms Jessica Tan, Dr Tan Wu Meng, Mr Teo Ser Luck and Ms Tin Pei Ling have also highlighted quite rightly, the Government cannot build a Smart Nation alone, and we need to involve citizens and businesses. In this spirit, we are opening our national platforms. I gave the example earlier about MyInfo.”
“This clarity is to encourage safe data-sharing in order to enhance policymaking and improve service delivery, and to do so securely. Assistant Prof Mahdev Mohan made other points on the social, legal and ethical dimensions of digital technology and we will study these points carefully. These are valid concerns. For the private sector, the Personal Data Protection Commission is conducting ongoing public consultation to ensure that the laws of personal data protection remain relevant. Let me move on to resilience and cybersecurity. We must also build our Smart Nation on a reliable and secure foundation. Many Members have highlighted this – Ms Sun Xueling, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Ms Tin Pei Ling. Ms Sun and Ms Tin referred to the recent SingPass episode. Basically, what happened was that a software bug was introduced when they updated the two-factor authentication system within the SingPass server. That led to progressive slowness and eventually a crash. Unfortunately, this bug was in the backup system, too. That is why we had two crashes. GovTech is currently investigating the incident and will provide a more comprehensive update when it is completed. But I take the Members' point that, for essential platform technology, we cannot afford to get it wrong. The Government imposes stringent reliability and resilience requirements for all our critical ICT systems, and we adopt a "security-by-design" approach to building this infrastructure. We conduct regular and rigorous audits, and any findings are followed upon thoroughly. I think the staff in GovTech know that I am quite obsessive and I drill down to details, so I give the engineers a slightly hard time. But I think this tension is necessary.”
“It will allow parents, when they have a new baby, to register the baby's birth online, apply for Baby Bonus, view medical appointments and immunisation records and search and register interest for preschools. We will test this out for families with babies born in public hospitals first and then roll it out further. Additional services will be added over time. And if the concept works, we will look at other "Moments of Life". On Smart Urban Mobility, we are pursuing initiatives to use digital technologies to enhance comfort, convenience and reliability of our public transport systems and support our vision of a car-lite Singapore. The Ministry of Transport (MOT) will convey more later. Besides ensuring progress in these Strategic National Projects, we also need to get our approach to data sharing and protection and system resilience and cybersecurity right. Harnessing the power of data will be increasingly critical for the Government, businesses and citizens as well. Data, in a sense, is the new currency of the digital age. I share Assistant Prof Mahdev Mohan's concern that increased data sharing and data use have to be done in an environment where personal data and privacy are robustly protected. Hence, we have the Public Sector Governance Act which takes effect in April. It outlines a set of data-sharing practices for the Government, including using only non-identifiable information for policymaking and planning. Individual officers will be held accountable for safeguarding the information, and the Government will appoint trusted data custodians who will have central oversight over the anonymisation of datasets before they are shared across agencies.”