COMPLAINTS CHOIR PROJECT

COMPLAINTS CHOIR PROJECT:

(Imposition of conditions on permit): 5.

Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) why was the conditional permit to the Complaints Choir prohibiting participation of foreigners in public performances granted only one day before the scheduled event; and (b) what was the reason for imposing conditions on the permit given that the Media Development Authority had already approved the lyrics.

The Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (Dr Lee Boon Yang): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Complaints Choir Project was started by two Finns to teach people all over the world to sing out their displeasures about the situation in their own countries. The Necessary Stage had applied to the Media Development Authority (MDA) for an arts entertainment licence to hold public performances of the Project throughout Singapore as part of the M1 Festival.

While we recognise this is an arts entertainment event, it is nevertheless an exposition about Singapore's domestic situation. For this reason, we decided to approve the application but on the condition that only Singapore citizens participate in the performances.

This is consistent with our position that Singapore laws and policies are an expression and a reflection of the values of our society and any public discourse in such matters should be reserved for Singaporeans alone. Foreigners, even if they are permanent residents, should not interfere.

On the licence application, MDA had received the full application from the organiser on 17th January 2008 for the choir performance to be held on 26th and 27th January 2008. As is publicised in MDA's website, such licence application should be made six weeks in advance of the hosting of an event. However, despite the late application, MDA accepted the application and tried to process it, as we recognised that the organiser could not furnish the lyrics of the song early enough. MDA only took slightly more than a week to process the application. Where applications for the other M1 Festival events were made early, MDA had cleared and given approval well ahead of their performance dates.

Mr Siew Kum Hong (Nominated Member): Sir, I have four supplementary questions:

(1) Last September, the Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs said, when responding to a Question that I had filed, "It is not as though that foreigners cannot make their comments or views known on Singapore's policies and laws." But he drew a distinction where it constituted interference in our domestic political scene. Does the Ministry have a different position from Home Affairs and, if not, in what way does MICA consider foreign members of the Complaints Choir Project to be interfering in our domestic political scene?

(2) Secondly, we ourselves frequently comment on matters in other countries. For example, this House debated the situation in Myanmar. Foreigners also write in the Forum pages, and we invite foreigners like Mr Peter Schwartz to speak publicly about the future of Singapore. How does that all reconcile with this case where foreigners were completely banned from singing in public about generic local affairs, with lyrics that have been approved by MDA no less?

(3) Third, I would like to ask the Minister whether in this age of Internet and YouTube, enforcing the policy in this manner still serves any purpose. After all, probably many more people saw the video online, than otherwise the case; and

(4) My last question relates to the timing of the approval that was given by MDA. I am told that initially the organisers were aware of the prohibition of foreigners participating in the Project only in relation to a planned performance at the Speakers' Corner. This obviously turned out to be different from the final situation where they were told that foreigners could not participate at all locations. So, I would just like to ask the Minister to clarify what exactly happened there.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think I need to comment on MHA's response to the Member in Parliament last September, other than to reiterate that it has been a consistent policy that we do not welcome or encourage foreigners to participate in domestic politics. Whether an event - be it an arts event, a forum or a dialogue - is construed as something that is interfering or participating in domestic politics, it is a matter of judgement in each and every case. It is up to the licensing authority, whether it is MHA (through the Public Entertainment and Licensing Unit) or MDA (through the Arts Licensing Unit) to consider whether this particular event should be allowed or not.

On our comments on other people's domestic affairs, I believe that we have a strong ground for making comments in those instances or in the rare instances where we made comments in line with what were international sentiments. We are, I would say, in very good company when we made such comments.

On the age of Internet, our effort is only to ensure that within Singapore, any such participation by foreigners in commenting on our domestic issues should be prevented, if possible. If they want to circulate materials on the Internet, we have always adopted a very light touch approach to anything that is on the Internet. It is not our intention to screen or to prevent Singaporeans from accessing any particular information. If they want to watch the Complaints Choir performance on the Internet, let it be so.

On the timing of the approval, as I have explained in my main answer, we tried to accommodate the Complaints Choir as soon as they were able to submit their entire lyrics. The lyrics themselves were not a problem or concern. It was more the participation of the foreigners. While it was also true that initially the reaction or the response of the licensing authority was that foreigners should not participate in such an event at the Speakers' Corner - because there is already an existing prohibition against any foreigners taking part in any activities at the Speakers' Corner - subsequent assessment resulted in the licence being issued on the basis that other performances in public places should also not be allowed. And we took some time over that because we had to consult other agencies. Unfortunately, the licence was then issued rather late in the day, but that was unavoidable. In the first instance, if they had submitted their full application with all the lyrics well ahead of time, we would have been able to advise them accordingly and they could have made alternative arrangement. That they submitted the full application with the lyrics late was a matter that was beyond MDA's control.

Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, I understand that the lyrics of this song were created through workshops with mainly Singaporeans, facilitated by the foreigners. I would like to ask whether the Ministry took into consideration this genesis process, the substance, tone and intention of the lyrics in this case, and how have all these factors influenced the decision.

The second question: are we extrapolating that in programmes on our national TV and radio, articles in local newspapers and content in the mass media, foreigners are prohibited from making comments regarding domestic policies?

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Mr Speaker, Sir, yes, we were aware that, apart from the foreigners, Singaporeans were involved through a series of workshops and discussions to come up with the lyrics. But our objection is not with the lyrics at all. In fact, Singaporeans are welcome and they are entitled to complain about anything and everything, and they regularly do and we have no objection, and they do not need a licence from MDA to make such complaints at all. So, our objection was really whether we should encourage foreigners to come in to lead Singaporeans, to organise Singaporeans to conduct such complaints in public. And we believe that that is not wise and not prudent over the long term. Although in this particular case the lyrics were not particularly objectionable, we felt that it ran contrary to our established principles that comments on domestic matters ought to be reserved for Singaporeans.

On other comments in the mass media, I think we have to be specific about the comments. Journalists do write comments about other situations. Journalists in Singapore and both outside do comment about us. But I do not think we can exercise that control over what journalists outside Singapore want to write about our domestic situation. Also, we should

not prevent anyone who wants to give a view about Singapore from doing so. But whether that particular view results in interference in the domestic politics or not is something that we have to judge on a case-by-case basis.