SECRETARY OF STATE'S MESSAGE

Mr Lim Yew Hock: Sir, I rise to move Motion No. 3 on the Order Paper in the name of the Chief Minister, namely,

That this House conveys to the Secretary of State an expression of warm appreciation for his message.

Sir, in this message of greetings and goodwill is an expression of regret that neither the Secretary of State nor any of his Ministerial Colleagues could be present in person to deliver the message. I feel sure, Sir, that all of us share that regret, because if the Secretary of State or one of his Ministerial Colleagues could be present with us that day, we would surely have taken the immediate opportunity afforded us to discuss the question of complete self-government.

Mr M. P. D. Nair (Seletar): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to second the motion moved by the Member for Havelock. While seconding this motion, I am deeply moved by the message of the Secretary of State when he said that it was with every confidence that he looked to the Assembly and the Council of Ministers to build and maintain a tradition of mature deliberation and of sound and impartial administration. Sir, I do hope and believe that all of us will take that message to our hearts, and will deliberate the various problems of this country with maturity and impartiality.

Question proposed.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, Sir, we are asked on this motion to associate ourselves with the Government to thank the Secretary of State for the Colonies for having sent us this message. Far be it from the People's Action Party not to observe the civilities and courtesies of life, but I think it is important that we should take this occasion to remind ourselves what we have to be grateful for. In his message he said,

"It gives me great pleasure to send a message of greetings and goodwill to the Legislative Assembly of Singapore on the historic occasion of its first meeting under the New Constitution. My only regret is that neither I nor any of my Ministerial Colleagues can be present in person to deliver it

I must first of all congratulate all those who have taken part in the working out of this New Constitution, the Committee under the Chairmanship of Sir George Rendel who now see the fulfilment of their labours and His Excellency the Governor and his officers who have devoted much time to framing and bringing the Constitution into operation. Secondly I want to express the satisfaction of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom at the successful completion of an important task which is signified by the convening of this Assembly today and our most sincere good wishes for the prosperity and happiness of Singapore in the New Era which is now opening.

It is with every confidence that I look to the Assembly and the Council of Ministers to build and maintain a tradition of mature deliberation and of sound and impartial administration. You will I am sure prove yourselves worthy of the high trust which has been reposed in you by the people of Singapore. Good luck to you all."

We join with the Chief Minister and the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Sir, in all these pious hopes, and we thank him for his good wishes, but we take exception when he says, "I must first of all congratulate all those who have taken part in the working out of this New Constitution, the Committee under the Chairmanship of Sir George Rendel". Sir, the authors of this constitution, with some exceptions, were not representatives of the people. Its Chairman was a man with a very distinguished career in the diplomatic service, amongst whose many achievements in life was a trip across Saudi Arabia at the invitation of King Ibn Saud. No doubt that gave him a sufficient understanding of our political and our economic problems, but the people of Singapore on 2nd April did not congratulate these men and they decisively showed, with one exception, that they would not have the authors of this phoney constitution. That one exception, Sir, is because the Member concerned is a man who is versatile, a man of many sides and many colours, a man who was agile at some later date to dissociate himself from some very spurious provisions of that recommendation.

An hon. Member: Shame!

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Shame indeed on him for not having had the courage to say then and there, "I sign a minority report."

Now, Sir, not so very many months ago an enterprising newspaper published a very elucidating article in which the new Member for Cairnhill, the Hon. the Chief Minister, said this constitution is out-moded even before it started, and if men of stature were asked to operate the constitution it would not work.

The Chief Minister: Correction. That is an inaccurate report of what was indicated. I said that men of stature, if elected, could conflict very sharply with the Official Ministers designated in that constitution. I did not say it was unworkable.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Very well, Sir. I am afraid I must apologise to the Hon. the Chief Minister for having so inaccurately summarised it; but be that as it may, what the Hon. the Chief Minister said then, and I hope he still believes it now, is that men of stature will find it difficult to work this constitution in opposition to the Official Ministers. Now, Sir, I think the People's Action Party is charitable enough to believe that there are men of stature on the Benches opposite, and we look forward with great anticipation, and even with some amusement, to the conflicts that will inevitably arise if there are men of stature. We in the People's Action Party believe that freedom is the inalienable right of any people anywhere in the world, and it is not for any retired diplomat who has travelled across Saudi Arabia or any colonial official to say that we are not fit to run; we are not fit to walk; we are not even fit to stand on our own feet. The people of Singapore - is it on a point of order, Sir? - I had hoped that there were men of stature opposite, but I might yet be mistaken in that pious hope.

We believe, Sir, that this country is fit now for full self-government, and, but for that useless, spineless lot that was supposed to represent the people of Singapore in that Constitutional Commission, we would not today find ourselves with the Governor's triumvirate, the men whom the Government has referred to as professional administrators - and no doubt they are capable and efficient. Finance, law, the police, the civil service - these are the three keys on which the whole system operates. The People's Action Party went before the electorate and said that we rejected this constitution in toto. We say this constitution is a sham. We say this constitution is colonialism in disguise. Only a few days ago an eminent supporter of the Government Benches, who was in Bandoeng, no doubt exhilarated by the high rarified mountain air in those parts, was moved to say that this constitution was nothing but a cloak for colonialism. Sir, I can only hope that his thoughts, the inspiration that he received in those parts, will not be altogether lost and that all the difficulties of booking air passages would have been worth-while when he returns and carries on the inspiration to his colleagues on the other side of the House. But we need not go to Bandoeng to understand that what the people want is freedom, above everything else. A very distinguished politician and diplomat once asked us whether, if the People's Action Party lost the elections, it would mean that the people did not believe in freedom, the people did not want freedom. We did not say that, that if that were so, the people did not want freedom. But it is quite clear that when the people on 2nd April decisively rejected those parties which were tinkering with the colonial system, those parties which were afraid of change, those parties which advocated orderly gradualism, they were swept out because the people would have none of them. And if they wanted to congratulate the framers of this constitution, as the Secretary of State for the Colonies wishes to congratulate them, I think the Chief Minister opposite and quite a number of his friends and colleagues would not be in this House.

Finally, Sir, no one in this House knows for how long this constitution will last. No one knows for how long this Assembly will last. But for as long as this Assembly lasts, let it never be forgotten that there are only 25 men here who can stand up and say "I speak for the people. I speak for the people of the constituency I represent"; that four men are here by leave and licence of His Excellency the Governor of Singapore; that they represent no one but themselves and their friends whom they are supposed to typify; and that the three professional administrators are in three pivotal positions. And we can only hope that there are men of stature in the Front Benches opposite who will prove that this constitution is not worth working and unworkable.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would therefore move that the motion to thank the Secretary of State for the Colonies be amended by the addition of the following words at the end of the message:

"save and except for that passage in his message where he congratulated all those who had taken part in the working out of the new Constitution, the Committee under the chairmanship of Sir George Rendel".

Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not a motion of no confidence in the Government. We fully endorse the Government's policy of civility and courtesy to all those who are civil and courteous to us, and it is necessary that we should return the felicitations that have been sent to us. But right across party politics, we must, on this first business meeting of this House, make a clear and categorical assertion that we do not accept this constitution as befitting the people of Singapore; that we do not say this is a constitution which should be given to free men in a free world; that this is Asia and we are part of that Asia which is asserting itself. Both the Government and the Opposition, or some parts of the Opposition - I expect some parts of the Opposition to be even more vehement than the Government Benches opposite in their defence of the Constitutional Commission - but apart from them, there should be agreement as the Chief Minister said six months ago, this constitution is out-moded; we do not thank the people who framed it; and that is the amendment I seek to move, and I hope the Chief Minister and his friends and colleagues are still of the opinion they were when they went before the electorate and said "This constitution is no good."

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim (Sembawang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to second the amendment.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be added, be there added."

The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is with very real regret that I note an attempt to make a political issue out of an act of courtesy. It is not, I respectfully submit, Sir, the appropriate moment and in so far as we have been attacked for moving that motion of thanks, which is the normal act of courtesy for greetings and good wishes received, I should like to make our position clear with reference to the particular passage envisaged by the Member for Tanjong Pagar (Mr Lee Kuan Yew).

Sir, as we have clearly indicated in our policy which will be debated in our motion of thanks to His Excellency's Address, the Government is of the view that the present constitution is inadequate, but it is not of the view that it is unworkable and never has been. There will be conflicts, Sir, there is no doubt about it, but the policy, the doctrine, of collective Ministerial responsibility will, I think, prevail in all circumstances, and make it workable where there is goodwill. Whatever the conflicts within the Ministerial ranks, it must be remembered that the people have the majority representation in the Council of Ministers, and the majority decision will prevail, and I am satisfied, with only the past fortnight's experience, that I will have the Official Ministers' loyal co-operation in this House, whatever the conflicts within the Council.

Sir, Sir George Rendel has been somewhat slightingly referred to. I can say that I view with amazement what has been achieved in view of the atmosphere of the times when certain so-called leaders of the people of this country advised him. Sir, but five months ago language was used in this House which I dare not have used myself and would never dream of using, language of so discourteous a character that I have no doubt you would not permit it, but which I trust you will permit me to read since it is from the records of our predecessors. On the 2nd of November, 1954, the President and leader of the then only existing political party of any standing, Mr C. C. Tan, made these remarks, Sir, in this Council Chamber:

"I do not think that anyone, except a few dishonest, self-seeking demagogues, will maintain that a period of another eight years will be too long to endure before we achieve self-government",

and it is my maligned colleague and friend the Member for Havelock (Mr Lim Yew Hock) who said, "Too long." Sir, in that atmosphere, with that advice, with the so-called leaders of this territory pleading, "Do not give us self-government. We do not want it. We are not ready for it, please."- it is in that atmosphere that Sir George Rendel and those who believe in freedom and democracy managed to achieve what Her Majesty has been graciously pleased to call a "significant advance" in our political development, and it is a significant advance.

Sir, with reference to this amendment which the Member for Tanjong Pagar has asked us to view on a non-political basis, I, as the Chief Minister, will not seek to use the Whip on voting - if voted on it must be - but I will say for myself that I consider the amendment discourteous, inappropriate and unfair.

Mr M. P. D. Nair: Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully sympathise with the mover of the amended motion, but I would like to say this: that nobody in this House who has the interests of the people of Singapore at heart would venture to suggest for a moment that the constitution suggested by the Rendel Commission is the most appropriate one for this country. I do believe that we are not considering that subject now. If the constitution suggested by Sir George Rendel has been faulty, I would say that it was not the fault of Sir George Rendel or the members of the committee; it was the fault of the people of Singapore.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Rubbish!

Mr M. P. D. Nair: For some time they have been apathetic towards the political problems facing this country. We had not mobilised our resources and organised political movements in the way that we should have, the fact being that the people have been organised into various political camps, which has enabled the Government to split hairs in the political scene. For example, we have a number of political parties here. They all have always the welfare of the people at heart. They all aim at one thing, but in different ways. If the whole political structure had been based on one ideology and thought, i.e. the political emancipation of this country, then I would say that we would have got a better constitution than the one which we have at the moment. On the one hand, we had the people divided into various parties, and a solid Government bloc on the other hand. The people divided themselves, and therefore we had to suffer the consequences. All we can do at the moment is to seek a better future, reorganize our political parties in the best possible way, and see that in the coming years we get a better constitution. It may be, as my colleague has suggested, that the constitution may break, but we will have another opportunity of holding general elections and put matters right.

Sir, in opposing this move, may I suggest that I have no intention of going into details of the whole message. What I am doing is to say a word of thanks for the message which the Secretary of State has sent in the normal courteous manner.

Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar): Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand now to speak against the amendment to the motion. We still believe that it is much too early for us to do anything except to try out the government which has now been so graciously entrusted to us. We have seen with our own eyes what is happening in this part of the world - in the territories that are not more than a few hundred miles from us - with all the disorder, disorganization, corruption and troubles which they are facing. Should we, gentlemen, go through that phase when everything has been promised to us? Our education is notably far from complete. Our system requires a lot of overhauling. Our technical training is very poor, and we still have very few people, local people, to man all those very important posts which will be open to us in a few years' time. It may not be eight years, it may be four, but let us take our time, learn our lesson, and do not run before we walk.

I am sure the House will join with me in rejecting this most unwelcome amendment.

Mr Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I should like to speak on the amendment. It is rather surprising, Sir, that so soon after the election we have again election speeches. I have just moved a very harmless motion, just a motion to convey an expression of warm appreciation for a message; and I even said in my speech just now, Sir, that I shared the regret that if the Rt. Hon. the Secretary of State or one of his Ministers could have been present with us at the official opening, we would have accepted that immediate opportunity to discuss immediate complete self-government. I made it rather clear, Sir.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Otherwise you would not?

Mr Lim Yew Hock: No. Otherwise, Sir, it would mean that we would have to go to the mountain. Sir, I find it difficult to reply to the, shall we say, odious remarks that have been hurled at the members of the Rendel Commission, because I was one, but I am here to say, Sir, the public knowing that I was one have returned me to this Assembly.

Mr G. A. P. Sutherland (Nominated): Mr Speaker, Sir, I had no idea that I should rise so early in the House, but I now do so because I am delighted to learn from the Member for Tanjong Pagar (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) that I only represent myself. So I think I have every right to say something.

I should like to remind the House of the conditions the British Prime Minister (Sir Anthony Eden) when he was Foreign Secretary laid down, I should say suggested, should be fulfilled before the Federation of Malaya attained self-government. They were, firstly, to suppress terrorism; secondly, to see that the people were on guard against Communist infiltration and aggression; thirdly, to develop a sound economy and administration and to achieve a durable accord between races; and, fourthly, to provide a secure system of defence.

Well, as I see it, the British Government, present and past, has been falling over backwards to give self-government to these territories, and in doing so, I feel that in retarding - what the Member for Tanjong Pagar regards as retarding - this progress I think they have been wise and far-seeing.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Shame!

Mr Sutherland: Speaking as a native of a country that has experienced seven centuries of freedom since Magna Carta, I thoroughly sympathise with the feelings of the Member for Tanjong Pagar, but I agree with the Member for Paya Lebar (Mr Lim Koon Teck) that the time is not yet ripe.

Mr John Ede (Tanglin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I had not intended to speak on this amendment which we cannot support, but I must express my regret that the Chief Minister has used discourteous, phrases towards his recent opponent in the constituency of Cairnhill. He himself expressed regret that the Member for Tanjong Pagar (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) had been discourteous in this House. Let us remember -

The Chief Minister: On a point of order, Sir. Is it proper for him to indulge in this personal attack on a Question of the motion before the House?

Mr John Ede: Sir, I do not think I was indulging in any personal attack.

Mr Speaker: I have been asked to rule on a point of order, whether anything that the Member for Tanglin (Mr John Ede) has said is a personal attack. I for one have not as yet discovered anything of that nature in the Member for Tanglin's speech, but if he does speak in that strain, of course I will have to rule him out of order. Please continue, Mr. Ede.

Mr John Ede: Sir, all I wish to say is, let us remember that the gentleman referred to was a member of the Constitutional Commission, and he helped to frame the new constitution which the Chief Minister himself has said is workable.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Speaker, Sir, we are now actually only trying to frame a message of thanks to the Colonial Secretary. We are not debating on any political issues. In effect, the Colonial Secretary has been correct in praising the people who sat on that Commission. Way back in 1947 or 1948 we started our election. If there are people who think that they are good enough to represent the people did not come out and allow the other people whom -

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: We are not good enough.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: - the people have trusted to come out and represent them, what grouse have they got in such a matter? Again we must see that credit must be given to those pioneers who are setting us up towards the road to independence. We cannot, at a jump, achieve what other nations have achieved after a long time, but we do not at the same time say that we are not fit for anything. I think it is the duty of Members of this House to see that we must get independence as fast as we can take it. I think it is important that we should give this constitution a fair trial, and as it becomes evident that we are able to take on more responsibilities, then we should so frame our constitution again in order to achieve the early aims of independence.

On the matter of colonialism, paternalism and all that, I believe that there are two forms of colonialism. We do not want both. Perhaps we are now trying to get rid of one, but we do not want the other type of colonialism. That is not only going to tie us physically, but will also tie us up spiritually. We detest that other form of colonialism.

On the matter of the leader of my Party, I believe that he has been a good man, a very reasonable man. If he had not been, he would not have been elected once, and again, and I believe that he was not far behind when the votes were counted. Such a man has given his service to this country for a long and continuous period, and I think credit must be given to him.

Hon. Members: Too long!

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: On a point of order, Sir. May I reply to the amendment?

Mr Speaker: There is no right of reply on an amendment.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be added, be there added."

The House divided: Ayes, 4; Noes, 24; Abstentions, 3. Ayes Noes Ahmad Bin Ibrahim. Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat. Goh Chew Chua. Braga, A. J. Lee Kuan Yew. Chew Swee Kee. Lim Ching Siong. Davies, E. J. Ede, John. Goh Tong Liang. Goode, W. A. C. Hart, T. M. Jumabhoy, J. M. Lazarous, A. R. Lee Choon Eng. Lim Choon Mong. Lim, R. C. H. Lim Koon Teck. Lim Yew Hock. Mak Pak Shee. Marshall, D. S. Mohd. Sidik Bin Haji Abdul Hamid. Nair, M. P. D. Seah Peng Chuan. Sutherland, G. A. P. Tan Theng Chiang. Thomas, Francis. Wong Foo Nam. Abstentions Jumabhoy, R. Lim Cher Kheng. Tan, William.

Question on the amendment accordingly negatived.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House conveys to the Secretary of State an expression of warm appreciation for his message.