CONSTITUTIONAL TALKS IN LONDON, 1957

The Chief Minister (Mr Lim Yew Hock): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's consent to move, and I now hereby move, the motion standing in my name, namely,

That this Assembly-

(1) takes note of the Report of the Singapore Constitutional Conference held in London in March and April, 1957, as contained in Sessional Paper No. Misc. 2 of 1957, and approves the points on which agreement has been reached; and

(2) approves the stand of the All-Party Delegation in not accepting the condition stipulated in paragraph 30 of the Report.

Sir, in rising to move this motion, I want to make it clear that this is not a Government motion at all. The subject of this motion is not the product of the Government; it is the product of the united efforts of the All-Party Delegation, and I am moving this motion as leader of the delegation.

Sir, the man who blazed the trail for a constitutional advance is the Member for Cairnhill. It was he who mobilised the first campaign and led an All-Party Mission to London in April 1956. He fought hard and he fought vigorously for us, but it was a matter for regret that the mission did not succeed. Although the mission did not succeed, Sir, it had done at least one good thing, and we must not forget this; it opened the way for the next round, and the credit for this rightly goes to the Member for Cairnhill.

Sir, I took over office as Chief Minister in June last year and pledged to have another crack at the Colonial Office. Having been a member of the Marshall Mission, I had the advantage of personal knowledge of the way the fight went, and how and why it went wrong. With this advantage, I was able to plan, and plan early, the strategy that could give us a good chance of success.

When I was Minister for Labour and Welfare in the Marshall Government, I accepted an invitation to attend a conference in Oxford of Labour Ministers of colonial territories. This was held in June-July 1956; and when I took over the chief ministership, I decided that I should attend this conference, and I took the opportunity it afforded me to see the Secretary of State for the Colonies. I had two rounds of friendly sparring with him. I came away with the knowledge that the going then was still tough and that an early official bout was inadvisable. I went round meeting people and making plans.

I visited London again, Sir, in December, this time to fix a date for the Constitutional Talks, to draw up an agenda and to have preliminary and unofficial discussions with the Secretary of State. I took the opportunity it afforded me to meet more people and make further plans. This time, I returned to Singapore more hopeful of success in the forthcoming talks. But I did not allow this hope to blunt the strategy that I had already made up in my mind, and it was that I should strive for an All-Party unity which was to be the magnetic force to attract success.

The first step was to call an All-Party Conference. The first meeting was held on 7th February and altogether the conference met eight times. The conference drew up its blueprint and this was incorporated in a White Paper which was presented to this Assembly as Sessional Paper No. Misc. 1 of 1957. A special sitting of this Assembly was called for 5th March, when the blueprint of the All-Party Conference was debated, and it was heartening to the people of Singapore that this national issue received the unanimous support of the Assembly. Thus, Sir, there was unity of purpose in the Assembly; there was unity of purpose in the All-Party Conference; and what was left to be proved was unity in the All-Party Delegation that was entrusted with this mandate.

I left Singapore leading this delegation confident in this unity, and I am happy and proud to repeat in this Assembly that this wonderful unity in the delegation during the talks and, in fact, during our stay in London, was the source from which we derived our strength, and was responsible for the successful discharge of our mandate.

We went to London knowing what we had to do, and the unity in the delegation provided the means to do it. The Press communique that was released at the end of each session was all the news that we allowed to go through. There were no leakages and no sensational statements by any member in the delegation. We were convinced that this course of action was a necessary and wise one, but this should not be taken to mean that all was plain sailing in the conference chamber. It was certainly not so. The good ship "The State of Singapore" did encounter rough weather, but we did not flounder nor founder because our teamwork pulled us through.

And now, Sir, let us turn our attention to Sessional Paper No. Misc. 2 of 1957. This is a Report of the Constitutional Conference: let me repeat, this is a Report and not an agreement signed by both parties.

Mr Marshall: Look at paragraph 12.

The Chief Minister: This Report is self-explanatory and I do not propose to go into details. I will, however, touch upon one or two important aspects in my opening speech, and should there be any point on which hon. Members would like elucidation, the members of the All-Party Delegation would supply the information.

A study of this Report side by side with the mandate that was given to the All-Party Delegation at the sitting of the Assembly of 5th March will disclose that the mandate has been fully satisfied, except on two points.

The first point is paragraph 16 (i) of Sessional Paper No. Misc. 1 of 1957 which reads:

"That responsibility for the relations of the Singapore Government and the United Kingdom Government shall be transferred from the Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations."

Sir, the answer to this is to be found in paragraph 55 of the Report contained in Sessional Paper No. Misc. 2 of 1957, which reads:

"The Conference took note that the Singapore Delegation had expressed the desire in paragraph 16 of the Report of the All-Party Conference in Singapore, contained in Sessional Paper No. Misc. 1 of 1957 for the Legislative Assembly, that responsibility for relations between the Singapore Government and the United Kingdom Government should be transferred from the Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations. The Chairman explained that Her Majesty's Government understood the feelings which prompted this request, but that it was not possible under the present division of responsibilities between the two offices for Her Majesty's Government to agree that the affairs of Singapore should he transferred to the Commonwealth Relations Office."

From the explanation given to us, we can safely infer that some change in the division of responsibilities is afoot. Moreover, Sir, the decision of the All-Party Conference was that the All-Party Delegation should press for this demand, but not to make an issue of it. We have therefore discharged the trust.

The second point, Sir, is paragraph 13 (b) of Sessional Paper No. Misc. 1 of 1957, which reads:

"Government rates of pay and conditions of service to apply to such employees",

that is, civilian employees in the armed forces. Sir, the answer again is to be found in paragraph 2 of Appendix C to the Report, which reads:

"Her Majesty's Government indicated that they could not bind themselves to relate the rates of pay and other conditions of service of the employees of the Service Departments exclusively to those enjoyed by employees of the Singapore Government. In following the generality of 'good local employers' due account was always taken of the rates and other conditions in both the public and private sectors of employment."

Sir, this demand is not a constitutional issue at all but was included in order that the matter could be pressed in London with the Service Departments. It is clear from paragraph 11 of Sessional Paper No. Misc. 1 of 1957 that there is to be no change in the responsibilities of external defence and external affairs apart from the control of trade and cultural relations which should be vested in the Singapore Government. The Government, however, is interested in this matter and will render all possible assistance to the workers' organisations concerned.

Sir, I would like now to touch on paragraphs 52, 53 and 54 of the Report. These refer to the date of introduction of the new constitution. The view of the All-Party Delegation, as expressed in paragraph 54, correctly reflects the view of the Assembly as made known at its sitting on 5th March. The Government does not wish to hold office under the present constitution longer than is necessarily imposed by the desire of the Assembly to give every opportunity to all persons who will acquire citizenship rights to have a say in the choice of the new government under the new constitution.

Mr Marshall: You can do that this month.

The Chief Minister: The Government will do everything in its power to expedite the fulfilment of this desire.

Mr Marshall: The instalment plan!

The Chief Minister: And now I come to the second part of my motion, and that is:

"approves the stand of the All-Party Delegation in not accepting the condition stipulated in paragraph 30 of the Report."

Paragraph 30, Sir, clearly states the stand taken by the All-Party Delegation. We had no directive from our various Parties on this issue, nor had we a mandate from this Assembly, but as it was made clear to us that Her Majesty's Government intended to impose this condition unilaterally, and in exercise of the powers still vested in them, the All-Party Delegation decided that we should only take note of this intention and report to this Assembly. The Parties represented in this Assembly, Sir, now have had time to consider this condition, and this will no doubt be made known to us in this debate.

The Secretary of State explained to the delegation that this was a temporary restriction. It was only to apply to elections to the first Legislative Assembly under the new constitution and that only detainees whose appeals had been rejected by the Appeals Tribunal would be affected, and Her Majesty's Government intended to impose this, sincerely believing that this was for the good of the people of Singapore.

Sir, my Party has given full consideration to this condition, and has decided to approve the stand taken by the All-Party Delegation in not accepting the condition. As the Party in power, there is another reason why we cannot accept this condition. We will be placed in the invidious position of having our actions against subversive elements being twisted by uncharitable people as a measure against our political opponents and thus prevent them from standing for elections. The actions that we have taken in the past and may take in the future while we are still in office are and will be in the discharge of our responsibilities to look after the welfare of the people of Singapore.

Sir, if my motion is accepted under the first part, the drafting of the new constitution can be proceeded with without further delay. The Government can introduce a Citizenship Bill-

Mr Marshall: When?

The Chief Minister: - which has to be prepared in consultation with Her Majesty's Government, see paragraph 49 of the report, and implement such other action as to expedite the elections.

Mr Marshall: In due course.

The Chief Minister: And under the second part, the Secretary of State can be moved to reconsider the imposition of Her Majesty's Government's condition precedent to the new constitution.

Sir, I would like to conclude by saying once again in this Assembly that we are grateful to the Government of the Federation of Malaya, and particularly to the Chief Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, for their assistance and co-operation which made possible the creation of an Internal Security Council under the new constitution on a three-three-one basis. Sir, I beg to move.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to second the motion. As a member of the All-Party Delegation, I believe we have discharged our duties to this Assembly. We have carried out the mandate given to us by the people of Singapore expressed through the various political Parties and through the Assembly here. We believe, Sir, that we have secured the maximum possible. I remember that last year we failed and after we failed, some attempt was made to revive the conference, and if we had secured agreement then, comparatively speaking, we would still have got more this year. The failure last year was regretted, because it would have been one year earlier for us to have self-government if we had secured agreement. We would probably be in the midst of an election today. However, all that is past and we have started anew. We went to London again this year and we got what we wanted. I know there might be criticism that what we have got is too little. People may say that we should have elections immediately, but the All-Party Delegation had in mind that the people who are to enjoy citizenship rights should be given a chance. Some people are of the view that it could be implemented immediately and that these people should be given, say, two months to register themselves. However, to be democratic and knowing as we do that not all people in Singapore understand everything told to them once or twice, we feel that we should give them more opportunity to be well versed in what is imparted to them and to exercise their right to become Singapore citizens.

Mr Marshall: Whilst we sit in the Assembly.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Furthermore, Sir, since the citizenship law - and we agreed to this during the last time we met - cannot be promulgated at once, there must be consultation. Time must be allowed for the passage of the Bill - [Interruption]

Mr Speaker: Order. I think in this particular debate I must insist that there should not be unseemly interruptions.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Thank you very much, Sir. I am quite used to such interruptions.

The United Kingdom too must amend its Nationality Act because we have just got self-government. It is not independence, and as it is, we are still to some extent governed by the laws in the United Kingdom. I believe those who have so much concern for the people who will be eligible to become citizens of Singapore should have a thought for them and should devise ways and means of letting them make the right decisions to shoulder responsibilities in Singapore.

Probably another criticism may be levelled at the delegation about the Security Council, and they may say that this gives the United Kingdom Government a great deal of power. Compared with what we would have got last year, I think we are in a much better position, because now we have not only the three votes of the Singapore Government, but we also have the Federation vote. The Federation vote, I think, is one of the most impartial votes which we could get. On the one hand, I understand they have made an agreement with the United Kingdom on a matter of defence. On the other hand, however, they are a close neighbour of Singapore and understand Singapore's problems much better, and I believe they will vote in a very fair way, both to the United Kingdom and to Singapore. In fact, they should vote more favourably to Singapore because events taking place in Singapore will also affect them.

Coming to the last part of the motion, we are of the opinion that the condition stipulated in paragraph 30 of the Report could not be accepted because it is undemocratic. We are trying to sell democracy and we feel that if we are to fight undemocratic elements, we should use democratic means to fight them. We know that if we fight in a democratic way we will win in the end, whereas probably we will be accused of winning our battle if we tie the hands of the undemocratic elements. That condition however is imposed on us by the United Kingdom. They have the power to do so at present. They mean to use that power. We are still subjected to that power, but we can only shake that off after we have held our first elections, and if we want to shake that condition off, we must hold an election-

Mr Marshall: Now.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Not now, but as early as we can after we have considered the rights of the people whom we have always in mind. We want to give them those rights. Sir, I beg to second.

Question proposed.

11.42 a.m.

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Mr Speaker, Sir, in this motion, which came at the tail of a long list of business and kicked around from day to day like an unwanted football, and in the speeches in support of this motion, not a single time was merdeka mentioned - not even tiga suku merdeka. But let me name it - tiga suku busok merdeka. They know, and we know, that what is here before us is a request that we nail down for a further indefinite period with our own hands, we hammer in the nails of colonialism which was imposed on us by force before - that is no fault of ours. But now with our own hands we are to rivet the chains on the people who trusted us, the people who had faith in us, the people who loved us, and hoped that we would know how to effect the freedom and the dignity which they desire.

Sir, there is a phrase in the English language - "stony silence". It connotes cold contempt, the quiet and implacable antagonism of the temporarily helpless, the quiet of the people who lined the streets of Singapore when the Japanese troops held their sway. Just stony silence. Today, Sir, Singapore is eating the ashes of its dead hopes with stony silence, despite the grin of our naturalised Malayan, the Minister for Public Works. They can glory, Sir, because they have so provided that they will remain in office as long as this Government is an effective extension of the Colonial Office, not only to 1959, but thereafter by Order in Council. I shall seek to prove it.

Sir, there was a very considerable propaganda build-up by the happy newspapers of Singapore, our imperialist, colonialist, capitalist friends. There was even a considerable propaganda build-up by Government organisations - like Radio Malaya - to welcome the heroes of the Merdeka Mission - the all-successful Merdeka Mission, so heavily praised by the Colonial Office, so heavily praised even by the man for whom I have some respect, Malcolm MacDonald.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Old friends so parted!

Mr Marshall: So I learn that a man, however good, in the service of the Government toes the line, as they learn to toe the line in the P.A.P. One day their Treasurer says he supports David Marshall in his appeal for immediate elections, and it is published in the newspapers. The next day, he writes in an official memorandum to say, "I erred. I am sorry. My Party has changed its mind. It is against immediate elections."

Sir, to know how the ashes of our dead hopes are being served up with all the pomp of colonialism by the gentlemen of the Merdeka Mission - I saw a newsreel, Sir - I have not seen a newsreel of the signing yet, I must see that. It was not the signing of the agreement, Sir, it was the agreement of disagreement. But I saw a newsreel of the triumphal return of this Merdeka Mission and the people's reaction. Sir, this newsreel with all its modern propaganda techniques and all its dubbing in of sound effects could not hide the small number, or the stony silence, of the onlookers. The decorations which greeted the delegation were the British Crown and the British Lion rampant, emblems of imperialism thoroughly appropriate to welcome back the delegation that handed the people of Singapore to continued imperial rule. I have no doubt that the officials, who put up these decorations of the British Lion rampant and the British Crown intended for His Royal Highness Prince Philip, thought that, apart from a question of degree, the status was the same, here were further imperialist factors, and they were entitled to an imperialist welcome. On the padang, Sir, the stony silence of some 5,000 people, although, Glory be, a platoon of the P.A.P. sought to liven matters up on command with boos and calls of merdeka. The boos were deleted, Sir, oh let me say that right away, in case the Chief Secretary takes action against this film unit, the boos were deleted and merdekas were dubbed in. Where were the people of Singapore? Where were the people of Singapore?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: In Batu Pahat!

Mr Marshall: One of them, whose contempt for the Merdeka Mission would never have permitted him to be anywhere near the participation of the triumphal return, was doing his duty to the citizens of Malaya in Batu Pahat.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Hooray!

Mr Speaker: Order.

Mr Marshall: But where were the rest - walking around on the padang across by the sea and completely ignoring the Merdeka Mission. And the rest of the people of Singapore? Where were the trade unions, the T.U.C., the Government trade unions, the P.A.P. trade unions? Where were they? The newsreel tried to imply that a loving T.U.C. had stopped the car which was carrying the triumphant Chief Minister and handed him banners and the picture of a sick lion. The T.U.C. has officially denied it was ever present at any part of the procession to welcome back this Merdeka Mission. Where were the trade unions?

Sir, the Labour Front made a special matter of passing a special resolution at its annual conference to welcome back its members in the Merdeka Mission with a mammoth rally. Where was that mammoth rally? It was not and it could never be, Sir, because the Labour Front and every Member of this House and every citizen outside knows that a mammoth rally would be a horrible joke, that there would be nothing but stony silence, and perhaps worse, to welcome back these gentlemen who have handed us over to our enemies.

Sir, why, why this cold contempt of the people of Singapore for their Merdeka Mission, as evidenced on the day of their return and since? Because when the hour of opportunity struck, Singapore was found wanting, wanting through the inadequacy of its own representatives. We failed, Sir, not because Lennox-Boyd was too strong - that is a glorious failure: it is a failure of which we need not be ashamed; when we are broken by superior force and we are shot down with a machine-gun bullet - we failed because we were afraid of Merdeka, we, the representatives of the people of Singapore. We failed because we have weak guts - we, whom the people of Singapore trusted. In silence must the people of Singapore bear the shame that their own representatives, the people they trusted, let them down. Their people failed in the hour of opportunity. All Singapore, Sir, shared the shame of the inadequacy of its delegation at the wonderful opportunity which was before it.

Sir, it has been very fashionable to damn the flamboyant ex-Chief Minister, to seek to bury him and to place on his shoulders the slimy hatred of persons who fear an honest and a clean constitution for the people of Singapore, which would make radical changes in the present vested interest set-up. But I am not seeking to justify myself if I ask you to turn back a few pages. I will give you my word - I can take what I am given and I can take a lot more. I survived the Japanese prisons, do not forget. I ask you to turn back the pages because I want you to contrast what happened and what has happened in order to judge the attitude of the people of Singapore. Can you remember, Sir, the warm solid support of the people of Singapore during the constitutional crisis of our young days, in July and August 1955? Even the double-crossing P.A.P. supported us, and I have, as a trophy of honour, a little cartoon in a Chinese paper showing the rejoicing of the people of Singapore, who were prepared to have no government at all rather than a stooge government. They were united, the Sikhs, the Chinese, the Malays, the Indians, the Eurasians, all of us.

Do you remember, Sir, Merdeka Week last year? I shall not remind you of the motion of the Member for Paya Lebar who said, "Let us have independence immediately." I shall not. Sir, I am trying to draw attention to some of the decent things that have occurred - the Merdeka Week of last year; the unity of purpose of all races; the signature campaign - I know, because we were told it was those horrible little Chinese school boys - let me say this to you - those Chinese school boys have committed many errors; the Chinese school boys have been a headache and have caused harm to Singapore; their conduct has harmed temporarily our relations with the Federation, but in those Chinese school boys there is pure gold, there is honesty, there is sincerity, there is idealism, there is energy. And those who sneer at those Chinese school boys will never be abe to guide the destiny of this country to anything that is worth while. Sir, we speak of the signature campaign. Sir, I have to anticipate objections because I am not going to be permitted a second speech.

Sir, do you remember the mammoth rally at the padang? Yes, I know, we broke a few windows - that is what you remember, a few windows only were broken. Oh, those dreadful things so beautifully magnified by the English Press! That is what they remember about that mammoth rally.

Mr Speaker: Order. I think the hon. Member ought to address his remarks to the Chair.

Mr Marshall: I was indeed, Sir. With respect, I say to the Chair that that is what the English Press has so beautifully magnified. The English Press, which slants and slimes every honest effort at nationalism in this country. Subversion? What is that but subversion, Sir, that the English Press does by dishonest techniques to try and destroy our struggle for true nationalism. What is that but subversion. Are we sending Colonel Simmonds to the undemocratic Changi jail? No, Sir. Yes, you remember. Everbody remembers. We remember the mammoth rally because of the broken windows. Heh, heh, heh, heh! I remember, Sir, the decency, I remember the affection. I remember the enthusiasm, I remember the good humour of 40,000 to 50,000 people. I remember the warmth of the people seeking freedom, the realisation of their hopes for a clean and honest future, to stand straight in the eyes of God and their fellow-men, in friendship with the United Kingdom, and at peace with all the communities in Singapore. That is what I can remember, Sir. There were acts of hooliganism, all right-

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Friendship with the United Kingdom?

Mr Marshall: Friendship with the United Kingdom I say I do believe. Those people are understanding. Their friendship is necessary for our long-term welfare - friendship and partnership.

Sir, in those days the people gave us all we asked for. They gave us their love. They gave us their trust. They gave us their support in every way that we asked for it, because it was going to be a people's merdeka, and we had not only shouts of merdeka, not only mammoth rallies, but we had the joy of unity of feeling, of being in the swim with all human beings. To greet a politicians' merdeka, we have a stony silence.

Sir, it is not fashionable today to speak of independence. No, Sir, we are frightened. Those persons who are vocal, who have the opportunity to talk in this House, they are frightened of independence. They are frightened of merdeka. We say we are too small, not viable. We say that we must bend our knees and put our foreheads to the dust at the feet of the Tunku until it pleases him to lift us up. I say to you, Sir, that is not the fate of Singapore. I say to you, Sir, that I have times without number in this House and outside indicated that our ultimate and our true destiny, the true destiny of the Federation and of Singapore is in unity. That I do not question, I have never questioned, and I have even struggled for it before the Tunku took office, immediately he was elected; and he, who is an honest man, will admit it. In fact, it is in the books. Sir, to crawl on my forehead and on my knees gives me a backache, and I do not believe it will assist Singapore in bringing it any nearer to unity with the Federation. I believe that such an attitude, Sir, will merely increase contempt-

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Does the hon. Member realise-

Mr Speaker: Order.

Mr Marshall: If the Tunku-

Mr Speaker: Order. The Member for Tanjong Pagar stood up. Does he wish to intervene?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Does the Member for Cairnhill not understand that what he is saying is making things worse?

Mr Speaker: Order. The hon. Member can only intervene if the Member for Cairnhill has given way.

Mr Marshall: I say, Sir, that it is the duty of Singapore and those who purport to be its leaders to face facts squarely. One fact is that our ultimate destiny, our true destiny, and not only ours but that of the Federation, is in a united Malaya. I have said, I do not know how many times, but let me repeat, that the Federation without Singapore is like the the fingers of the hand without its thumb. Singapore without the Federation is the thumb without its fingers. But we can exist independently, and I say, Sir, that crawling to the Federation on our foreheads and on our bellies and on our knees can only create contempt, and is creating contempt today, and can only achieve a position whereby the Federation seeks control, without giving protection, seeks privileges without giving any concession. That is what the present trend is heading for. I say, Sir, that if the Tunku does not want us, and if the Federation does not want us, then it is the duty of the people of Singapore not to continue crawling on their bellies but to reorient their outlook, and that was the position we took last year, and which the Member for Tanjong Pagar endorsed as a member of the delegation in London - that if we cannot achieve integration with the Federation, then we must have independence within the Commonwealth. Sir, -

Mr Lee Kuan Yew rose-

Mr Speaker: Point of order?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Information, Sir.

Mr Marshall: No, Sir.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Coward!

Mr Marshall: You are-

Mr Speaker: Order. The hon. Member must not use the word "coward". Will he withdraw it, please?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I withdraw it. I shall deal with it in due course.

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Sir. I am saying that Singapore must consider, until such time as it can with dignity achieve unity with the Federation, whether it is to remain a colony or to achieve a position of human dignity and independence within the Commonwealth. I know that the Commonwealth is supposed to be an obsession with me, all right, but obsession or no, let me add this: if we are not wanted in the Commonwealth, then we must again reorient our attitude, Sir, and consider whether we should not instead struggle to make this territory an international territory, an international port, under the protection and the Asian headquarters of the United Nations. Yes, it is easy to sneer, Sir, very easy, but much that we benefit by today, much that is gracious in our way of life, much that is worth while in our thinking, was started by allegedly crazy people. If I am called crazy by the Member for Tanjong Pagar, I shall indeed consider that an honour. To those who consider it fashionable today, Sir, to speak of how small Singapore is, how weak, how impossible it is for us to achieve independence until the Federation has mercy upon us, may I draw their attention to some of the things we said last year? I quote from the Report of the Singapore All-Party Mission to London, April/May 1956, Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 31 of 1956, at page 19, in a speech delivered in London at the opening of the constitutional conference at Lancaster House:

"As to its size the population of Singapore is larger than that of New Zealand when it became a member of the League of Nations. Our population today is larger than the population of seven independent countries who are members of the United Nations - Iceland, Costa Rica, Jordan, Libya, Luxembourg, Nicaragua, and Panama and only slightly less than three other independent countries - Honduras, the Lebanon, and Paraguay. Our revenue is greater than that of 16 independent countries which are members of the United Nations."

So our revenue is more than 16 independent countries and our population is equal to almost ten independent nations who are members of the United Nations.

What did we say, Sir, in our memorandum - approved by the P.A.P. by the way - submitted to the Singapore Constitutional Conference by the All-Party Mission:

"Though the present Constitution of Singapore did not come into operation until the 8th February, 1955, all parties are agreed that the aspirations of the people of Singapore cannot be met except by the attainment of full self-government within the Commonwealth as soon as the necessary constitutional changes can be brought about."

"Full self-government within the Commonwealth", Sir. I continue:

"As in other Asian countries, colonial status is considered to deprive the people of self-respect."

It seems now that colonial status under the Rendel-Yew Hock Constitution deprives the people of self-respect, but colonial status under the Lennox-Boyd-Yew Hock Constitution does not. We shall see. "On the 25th July, 1955, the new Legislative Assembly clearly affirmed its resolution that colonialism be brought to a speedy end in Singapore. On the 5th April, 1956 the Legislative Assembly passed the following resolution:-"

Sir, I hope the gentlemen are not bored to hear what they did. If they are, may I remind them about this:

"That this Assembly affirms, in the name of the people of Singapore, its belief in the principle of 'the basic right of peoples to governments of their own choice', as enunciated in the Washington Declaration signed by Sir Anthony Eden, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and President Eisenhower, President of the United States of America, on the 1st of February, 1956:

And its belief that the long term welfare of Singapore lies in close and friendly cooperation with the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth territories;

Therefore the Assembly instructs its All-Party Delegation to the forthcoming Constitutional Talks in London to seek forthwith for Singapore-"

Now, what did we seek?

"-the status of an independent territory within the Commonwealth, and to offer an agreement between the United Kingdom Government and the Singapore Government whereby the Government of the United Kingdom would in respect of Singapore exercise control over external defence and give guidance in foreign relations other than trade and commerce."

And that resolution, Sir, in case your memory is short, was passed by 27 votes to zero and four abstentions - three officials and Mr Sutherland, Now, Sir, I am amused to note that the Member for Tanjong Pagar noticed this motion of the Assembly and referred to it in a speech on the 5th of March, 1957, Sir, at a hastily convened sitting of this Assembly, after my departure for Brunei.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: On important business.

Mr Marshall: Yes. It was known that I would leave for Brunei on the first of March. On the first, notice of motion was given for the 5th. I was never informed at all. I tried to get back, Sir, and as you are aware, I arrived four hours too late - the Merdeka motion taking two hours to be debated in this Assembly, two hours - I consider it indecent haste. Here is what the Member for Tanjong Pagar said about this motion. I hope he does not mind, I know that the P.A.P. thrives on inconsistency, and the P.A.P.'s basic political philosophy is to try and fool most of the people most of the time to get into power. Sir, the Member for Tanjong Pagar, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, on the 5th of March, 1957, said, at col. 1465 of the Official Report:

"But I did look up the former resolution. The House will forgive me if I were to remind them of the terms of the resolution they passed on the 5th April last year. The resolution first opens with a flourish by a reference to the Washington Declaration of Dwight D. Eisenhower...

Those were fierce words and, I am sorry to say, they did not materialise. Looking back now, I thought -"

Not "I think" - a man is entitled to change his views, Sir.

"- I thought - like when the platform collapsed at the famous rally at Kallang-"

He did not collapse on the platform-

"- it was a symbolic act of unwisdom of people who did not prepare the ground before they climbed on the platform."

"A symbolic act of unwisdom", Sir. Can you tell me, Sir, who was the man who seconded the motion on the 4th of April, 1956? Who was the man who seconded the "symbolic act of unwisdom"?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I was not on the platform.

Mr Marshall: Sir, I know that last year it was fashionable to be a nationalist, and this was a nationalist motion, so the Member for Tanjong Pagar seconded the motion, His was the privilege of seconding the motion. His was the privilege of seconding this "symbolic act of unwisdom". This year it is no longer fashionable to be a nationalist. It is fashionable to be a colonialist. He considers it a symbolic, act of unwisdom.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: It hurts, does it not?

Mr Marshall: Yes, it hurts indeed to see the twistings and turnings and tortured conduct of the P.A.P., always seeking to adopt what is fashionable today because, by doing that, you fool most of the people most of the time - and those who can see what you are doing do not matter, because they are a minority. Their votes will not matter very much. But, Sir, remember, this is the principle of the P.A.P. - you achieve political office, you achieve political power, by fooling most of the people most of the time, and so inconsistency is quite naturally part of their technique and double-crossing is part of their technique. I mentioned the Kiss of Judas at the very first sitting of this Assembly in April 1955-

Mr Speaker: Order. I think this is an appropriate time to suspend. I will take the Chair again at half-past two.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 12.15 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.