MERGER (SINGAPORE/FEDERATION OF MALAYA) (White Paper)

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

Debate on motion resumed.

Question again proposed.

Mr Speaker: The position now is that the debate may range over all aspects of merger as covered by item 5, that is, the motion I have just read, item 7, the motion standing in the name of the Prime Minister, on the White Paper on reunification of Singapore and the Federation of Malaya, and on such aspects in the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech which touch on merger, including the amendment which is proposed to be moved by the Member for Queenstown as shown in item 8*.

The Member for Queenstown, after completing his speech on all aspects of merger covered by items 5, 7 and 8, will, as he has indicated, move his amendment to the motion set out in item No. 5.

Debate will then be confined to this amendment.

After the amendment has been disposed of, the debate will continue on all aspects of merger covered by items 5, 7 and 8 of the Order Paper other than the aspect already disposed of, that is, the amendment proposed to be moved by the Member for Queenstown to item 5.

At the end of the debate, a vote will he taken on item 5 in the first instance.

When items 7 and 8 are called, no Member will be permitted to speak again on the topic of merger, but the Prime Minister in regard to item 7 and the Member for Queenstown in regard to his amendment as shown in item 8 may, if they so desire, propose the motion as shown in item 7 and the amendment as shown in item 8 respectively simpliciter for the purpose of taking a vote.

I have reduced all that to writing, and I propose to pass copies of that ruling to Members so that they will have that ruling before them when the debate continues.

If any matter requires elucidation, perhaps hon. Members will indicate.

Mr David Marshall: As indicated by the hon. Member for Queenstown, it is of a sweeping character. I wonder whether you will permit Members when speaking - since the Member for Queenstown is going to move the amendment, we will all be speaking after - to speak on all the items indicated by you and not limit ourselves to the issue of citizenship. You see, the Member for Queenstown does speak of genuine and complete merger. Could we not speak on items 5, 7 and 8 so that, if the amendment is lost, there is no question of speaking again on any of the motions?

Mr Speaker: I think paragraph 2 of the ruling meets the point.

Mr David Marshall: The Member will move his amendment. I was referring to paragraph 3, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker: Order. The position will be as shown in paragraph 2. The Member for Queenstown, after completing his speech on all aspects of merger covered by items 5, 7 and 8 will, as he has indicated, move his amendment to the motion set out in item 5. Once that amendment is moved, the debate will be confined to the aspects of that amendment to start off with. But the Member for Queenstown, of course, having already spoken to the main, motion and on all aspects covered in items 5, 7 and 8, will not be able to speak again. I trust that is all clear.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: May I just seek elucidation on this point? The debate will be on the amendment to be moved by the Member for Queenstown to item 5. But will he then be again making another amendment as stated in item 8?

Mr Speaker: Item 8 contains the amendment of which the Member for Queenstown has given notice in the usual way. I have indicated that he should speak on every aspect covered not only by items 5 and 7 but also by his own amendment. Then when item 8 is called and the motion has been duly proposed by the Prime Minister, the Member for Queenstown, if he so desires, could just move the amendment simpliciter only for the purpose of taking a vote.

Dr Sheng Nam Chin (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, one more small point. Coming back to paragraph 3 here, "Debate will then be confined to this amendment." That means that while I am speaking on the amendment of the Member for Queenstown, I would not be allowed to wander around, say, to item 7 or item 8?

Mr Speaker: The position is that the Member for Nee Soon then would be entitled to speak on the amendment, as every other Member would be entitled to speak on the amendment, alone. After the amendment has been disposed of, the Member for Nee Soon not having spoken to the main motion, can speak again to the main motion and range over item 7 and item 8. Dr Lee will continue his speech.

5.40 p.m.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Mr Speaker, Sir, first, I wish to deal with the very important citizenship issue in all aspects. Then I shall discuss "national" and proportional representation. Then I shall discuss this so-called autonomy on labour and education, which is being used as a sop to cover this lack of proportional representation. After all that, I shall then discuss whether the P.A.P.'s so-called merger proposals will help us attain the desirable objectives which merger is supposed to achieve, namely, independence, economic prosperity and national unity.

It is unfortunate, Sir, that the Federation is prepared only to accept Singapore as a partner. In fact, the Federation only wants our country but not our people. It wants our country only, if the political influence of the people of Singapore could be reduced to the minimum. Thus we find that the P.A.P.'s brand of merger is an unholy scheme whereby the people of Singapore become politically castrated by being segregated, with separate citizenship and without proportional representation in the Federal Parliament. This, Sir, is worse than second-class citizenship to the people of Singapore. Thus, under the P.A.P. scheme of things, the political influence of the people of Singapore will be kept to the minimum possible by two methods: (1) by segregating the people of Singapore from the people of the Federation under separate citizenship arrangements; (2) by not giving the people of Singapore the right of proportional representation in the Federal Parliament. These are ugly features which the P.A.P. hopes to sugarcoat and make acceptable to our people. It is against this background of unholy intrigues and machinations that we must view the P.A.P.'s present propaganda on "merger" (inverted commas), "merger" in general and on the citizenship issue in particular.

Mr Speaker, Sir, at this point let me first answer the malicious falsehood put up by the P.A.P. that we in the Barisan Sosialis are afraid of merger because we are afraid of internal security being controlled by the Central Government. Even last night over Radio Singapore, which has now become the private organ of the P.A.P., the Prime Minister repeated the same falsehood. He said we are opposing his so-called merger plans because we are afraid that Internal Security will come under the control of a strong Central Government. The only truth in this, Sir, is that he has admitted, by implication, that his own Government is not strong, and this, the whole lot of people, everyone of us, already know.

Sir, we have already stated in the most unequivocal terms that we are fully prepared to accept a complete merger, and we will only be too glad to say "yes" if the Tunku says tomorrow that we should have complete merger. As everybody realises, and the Prime Minister above all, though he is not prepared to admit this, internal security will be, of course, under the control of the Central Government in a complete merger. Where then is the truth of the Prime Minister's statement? Sir, we are prepared to accept a complete and genuine merger even when we are fully aware that this means that the internal security of Singapore will, under such an arrangement, come under the control of the Central Government. We are fully aware that the socialist forces in Singapore will after complete merger face the probability of having to make certain sacrifices - sacrifices which our socialist comrades in the Federation are now making. But, Sir, we are prepared to make these sacrifices. The Secretary-General of my Party, Mr Lim Ching Siong, has said as much at the inaugural meeting of the Barisan Sosialis on the 17th of September. Let me quote him - Straits Times, Monday, 18th September, 1961:

`"As one who has tasted political detention and repression, I say [this is what Ching Siong said we are prepared for this sacrifice.

As socialists we should not allow our personal security to stand in the way of national unity...".'

Sir, whatever one may think of the political views of Mr Lim Ching Siong, no one can doubt his sincerity and dedication. This is more than what we can possibly say of the Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew -

Mr Speaker: Order. The hon. Member does know the Standing Order which says he must not refer to a Member by name.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will repeat then. Sir, that this is more than what can possibly be said for the Prime Minister.

Mr Lim Ching Siong has suffered Imprisonment for his political convictions, and I have no doubt he is prepared for further sacrifices if it is necessary to bring about a genuine reunification of our people. Is our Prime Minister, Sir, prepared to do the same? As far as we know, he is not prepared even to risk being considered dotty, let alone go to prison for the interests of our people -

Mr Speaker: Order. I am not quite certain whether I heard the word "dotty" being used.

Tun Lim Yew Hock (Cairnhill): "Dorothy" or something like that.

Mr Speaker: Will the hon. Member for Queenstown indicated what word he used? Did he use "dotty", meaning a lunatic?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I did say "dotty", Sir. I merely quoted the Prime Minister himself.

The Prime Minister: Huh?

Mr Speaker: Order. I know of no occasion when the Prime Minister called himself dotty. I think that word with reference to a Member of the Assembly is unparliamentary and ought to he withdrawn.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will leave it out, Sir, but I can quote chapter and verse if you like. I am sure you do not think that is necessary.

I was told that, in fact, our Prime Minister once told a political detainee that he would like to go to prison in order to glorify his political career -

The Prime Minister: At least he is prepared to, but are you?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: But then it should be only - you see, this is the snag - for a few days, and provided he would be allowed to stay by the seaside -

Some hon. Members: And play golf.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I may add -

The Prime Minister rose -

Mr Speaker: Point of order?

The Prime Minister: Point of order. Sir, can a Member of this Assembly be so grossly misrepresented when he has never said any such thing to anybody?

Mr Speaker: That, of course, is not a point of order. It might perhaps amount to an abuse of privilege, but I do not see any privilege being abused in this particular instance.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Of course, Sir, I may add, as some of the Members over this side of the House have been saying, provided they also build him a golf course within the prison grounds -

Mr Speaker: Order. I have indicated earlier on that I am not going to allow any personalities to creep into this debate. I think the Member for Queenstown did hear me very clearly and he should take cognizance of what the Chair desires.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Anyway, Sir, we in the Barisan Sosialis are prepared to make sacrifices for genuine reunification. But no one in his sanity will be prepared to sacrifice for this phoney merger which is a treacherous betrayal of the people.

Let me now deal with the vital question of citizenship. The Prime Minister sometime back indicated that he would like to have a debate in a forum on the citizenship question.

The Prime Minister: Why did you decline one?

Mr Speaker: Order.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Now is his chance. In fact, only last Friday at about 5.30 p.m. I received a very urgent letter from the acting Head of the Broadcasting Department. He suggested we have a forum to discuss the White Paper tabled here only a couple of days back, and he wanted us to discuss that White Paper in that forum. I think, Sir, since you have always been ruling about anticipation, this is a gross case of anticipation. In my reply, I suggested that the civil servant concerned should suggest, to his Minister that a live broadcast be allowed for the proceedings that are taking place in the Assembly today.

An hon. Member: God forbid!

Mr Speaker: Order. Of course, the Member for Queenstown will realise that that would be completely out of order and that I would fight with all the rhetoric at my command against that. The Speaker is against a live broadcast of any debate in this Chamber.

The Prime Minister: That was why he invited you to Radio Singapore.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Let us, Sir, examine how the P.A.P. hopes to effect the political castration of the people of Singapore. Firstly, it appears that the Prime Minister hopes to achieve this by confusing the people with the use of the magic word "national". He hopes -

Mr Speaker: Order. There is a word which has been used by the Member for Queenstown which is slowly sinking into my tired brain. That is the word "castration". I do not think that is a parliamentary word to be used in this Assembly, and I think he should avoid using that word.

Mr Byrne: Virile.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: May I suggest the word "emasculation", Sir?

Mr Speaker: Order. I think even the word "emasculation" is akin to "castration" and, therefore, I will not allow that word either.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: The Prime Minister hopes thus to mislead the people into believing that there is no significant difference between the word "citizen" and the word "national". He would like the people of Singapore to believe that a Federal National is not materially different from a Federal Citizen. That is point No. 1.

Secondly, the Prime Minister hopes to frighten a large number of the Singapore electorate into believing that complete merger must lead to automatic disenfranchisement of a large number of Singapore citizens. That is point No. 2.

And the third one, the Prime Minister wants to make the people believe is that it is unreasonable to demand Federal citizenship for all Singapore citizens.

Let me first brace the various statements made by the P.A.P. on the question of citizenship. Let us trace their twists and turns over this vital matter in their attempt to fool the people. On 23rd August, 1961, the Prime Minister gave a Press conference after the first joint statement by the two Prime Ministers was issued. While the joint statement stressed Singapore's autonomy on labour and education as important principles to be agreed upon beforehand between the two Prime Ministers, it was significantly silent on the vital question of citizenship rights for the Singapore citizen. The Prime Minister, when pressed by a reporter dismissed the citizenship question as also another matter for the Working Committee, to be considered together with other mundane things such as postal and telegraph communications.

Sir,I think almost everyone smelled a rat. We had all along suspected that the P.A.P. in its desperation was selling out the citizenship rights of the people of Singapore in return for help and succour -

An hon. Member: Who is the sucker?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: - from the Right-Wing Government of the Federation. But as yet it was not clear to the people. We in the Barisan Sosialis immediately pressed for full citizenship rights for all Singapore citizens in the, event of merger. What did the P.A.P. Government do? They threw a dirty smoke bomb to confuse the citizenship issue instead. On 21st September, 1961, the Minister for Finance at a radio forum [Interruption] said that according to the Federation Constitution -

The Prime Minister: You have read it, have you?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Let me quote from the Straits Times of Friday, 22nd September, 1961. The Minister for Finance said that it was impossible for all Singapore citizens to become Federal citizens on complete merger. That is what you said, did you not?

Mr Speaker: Order. I can assure the Member for Queenstown that I never said those words. He must remember that he is addressing the Chair.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I am sorry, Sir. The Minister for Finance declared that complete merger would mean the automatic disenfranchisement of about half of Singapore's citizens who were not born in Singapore. The next day the Barisan Sosialis in a statement pointed out the falsehood of the statement of the Minister for Finance. I will quote, Sir -

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Do not be so long about it.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: - from the Straits Times of 23rd September, 1961:

`Citizenship status after merger: Barisan points to Federal Constitution'.

An hon. Member: Article 22.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: And they point out that Article 22 -

The Prime Minister: The magic wand.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: The thing that kills the P.A.P. Article 22 of the Federal Constitution reads:

`If any territory is admitted to the Federation in pursuance of Article 2, Parliament may by law determine what persons are to be citizens by reason of their connection with that territory and the date or dates from which such persons are to be citizens.'

I quote further from the Straits Times of 23rd September, 1961:

`Article 2, the Barisan Sosialis statement said, merely provided for the admission of other States to the Federation and the alteration of the boundaries of any State.'

Article 22 of the Federal Constitution therefore provides the Federal Government with full powers to decide on the terms of citizenship for the people of a new territory joining the Federation. It is crystal clear to all, therefore, that the question of citizenship on merger is essentially a matter for negotiation - remember that - between the parties concerned. There is no such thing as automatic disenfranchisement except when agreed upon by the two parties concerned. Dr Goh's -

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Order.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: The Minister for Finance's intentional bluff was thus exposed -

Dr Goh Keng Swee: On a point of order, Sir. Is it proper for a Member of the Assembly to accuse another Member of bluffing?

An hon. Member: No bluff.

Mr Speaker: Order. I was under the impression that bluffing is a good attribute of a politician! But it the Minister for Finance says that it is offensive, then, of course, it becomes unparliamentary. Probably on second thoughts he might think it is not offensive, because it might well be that the Member for Queenstown is bluffing. Dr Lee.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Although it has been shown that the Minister for Finance has been bluffing, this did not stop the Prime Minister from repeating this same falsehood in his many subsequent Press conferences. The Prime Minister, like Dr Goebbels. evidently believes that a lie told often enough may be taken for the truth.

Mr Speaker: Order. It is so difficult for me to draw the line. I have in the past drawn the line at "lie" and I have allowed the word "falsehood". I have also allowed the words "terminological inexactitude". Now I permit the word "falsehood" but I will never permit the word "lie". It is unparliamentary to use "lie".

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Mr Speaker, Sir, when I said "lie", of course, I was referring to Dr Goebbels.

Mr Speaker: Order. The Member for Queenstown cannot get round my ruling by saying that. He must withdraw that word.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I withdraw the word "lie" and I will substitute the word "falsehood".

But soon afterwards, the Prime Minister must have realised that his bluff was not selling well among the people. So he started to shift his ground. In graphic language, he tried to show that the demand for automatic citizenship for all Singapore citizens was unreasonable because of what he claimed to be different residential qualifications for citizenship in the two territories. He compared the citizenship demand with a dishonest blackmarket operation in currency. Let me quote him, Sir. He was talking about citizenship and this is the relevant portion from the Straits Times of Monday, 25th September, 1961:

`This, Mr Lee said, was like people crossing frontiers with currency. One could change a dollar for 100 rupiahs on the black market and then on returning, ask for conversion at the official rate of 30 rupiahs for a dollar.'

Perhaps our Prime Minister is an expert on black-marketing, as we were told by the Member for Hong Lim at the Chua Commission of Inquiry before the Hong Lim by-election that the Prime Minister was once a black marketeer.

The Prime Minister further declared that he was not prepared to put forward such an unreasonable demand, as he thought it would definitely be unacceptable to the Tunku. Our Prime Minister also intimated that the Tunku would also think him dotty if he brought up such a demand. I will quote from the Straits Times of Monday, 25th September. The relevant paragraph is this, Sir:

"I mean I wouldn't for one moment put forward a proposition because the Tunku may think that I [i.e., the Prime Minister have already gone dotty," the Premier added.'

There you are, right there, Sir! Then on 25th October, 1961, again at one of his frequent Press conferences, our Prime Minister unabashedly

The Prime Minister: Un-what?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Unabashedly suggested that-let me quote him again. Sir. This is the Straits Times of Thursday, 26th October, 1961:

`Mr Lee suggested that those who demanded automatic Federation Citizenship should ask their friends in the Federation Parliament, such as Mr Lim Kean Siew, a Socialist Front leader.' -

The Prime Minister: A Front leader, not socialist.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: -

`or Mr D. R. Seenivasagam, of the People's Progressive Party, to introduce a resolution supporting automatic conversion from Singapore to Federation citizenship.'

In effect, our Prime Minister reluctantly admitted that it was constitutionally possible and correct to have automatic Federation citizenship for all Singapore citizens. That is as we have pointed out - the question of citizenship rights for Singapore citizens on merger is a matter which the Federal Parliament has the power to decide. But at the same Press conference, our Prime Minister also brought in another red herring to confuse the picture. He said that in a complete merger all those Singapore citizens who were not born in Singapore would be required to register again and to pass a language test in addition to satisfying the necessary residential qualification.

Let me now, Sir, summarise the twists and turns of the Prime Minister in his many attempts to find an excuse for not fighting for equal citizenship rights for the people of Singapore. It was originally supposed to be constitutionally "impossible." Then it became politically "unreasonable," "dishonest," "black-marketing;" and finally, it has become a matter of need for further registration and requiring a language test. Mr Speaker. Sir, let me ask: why has the Prime Minister got to twist and turn over this vital question of citizenship? Why? Why has he got to reveal information in dribs and drabs?

Mr David Marshall: Hear, hear!

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Why must the Prime Minister -

Dr Lee Siew Choh gesticulated. [Laughter].

Mr Speaker: Order. I suppose it is time for me to intervene. Perhaps the Speaker did not intervene in view of all the levity that has been created by a lone voice on the back bench of the Opposition! May I perhaps point out that this is a very serious subject which we are discussing, and perhaps less levity would be more in keeping with it. The Member for Queenstown also should realise that he is endeavouring to put forward a serious point of view, and levity on his part would not advance his cause, in my opinion, more than he could without levity.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Mr Speaker, Sir, I crave your indulgence. To us in the Barisan Sosialis there is never a more serious question than this citizenship issue. This citizenship issue proves to the people of Singapore that the Front Benchers of the P.A.P are selling the rights of Singapore down the river. I was asking, Sir, why have they got to reveal information in dribs and drabs? And I want to ask another question, Sir. Why must they go on trying to strip and tease?

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Strip tease.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: The answer, Sir, is simple. The Prime Minister simply has not been telling the truth. He has not got the guts to tell the people the truth.

The Prime Minister: On a point of order, Sir,I have been accused of many a thing. It has been suggested that parts of my abdomen be removed. But to be accused of not having guts, I think, is a very serious proposition.

Mr Speaker: Order. I do not know whether the Hon, the Prime Minister is saying that that expression is offensive. I have allowed that expression in the past. I do recollect a Member of the Front Bench on the Government side - I do not wish to mention the name - using the same expression in different circumstances.

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I was referring to the word "guts" literally. I have been listening with great admiration to the Member for Queenstown, and as he himself does not take it seriously, I wonder if he was using the word "guts" in its literal sense - that I do not have sufficient bowels, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Since the Member for Queenstown is a medical man, I suppose he should know. Dr Lee.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I know more about guts than the Prime Minister ever knows about anything.

I was saying, Sir, that the Prime Minister simply did not have the guts to tell the people the truth. He hopes to sell out in bits and pieces, at times heavily sugar-coated and at times he threw a dirty smoke bomb and a dirty smokescreen. The people might be misled. In fact, the P.A.P.'s present propaganda method may be likened to throwing clay pigeons. They throw a clay pigeon and you shoot, Sir. And just when you think you have got it, they throw another one for you to aim at.

The Prime Minister: You will have had a lot of practice then.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: The idea being, of course, to keep us so busy and confused, shooting dummy clay pigeons that we miss the real thing when it does come out. We know they are quite capable of confusing the people, Sir, for they have the whole propaganda machinery of the State in their hands, including what has now become a very, very friendly English Press. In the debates and arguments in the coming months, it will become more and more evident that the P.A.P. cannot be trusted even on simple things like constitutional facts. They have shifted their stand once too often. Only two days ago, Sir, the Straits Times reported the Tunku as having said at the Airport - let me quote, Sir -

Dr Goh Keng Swee: On a point of order, Sir. Is it in order for the hon. Member to have his back pointing [Laughter] -

Mr Speaker: I am afraid I did not hear that. Will the Minister for Finance repeat it?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, I ask whether it is in order for the Member to present his back to the other side.

Mr Speaker: Order. I suppose it is another protest about the use of a word which refers to the anatomy of a person. But I would suggest once again that this unseemly levity be stopped. Let us get on with the serious business of this debate. Even if levity is considered to be the best form of attack, I would suggest it is not proper to use that attack in this Assembly. Dr Lee.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: This is the Straits Times of Friday, 17th November, 1961. The Tunku was talking about merger and citizenship. "He reiterated that the present Federal Parliament would not, though it could - I stress, Sir, though it could - grant automatic Federation citizenship to Singapore citizens on merger". That clearly shows that the P.A.P. has all along not been speaking the truth.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: On a point of order.

Mr Speaker: Point of order?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Is it in order for the Member for Queenstown to quote just half a sentence without completing the rest of the sentence which gives the substance of the statement quoted?

Dr Sheng Nam Chin: Only extracts are allowed!

Mr Speaker: Order. If the Hon. The Minister for Finance can point out that the subsequent sentence or sentences are relevant, then, of course, the Member for Queenstown will be asked to -

Dr Goh Keng Swee rose -

Mr Speaker: Will the Minister please take his seat? There seems to be too much of a hurry in this matter. If the Minister can assure me that the quotation is incomplete, then, of course, I will ask the Member for Queenstown to continue with his quotation.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker. Sir, the statement quoted is very fresh in my memory. The Tunku did say that the Federal Parliament could grant all Singapore citizens automatic conversion. But he also added that they would not do so. And I suggest that this omission is deliberate, mischievous and dishonest.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: To satisfy the Minister for Finance, I will even quote the following paragraph. I quoted one full paragraph, Sir, a little while ago. I will quote the following paragraph. The following paragraph says -

Mr Speaker: Order. I think it would be more satisfactory if both paragraphs are quoted from the very beginning.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will quote both paragraphs then, Sir,It is the Straits Times of 17th November, 1961. The heading is on merger.

`He reiterated that the present Federal Parliament would not, though it could, grant automatic Federation citizenship to Singapore citizens on merger.'

Now this is the following paragraph which the Minister for Finance is so eager to hear:

"This was because there had been laxity in awarding the first citizenships in Singapore he said.'

Mr Speaker: Order. Perhaps the Minister for Finance will his recollection of what for Queenstown said in stance was wrong.

Satisfied?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: I did not hear the Member very accurately, Mr Speaker, Sir. For some reason, a few words escaped my notice.

Dr Sheng Nam Chin: If the Minister for Finance did not hear the Member for Queenstown accurately, how could he stand up and protest?

Mr Speaker: Order. Every Member in this Assembly has a right to get up a point of order, provided it is a point of order. And that was a point of order, properly but mistakenly taken.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Of course, he has a right. I agree with you. But I would suggest that the Minister for Finance -

Mr Speaker: Order. I do not want a debate on my ruling. Will the Member for Queenstown carry on?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will carry on, Sir. I was only going to suggest that he might see a ear specialist.

Mr Speaker: Order. I am getting a little tired saying "order". I would suggest that Members pay some heed to the Chair, because the Chair might get as tough as the Prime Minister hopes to get in the near future.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will continue, Sir. Let me first state the Barisan Sosialis stand on citizenship. The stand of the Barisan Sosialis has been clarified time and time again. I shall repeat it here once more. Our stand is that every Singapore citizen should automatically become a Federal citizen on merger. That is, on merger, all 624,000 Singapore citizens, irrespective of whether they were born in Singapore, India, China, or Timbuctoo, will automatically become 624,000 Federal citizens. No more, no less. To us in the Barisan Sosialis, this is, to use the favourite phrase of the Prime Minister, basic and fundamental. On this there can be no compromise, no retreat, because in the practice of parliamentary democracy, only citizens who have the vote will be able to elect representatives, or become elected as representatives, to the Legislative Assembly or Parliament. And since the Legislative Assembly or Parliament is the highest seat of authority in the country, it means that only those who have representatives in the Legislative Assembly or Parliament will have a say in the running of the country. This is how the one man one vote system of parliamentary democracy works.

Citizenship entitles you to the right to vote and to stand for election in any part of the country. It means you can determine your own political destiny. It means you can decide what your society should be like. It means you can decide the extent of your freedom; the government you want; the law you want and do not want; the type of working conditions you wish to have; the type of education you wish your children to have; the type of health facilities you would like, and so on and so forth. Citizenship entitles you to play your part in effecting political changes in your country that will help improve the society you live in. It means you can share with the rest of your fellow citizens a common political life and destiny.

Besides the vote, of course, there are a host of other rights and privileges which are only enjoyed by citizens and not enjoyed by non-citizens. In Singapore, for example, only citizens get permanent employment in the Government offices. Children born in Singapore or are born of Singapore citizens, are given preference over others for places in Government schools. Only children born in Singapore or born of Singapore citizens, will be awarded scholarships and bursaries in schools and universities. Only citizens get legal aid and public assistance. Only citizens can be given land for resettlement. Only citizens can apply for Housing Board flats. Only Citizens are given Singapore passports. Citizens - and this is a very important point, Sir - cannot be banished from the country.

Thus we see the importance of citizenship, Sir. It is not something that comes into the life of the people only at election time. It is intimately connected with every facet of our everyday life. The way we live, work, eat, travel, learn, study, associate and so on. Sir, if merger is to have any meaning, then the Singapore citizen must become a Federation citizen. Only then will the Singapore citizen have the opportunity of sharing a common political life and destiny with his brothers across the Causeway. If, the Singapore citizen does not become a Federal citizen on merger, then merger has lost its soul. It becomes meaningless. It is no more merger. It is only a sell-out - the P.A.P. sell-out.

You can realise, therefore, Sir, that citizenship is the lifeblood of the people. Any person who claims that he represents the people, any person who has the interests of the people at heart, any person elected by the people, must, therefore, bear these basic interests of the people in mind in everything he does. He must fight for the people's rights, and especially when the person is the Prime Minister and claims to represent the people of Singapore. He must fight for these basic and fundamental rights of the people of Singapore. But has the Prime Minister done that? Has he thought of the Federal citizenship rights of the people of Singapore? No. Instead of fighting for these rights, he makes excuses. He throws up clay pigeons. He strips and teases. The Minister for Finance first says it is impossible. Then the Prime Minister says it is unreasonable; and then the Prime Minister says he would be "dotty". Let us now examine why our Prime Minister and his friends do not want to fight for the rights of the people of Singapore.

First, let me deal with the representation of the Minister for Finance. He says that under the Federal Constitution it is impossible - impossible, he says - to have automatic Federal citizenship rights for all Singapore citizens. He says that complete merger would automatically disenfranchise about half of Singapore's 630,000 citizens who are not born in Singapore. I have already quoted that, Sir, so it is not necessary for me to quote again. Or maybe I did not quote, I think. May I quote, Sir?

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: This is the Straits Times, Friday, 22nd September. He says "nearly half of the total electorate would be disenfranchised." Similarly, on the 25th of September, the Prime Minister is reported to have said that those who were clamouring for complete merger knew that it was impossible for Singapore citizens to become Federal citizens automatically on merger.

Sir, I would first like to say that there is no such thing as impossible in the matter of advancing the interests of the people. It all depends on whether or not you have the will to do it. I am sure the Minister for Finance knows the saying that if there is a will, there is a way. The trouble is that the Minister for Finance has not got the will to fight for the people's interests any more. I am sorry he is not here, Sir,I would like him to hear this. He is now fighting for his personal political survival which evidently depends on forces outside Singapore. He knows that if he should go back to Kreta Ayer at the next general elections, he will be very lucky if he does not lose his deposit. He, therefore, has to consider first, the interests of forces outside Singapore, and not the interests of Singapore itself. The interests of the people of Singapore, to him, come second.

Laws, Sir, are made to serve man, not the other way round. If a law does not serve the interests of the people but merely obstructs the advancement of the people's interests, then it becomes our duty to remove or modify this law. As politicians and statesmen - that is what the Prime Minister claims himself to be - it is our duty to protect and advance the interests of the people. Law and legal experts come in only to give legal expression and effect to the interests and aspirations of our people. It is sheer irresponsibility, to say the least, for any politician to refuse to fight for the interests of the people, just because he chooses to think that certain laws are in the way. He should not sit by and just cry "impossible". But since the P.A.P. chooses to harp on constitutional limitations, let us find out whether there is indeed any truth that there are laws existing which stand in the way of automatic Federal citizenship for all Singapore citizens on merger. As I have said earlier on, we in the Barisan Sosialis are students of politics. We shall always be so. I am a medical doctor, not a lawyer. Neither am I an economist pretending to he a constitutional expert. But we have consulted experts in our own way. Sir, and I venture to suggest to the Government Front Benchers that if they doubt the Barisan Sosialis' interpretation of the present constitutional position, they are at liberty to go and consult the constitutional experts, both inside and outside Malaya, on the matter. Maybe the Prime Minister does not care to consult the experts any more because the Tunku has already said that it is possible to have automatic Federal citizenship.

However, let us see what the Federal Constitution says about citizenship for the people of a new territory joining the Federation of Malaya. The Constitution of the Federation requires that when the Federation Parliament admits a new territory into the Federation it must provide by law as to who from the new territory are to be citizens of the Federation and when. This is known as automatic citizenship on merger. Let me read it out once more for the record, Sir. Article 22 says (this is in the Malayan Constitution Documents):

`If any new territory is admitted to the Federation in pursuance of Article 2, Parliament may by law determine what persons are to he citizens by reason of their connection with that territory and the date or dates from which such persons are to be citizens.'

Article 2 of the Federal Constitution merely provides for the admission of new territories into the Federation. It is clear from this that the Federation Parliament has complete discretion in this matter and, therefore, on the question of citizenship, either in a complete or a phoney merger, it has in any case to provide the exact terms of citizenship. It is crystal clear, therefore, that the terms of citizenship are entirely a matter for negotiation between the parties concerned. In this case, the two parties concerned are the representatives of Singapore and the Federation. The Federal Parliament has the power to say that none of the Singapore citizens should become Federal citizens. It has also the power to say that all of the Singapore citizens should be Federal, citizens. It is, therefore, absolute nonsense for the Minister for Finance to say that under the Federal Constitution it is impossible for all Singapore citizens to become Federal citizens on merger. It is only impracticable if the Federation Government refuses to agree on this. But that is entirely a different matter from being "constitutionally impossible", as he alleges.

On the 9th of October, 1961, the Prime Minister, in one of his numerous radio talks, alleged that "I learned" - I will quote, Sir, from the Straits Times, Tuesday, 10th October, 196l - "for the first time from the Minister for Finance at a radio forum that out of (I will quote the figures as mentioned here) 650,000 Singapore citizens, only half - about 325,000 - were born here and would automatically get Federal citizenship on complete merger." This, Sir, is false and the Prime Minister knows it is false; for to state that "I learned" is to say that I learned of the existence of a fact. It is true I heard the Minister for Finance say this, but what he said was not a fact but a falsehood.

Again there is no such thing as "automatic disenfranchisement" except as to be provided by the Federal law which will be passed by the Federal Parliament to admit Singapore into the Federation and to provide for citizenship. Sir, it is of the utmost importance that the people of Singapore must know that, on merger, citizenship depends on an Act of the Federation Parliament, which in turn depends on the agreement reached during negotations between the two Governments. Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to challenge the P.A.P. Government to seek expert opinion on constitutional law, whether from Singapore or from outside, to check the correctness of my statement. You will find that I am telling you the simple truth. The stand of the Barisan Sosialis is simply this. In the negotiations for merger both Governments should agree that all Singapore citizens on the date of merger become Federation citizens. It is for the Governments to agree that all persons who are already citizens of Singapore immediately before the merger date will, by operation of law, become Federal citizens. Such an agreement could be given legal effect in pursuance of Article 22 of the Federal Constitution. Whether or not the Federation Government is agreeable is a matter for negotiation. We in the Barisan Sosialis believe that merger is a unification not only of our territories but also of our people. We believe that on merger all Singapore citizens must be given the same rights and status as those enjoyed by the citizens of the Federation. The only way to do that is for the Singapore citizen to become the Federal citizen.

The Tunku has categorically stated in the recent Federal Parliament debate on merger that he is prepared to give these equal rights and equal status to the citizens of the Borneo territories. Does not the Minister for Finance now admit that it was silly and foolish of him to say that it is constitutionally not possible for all Singapore citizens to become Federal citizens on merger, when the Tunku himself is prepared to grant citizenship rights to all citizens of the Borneo territories? I wonder what the Minister for Finance was thinking about when he pulled this fast one on the people. Yes, why did he do it? Does he really think that fighting for political power is so much more important than advancing the interests of the people?

Let me stress once again in this House our views on citizenship. The Barisan Sosialis regards as absolutely fundamental that merger must mean that, (1) all those persons who are considered fit to be citizens of Singapore should also be considered fit to be citizens of the Federation on merger - that is, they must all be made citizens of the Federation by operation of law; and (2) these citizenship rights once granted must not be revocable for political reasons. Anything short of this is not merger but a sell-out.

Let me, Sir, explain why we regard these two points as absolutely fundamental. It is important that the conversion of Singapore citizenship to Federation citizenship must be effected by operation of law, because "registration" may mean that Federation politicians could deprive the citizenship of Singaporeans who do not agree with their politics. For the same reason, to ensure that citizenship rights must not be left to the whims and fancies of politicians, we believe it is essential that these rights, once effected by operation of law, must be irrevocable for political reasons.

In terms of constitutional procedure, it is in fact much more simple to let all Singapore citizens become Federal citizens by operation of law than to effect the P.A.P.'s proposals of separate citizenship and the establishment of a Federal nationality, a term that is not found in the present Federal Constitution at all. In fact, the P.A.P., by bringing in the Federal national, merely proves our point, that there is nothing that is impossible under the Constitution. When it suits the P.A.P.'s purpose of camouflaging a sell-out, it is possible for them to introduce a whole set of laws to frame an entirely new invention - the Federal national - whereas when it does not suit the P.A.P., everything becomes impossible.

I am no constitutional expert but I could suggest to them the following. As the Federal Constitution was not written to include Singapore, it can only be applied by analogy. Words like "Merdeka Day" would have to be read "Merger Day". The provisions for automatic Federal citizenship on merdeka is governed by Article 14 of the Federal Constitution, Part II, under Citizenship, which reads as follows:

'(1) Subject to Clause (2), the following persons are citizens by operation of law, that is to say:

(a) every person who, immediately before Merdeka Day, was a citizen of the Federation by virtue of any of the provisions of the Federation of Malaya Agreement, 1948, whether by operation of law or otherwise;.'

The other clauses in this Article of the Constitution do not concern us here. The above clause clearly provides that all those who were citizens of the Federation immediately before Merdeka Day should automatically become citizens of the Federation of Malaya on its attainment of independence. Similarly' it can be easily provided by law that all those who were citizens of Singapore immediately before Merger Day should automatically become citizens of the new Federation of Malaya on merger. Under such a simple legal arrangement, no citizen of Singapore will be deprived of the Singapore citizenship status on Merger, for a Singapore citizenship status will be automatically converted to Federal citizenship status by the operation of such a law. Under such an arrangement, therefore, those Singapore citizens who were not born in Singapore and who have obtained Singapore citizenship either by registration or by naturalization need not have to register again for Federal citizenship rights. I repeat "need not have to register again for Federal citizenship rights". The question of residential qualification and language test will therefore be irrelevant. This law will apply only to persons who immediately before Merger Day are already citizens of Singapore; that is, all persons who are already citizens of Singapore immediately before merger will, by operation of this law, automatically become Federal citizens. It is therefore only a transitional provision and is not intended to apply to any other person whatever his connection with Singapore after merger. After merger, the position of citizenship rights for those persons who are not Singapore citizens before Merger Day will be governed by non-transitional citizenship laws as stated in Part III of the Federal Constitution. In other words, Sir, all persons born in Singapore on or after the date of merger will automatically become Federal citizens by right of birth, just like any person born now in the Federation; whereas those persons in Singapore who are not citizens of Singapore immediately before merger - and therefore not entitled to automatic Federal citizenship by operation of the above-mentioned transitional provision - may subsequently become Federal citizens either by registration or by naturalization under existing Federal citizenship laws, which for practical purposes are the same as the present citizenship laws in Singapore. I think our legal luminaries in this Chamber can verify all this.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have clearly shown that under the Constitution of the Federation, it is not only not impossible but, on the contrary, absolutely possible - and in fact also quite simple - for all Singapore citizens to become Federal citizens on merger. The problem only lies in obtaining the Federation Government's consent to agreeing on the just and legitimate aspirations of the people of Singapore.

Sir, all this is a matter for negotiation. Our Prime Minister has a responsibility to look after the interests of the people of Singapore. Why has he not done so? Has he to depend on Lim Kean Siew and Seenivasagam? If the Federation Government is truly sincere in wanting merger and achieving the genuine unification of the peoples of the two territories, then it must accept all Singapore citizens as citizens of the Federation on merger in the same way as it is prepared to accept the citizens of the Borneo territories on formation of the Tunku's Malaysia. This is not a demand that can be construed as "Communist-inspired or placing ob stacles" - the Prime Minister's words - in the way of merger. It is simply a fair and democratic way of achieving the political integration of the people of both territories based on equality, democracy and justice. The Prime Minister said, "Conditions must be fair and just." Is it fair and just to the Singapore citizen when he does not automatically become a Federal citizen on merger? If there is no merger, why harp on merger all the time? Why does the Prime Minister want Federation Members of Parliament to fight the battle of citizenship on behalf of the people of Singapore? Who is the Member for Tanjong Pagar? Was he not elected by the people of Singapore? Is he not the Prime Minister of Singapore? Then why does he not fight for the interests of the people of Singapore? If our Prime Minister wants to fight for the interests of non-Singaporeans, why does he not resign and give up the post of Prime Minister? Does he think that having several classes of citizenship is fair and just? [Laughter] They laugh. Dare they laugh this off in the face of the people?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Why don't you -

Mr Speaker: Order.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Is that what they want? The Prime Minister says, "To a more equal and just society" - Is that fair? Is that equal? Is that just?

Dr Toh Chin Chye: On a point of order, Sir,I see no reason why my eardrums should be so much disturbed. I do not require an E.N.T. specialist.

Mr Speaker: I suppose that is a point of order. The Member for Queenstown should try and modulate his voice.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: What about mine?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Sir, when one talks of citizenship, when one sees how people have been selling out the interests of the people, one cannot help becoming angry. They are traitors, treacherous traitors! If the Prime Minister of Singapore fights for the interests of non-Singaporeans and for forces outside Singapore, he is not only a traitor hut a super-traitor. If the P.A.P. Government is sincere in guarding the interests of the people of Singapore, he must not negotiate for merger with an attitude of defeatism and submissiveness. Merger is something that should bring mutual benefit to the peoples of both territories. The people of Singapore must, therefore, not approach the negotiations on merger with an inferiority complex.

The P.A.P. in its booklet, The Tasks Ahead, issued in 1959 before the general elections, declared - this is the famous Tasks Ahead, the P.A.P.'s Five-year Plan which the P.A.P. has completely forgotten - Part I, page 21 (they are talking about the common market):

`A P.A.P. government [I will leave out the irrelevant parts] . . . need not approach the Federation government in the role of supplicants for favours.'

Now they are begging on all fours. The P.A.P. was able to say this at that time because they then had the support of the people of Singapore, and because they then knew that all the people were behind them. Now that they have lost the people's support, it is clear that they are now approaching the Tunku not only on bended knees but also with outstretched hands waiting for alms.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the basis of our negotiations on merger must be on whether it is to the interests of the people of Singapore, and not whether it is acceptable to the Federation Government. What is unacceptable to the Federation Government may not necessarily be bad for the people of Singapore, and what is acceptable to the Federation Government may not necessarily be good for the people of Singapore. If the interests of our people have to be looked after, then it is our duty to fight for them, even at `the risk of being considered dotty. It is for us then to convince our friends across the table that we are, in fact, not dotty but are merely asking for something that is legitimate and reasonable for our people. It may be that our Prime Minister in his desperation has gone dotty in not having fought for the basic interests of the people of Singapore. For the Singapore Prime Minister to ask our friends in the Federation Parliament to move a motion to give Federal citizenship to all Singapore citizens merely shows the irresponsibility of the Prime Minister.

Mr Speaker: Order. I think the hon. Member for Queenstown has touched on that aspect on at least three occasions. There is a certain amount of repetition which might eventually be tedious. Perhaps he should try not to repeat what he has said so often.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I merely want to emphasise the irresponsibility of the Prime Minister, Sir. We implore the Prime Minister not to shirk his responsibility and not to pass the buck. Incidentally that ridiculous statement by the Prime Minister only serves further to prove that he has reluctantly accepted the Barisan Sosialis' position as being the correct one, namely, that the Federal Constitution empowers the Federal Parliament to a full discussion over the terms of citizenship on merger, and that it is up to our Prime Minister to negotiate on Singapore's behalf.

We challenge the P.A.P. Government to a general election on this basic issue of people's citizenship -

Tun Lim Yew Hock: By-election.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: - for all citizens on merger. Have they the guts to accept?

Let me now, Sir, deal with the Prime Minister's lame excuse - that it is unreasonable to demand that all Singapore citizens should become Federal citizens on merger. The P.A.P. line is that on full and complete merger it is not reasonable to demand for Federal citizenship for those Singapore citizens who were not born in Singapore, because (1) these Singapore citizens do not have the residential qualification required under the present Federal citizenship laws; (2) they have not passed a language test as required by the Federation law. In the first place, as I have pointed out earlier, Sir, it is possible for all Singapore citizens automatically to become Federal citizens by operation of law passed in pursuance of Article 22 of the Federal Constitution, in which case, of course, all this talk of residential qualification and language test becomes completely irrelevant. They are only red herrings. But let me, nevertheless, deal with these mischievous arguments of the P.A.P. just to expose their hollowness. Let us examine the facts.

Let me first summarise the requirements of the Federation Constitution on citizenship. Under the Federation Constitution, Federal citizenship can be acquired by one of three procedures. Let me quote "Citizenship by operation of law" as set out in Article 14. The salient features are that a person can become a Federal citizen `by operation of law if he was (a) a citizen of the Federation before Merdeka Day, or (b) was born in the Federation of Malaya on or after Merdeka Day.

"Citizenship by registration" - I have no wish to read this out, Sir, but for the record I think it is useful. There are three main categories: (a) Citizenship by registration (wives and children of citizens) as provided in Article 15: residential qualification and language test are not required in these cases. (b) Citizenship by registration (persons born in the Federation before Merdeka Day) as provided for in Article 16: the main requirements here are a residential qualification of at least five years during the seven years immediately preceding the date of application, that he is of good character, that he must have an elementary knowledge of the Malay language. This language requirement is waived where the applications were made within one year after Merdeka Day - for one year they need not have to bother about the Malay language test. And then under (c) "Citizenship by registration (persons resident in the Federation on Merdeka Day)" as specified in Article 17. Here the requirement is similar to that in Article 16 except that the residential qualification is 8 out of the 12 years immediately preceding application. The language requirement is also waived during the first year of Merdeka, and also for those who have attained the age of 45 on the date of application.

Then comes "Citizenship by naturalization". Here the main requirements are a residential qualification of 10 years out of the 12 years preceding application. He must be of good character. He must have an adequate knowledge of the Malay language. You will note that the Prime Minister is playing only on the ten-year residential qualification and the language barrier in the naturalization laws in order to frighten the citizens of Singapore who were not born here.

Let us now briefly, Sir, see how the citizenship laws in Singapore operate. The Singapore Citizenship Ordinance, 1957, came into force on 1st November, 1957. Under this Ordinance, Singapore citizenship could be acquired by birth in Singapore, citizenship by descent, citizenship by registration, which has two main categories - those born in the Federation and those who are citizens of the United Kingdom and British colonies. The residential qualification here was only two years. For those who were born in China and other foreign countries, the residential qualification here was that they must have 8 years' residence immediately preceding the date when application for this category of citizenship should be made within two years from 1st November, 1957. Incidentally, Sir, citizenship by naturalization did not come into force on 1st November, 1957. The Prime Minister has chosen to emphasise this residential qualification of two years for those born in the Federation and the U.K. and Colonies, and 8 years for those born elsewhere, and argues that it is therefore not reasonable for these groups of Singapore citizens to demand Federation citizenship rights in view of the ten-year residential qualification and language tests required under the naturalization laws of the Federation. In support of his argument, the Prime Minister takes on those Singapore citizens who were not born here. The Prime Minister has conceded that all Singapore citizens who were born here have the right to automatic Federal citizenship on complete merger though, and we must note this very carefully, Sir, the P.A.P.'s phoney merger does not even give these rights. But I shall deal with that later.

The argument of the Prime Minister centres on those Singapore citizens who were not born here and is based on two points: (a) an alleged lack of residential qualification of ten years as required by the Federation naturalisation law; and (b) the fact that these Singapore citizens did not undergo a Malay language test as required by the Federation laws. At first the Minister for Finance, on the 21st of September, 1961, contended that "all these 300,000-odd citizens" - those were the figures at the moment, Sir - "not born here would automatically lose their citizenship rights on complete merger." But later, on the 27th October, 1961, the Prime Minister cut this down to 200,000. saying that 100,000 - of course, the figure now is 110,000 - of this 300,000 may successfully apply for registration and pass the language test. Let me first dismiss all this hullabaloo about the language qualification. Under the Federation Constitution, this language requirement was waived for applicants during the first year after Merdeka Day, as I have already mentioned, and for those reaching 45 years of age, it is not necessary at all. Is the Prime Minister saying that this cannot also be done in the case of merger, and that the language barrier cannot be waived during the first year after merger? Does the Prime Minister want to lay down conditions even harsher and more stringent than the Federation constitution? Already as the result of memoranda and representations from Assemblymen and past P.A.P. Branch executives who are now with the Barisan Sosialis -

An hon. Member: Oh God!

Dr Lee Siew Choh: - the Malay language test in Singapore is now waived for all those over thirty. I wonder if it has been done. It has been recommended. We recommended it, and I hope they have carried this out. So the Malay language test should not be a barrier.

Let me then deal with alleged lack of residential qualification. Here again the Prime Minister is trying to be more stringent than the Federation Government. He must insist on the ten-year residential qualification required under the naturalization laws, and conveniently forgets that the Federation Constitution provides for citizenship by registration for those who were resident in the Federation on Merdeka Day, the residential qualification here being only 8 years. We want to ask: Why cannot this pro-vision be given to those who are resident in Singapore on Merger Day? After all, is not the Prime Minister trying to tell us that he is getting us Merdeka through merger? But let me argue on the basis of his ten-year qualification. The fact is that most of the people in Singapore who were not born here have been residing here since 1952, except for those who come from the Federation and who cannot be considered as aliens anyway. Stringent safeguards were made to guard against the large influx of aliens after the war, and according to immigration reports of post-war years a policy of selective immigration on a severely restricted basis was introduced. When the Immigration Ordinance of 1952 was passed providing for selective immigration, control of entry of aliens became even more strict. Most of the Singapore citizens who obtained their citizenship by registration in 1957 did so under the requirements of 8 years' residential qualification. In fact, the reason given by the then chief Minister for this 8-year residential qualification was that it was to facilitate the registration procedure, as the identity card system was introduced in late 1948. The registration of these citizens was done mainly on the basis of the 1948 identity card. That is to say, most of the Singapore citizens who obtained their citizenship by registration in 1957 have, in fact, been resident here since -

Dr Goh Keng Swee: On a point of elucidation.

Mr Speaker: If the Member will give way. The Member will not give way. The Minister will take his seat.

Dr Goh Keng Swee resumed his seat.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: It is a manoeuvre. Sir.

Mr Speaker: Please continue. Dr Lee.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I bow to your decision. Sir.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Scared!

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I was saying, Sir, that most of the Singapore citizens who obtained their citizenship by registration in 1957 have, in fact, been resident here since 1948. 1948-1961, 13 years ago. That is more than the ten-year residential qualification required under the Federation naturalization law, which only require 10 years out of 12. And by 1963 when "merger" is supposed to take place (inverted commas "merger"), they will have 13 plus two, which means 15 years' residence.

The Prime Minister: Where? In Singapore or the Federation?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: What more does the Prime Minister want? Does he think this is not fair and just, Sir? After 15 years' residence in Singapore and still -

The Prime Minister: On a point of order.

Mr Speaker: Point of order?

The Prime Minister: When a speaker asks me a question, am I not allowed to reply, Sir?

Mr Speaker: Order. Those questions, of course, are rhetorical and the Prime Minister will have an opportunity of replying in due course.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: As I have pointed out, Sir, this provision of the 1957 Singapore Citizenship Ordinance allowing only 8 year's residential qualification was operative only for a two-year period, that is from 1957 to 1959. Even where those citizens registered themselves at the end of this two-year period, that is, in 1959 - let us calculate arithmetic, Sir - they still have by now at least ten years' residential qualification, because when they registered two years ago, in 1959, they must have at that time at least 8 years residence in order to qualify. Let us add 2 to 8, that is by 1961 - that gives you 10, which should already satisfy the 10-year residential qualification. And if we should add 2 to 10, that is to say by 1963, when this phoney merger is supposed to take place. they will have already 12 years' residential qualification. The fact, therefore, then is that most of the 300,000 Singapore citizens who were not born here have by now at least 10 years' residence in Singapore, and by 1963 it will be at least 12 years. The few that do not have 10 years' residence are those who have obtained citizenship rights with the 2-year residential qualification provided for in the 1957 Singapore Citizenship Ordinance for those either born in the Federation or in the U.K. and Colonies. Most of them in this group were, in fact, born in the Federation and cannot be considered as aliens to this country at any rate. These Singapore citizens born in the Federation could in any case obtain Federal citizenship by registration under Federal citizenship laws with only a 5-year residential qualification and not 10 years - not 10 years. Moreover, in May 1960, the P.A.P. amended the citizenship laws in Singapore. I have got it down here as No. 40 of 1960 - I am not going to quote that, Sir - and thereafter persons born in the Federation require an 8-year residence in Singapore before they can become Singapore citizens. So what is all this talk about black marketing and currency exchange cheating and all that? Why all this cheating? Why cannot the P.A.P. leaders come out with the truth and tell the people that they have not been doing their duty, that they have been irresponsible to the people of Singapore, and that they have not been looking after the interests of the people? The number of persons born in the U.K. and Colonies who have obtained Singapore citizenship under the 1957 Singapore Citizenship Ordinance is probably very small, perhaps a few thousand. They comprise, I believe, mainly ex-servicemen and expatriates who choose to settle here for one reason or another. The Prime Minister cannot escape responsibility for this awkward provision of the 1957 Singapore Citizenship Ordinance as he was a member of the Select Committee which drew up the Bill. It is clear, however, that the Prime Minister is using the existence of this small number of Singapore citizens born in the U.K. and Colonies -

The Prime Minister: And India.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: - as a feeble excuse to block genuine merger and to grant second-rate citizenship status to our people in Singapore. Is it fair that just because of these few citizens all of us are denied an equal citizenship status? This is nothing but a lousy camouflage for a treacherous sell-out. Just because of these few Europeans and ex-servicemen who do not have the 10-year residential qualification, the P.A.P. is trying to bring about a phoney merger under which not a single Singapore citizen will obtain Federal citizenship rights. Is this fair and just? The P.A.P. alleges that under complete merger only those 323,000 citizens who were born here - maybe I will have to change that figure because of the new development of 624,000 from 650,000; anyway I will stick to this 323,000, Sir - that is, about half of Singapore's 624,000 citizens, will automatically get Federal citizenship. But Mr Speaker, Sir, the fact is that under the P.A.P. phoney merger, even these 323,00 citizens born in Singapore, or the new figure of 284,000, will not get automatic Federal citizenshp rights. The fact is that under the P.A.P.'s phone y merger not a single Singapore citizen, not even those who were born in Singapore, will get automatic Federal citizenship rights. This is a very ugly fact which the Prime Minister has so far successfully concealed from the people and I challenge the Prime Minister to categorically deny this -

Mr Lee Teck Him (Tiong Bahru) sneezed. [Laughter]

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I challenge the Prime Minister -

Mr Lee Teck Him sneezed again. [Laughter]

Mr Speaker: Order. I was under the impression that the first sneeze was perhaps due to the dryness of this atmosphere; but if the Member for Tiong Bahru cannot behave himself, I may have to apply Standing Orders, which might mean that he will have to leave this Assembly Chamber. He must not make noises. He must not, in fact, emulate the Member for Anson.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I was saying. Sir, I challenge the Prime Minister to state categorically in this Chamber if there is a single group of Singapore citizens who will have automatic Federal citizenship rights under their brand of merger. Let the people know the truth.

Mr Speaker: Order. This is another occasion. I suppose, when the Member for Queenstown is losing his temper. He is getting angry. But I think he should try and modulate his voice.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I am sorry, Sir. When one meets with treachery like this, one cannot help but be angry, Sir.

In fact, on the 26th of October, 1961, the Straits Times attempted to misrepresent what the Prime Minister had said at a Press conference held the previous day, trying to mislead the people into believing that under the P.A.P.'s phoney merger all those who were born in Singapore would automatically become Federal citizens. Let me quote, Sir, the Straits Times, Thursday, 26th October, under bold headlines -

"ALL SINGAPORE BORN - AUTOMATIC CITIZENS".

And it says -

The Prime Minister rose -

Mr Speaker: On a point of order?

The Prime Minister: Yes. When the Member is fully aware that that, in fact, was a misreport and he has read the correction, ought he not really to have read the correction instead of reading the misreport and adding to the confusion of this House?

Mr Speaker: If, in fact, there was a correction, I think the Member for Queenstown should point it out.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will show the correction, Sir, in due course.

The Prime Minister: On a point of order. Sir. My point of order is this. That what the Member for Queenstown proposes now to read will create confusion which requires correction; and he is now proposing to add to the confusion by repeating that mistake.

Mr Speaker: I think the Member for Queenstown is trying to be historically accurate, but he must say, of course, before `he reads that statement that it was subsequently corrected.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I want to be historically correct, Sir. It says here:

`Mr Lee said that after merger, (meaning the P.A.P. brand of merger) Singapore-born citizens would automatically become Federation citizens, but other Singapore citizens would have to satisfy the Federation citizenship laws on residence and pass a language test.'

I am going to show the correction, Sir. The next day the Prime Minister quickly issued a statement which said that the Straits Times report of his Press conference held the previous day on the question of citizenship needed clarification and correction. In the statement he was - now this is important - significantly silent on the subject of automatic Federal citizenship rights for Singapore citizens born in Singapore after the P.A.P.'s phoney merger. In fact, the only thing he said of Singapore citizens being able to obtain Federal citizenship is this. Now, I will quote him, Sir. This is the Straits Timex of 27th October:

`Any Singapore citizen who wishes to live in the present Federation and become a citizen of the present Federation can apply for citizenship of the present Federation under the laws of the present Federation.'

All the time it was present Federation laws.

The Prime Minister: You said they would all qualify, so why worry?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Sir, this innocent-looking statement -

Dato Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat (Geylang Serai): Mr Speaker, on a point of order.

Mr Speaker: On a point of order.

Dr Lee Siew Choh resumed his .seat.

Dato Abdul Hamid: Could we have the date on which the speech or the interview given by the Prime Minister was published in the Straits Times? Both of them, Sir.

Mr Speaker: That was given. If the Member was listening, the date of the paper was given.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I did give the date, Sir. It was the 26th and now it is the 27th, the day following.

This innocent-looking statement, Sir, covers a multitude of sins, it means, in the first place, that if a Singapore citizen goes to the Federation after the P.A.P.'s phoney merger, he will become disenfranchised and will not be allowed to vote or to stand for election in the Federation.

Mr Speaker: Order. Moment of interruption.