BY-ELECTIONS IN ANSON AND GEYLANG WEST CONSTITUENCIES

3.21 pm

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the original wording of the motion was: This House disapproves the refusal of the Government to hold by-elections at Anson and Geylang West constituencies. This is pursuant to the answer given by the Prime Minister on 28th July 1987 [Hansard, Vol. 49, cols. 1415-6] when he said "no by-election will be held in Anson and Geylang West constituencies."

Sir, in the first three years of the 1960s, the PAP was fighting for its dear life. At one stage, it had one seat less than the Opposition in the then Legislative Assembly. By 1968, after three years of Singapore's independence, the picture was completely different. In that year's general elections, the PAP won all 65 seats in Parliament, albeit 51 seats were returned unopposed. The Prime Minister was not altogether jubilant. In fact, he expressed disappointment because there was a lack of Opposition. He pointed out that 30 of the PAP candidates had not experienced "the tough, vicious and ruthless fighting the Communists had shown in the past."

We are now in the 1980s. We have no Communists or their proxies to fight in the polls. But we do have the Opposition in Singapore who believe strenuously in getting into Parliament by constitutional means. The Opposition in Singapore are certainly not vicious or ruthless as the Communists but they are tough and enduring. And more importantly, the Government knows that they do have a big support at the ground today, and that is the real reason why the Government refuses to hold by-elections in the vacant constituencies of Anson and Geylang West. If by-elections were held this year, the ruling party's candidates in both those constituencies I would say, and to use a boxing term, will be knocked out in the first round. The Government should be honest with the people of Singapore and come out truthfully and say, "Yes, we refuse to hold by-elections at Anson and Geylang West because we are going to lose two seats in Parliament." If the Government had said that, I would certainly have more respect for it than the lame excuses offered by Ministers. One excuse was that the Government would make a decision in the latter half of the year. I suppose that decision, today, has already been indicated. In any event, that announcement was made on the 4th March in this House. I say that is an excuse. Because we have now come to the end of the year and the year-end is already around the corner and I still believe probably there would not be any by-elections.

As for the formation of group MPs, that is also another excuse. What has the election, by grouping constituencies together, got to do with the by-elections?

The by-elections by group MPs will only take place probably, at best, next year. In the meantime, for the whole of this year, is it right to deprive the voters of Anson and Geylang West to choose an MP of their own choice? In February 1967, there were five by-elections, namely, in Bukit Panjang, Havelock, Jalan Kayu, Tampines and Thomson. One year later, in February 1968, there were general elections, just after a lapse of one year.

The next general elections will certainly not be held in December. At best, probably it will be held early next year. So the voters in Anson and Geylang West have been definitely deprived of the services of an MP which they want to choose for themselves for one whole year.

In the 1960s and the 70s, almost all by-elections were held within three or four months of those parliamentary seats becoming vacant, for whatever reasons. The Hong Lim by-election was held within one month of its becoming vacant on 16th July 1965. So also the by-elections in Jurong, Bukit Timah and Joo Chiat were held within one month of their becoming vacant on 7th October 1966.

Why does the ruling party refuse to hold by-elections in Anson and Geylang West this year? Many have said that the new leaders have no confidence in themselves. Unlike the old leaders or the old guards, I am sure they know that they may lose the by-elections, just as in Hong Lim and at Anson, both held in 1961. And yet they went ahead with them but, of course, they lost both those constituencies, the former to Ong Eng Guan and the latter to David Marshall. I believe that the new leaders cannot take any electoral defeats before the next general elections. With two more defeats coming after the two defeats at the last general elections, they probably believe that the ground may just slip from their grasp at the next general elections. Also, a defeat in Anson and Geylang West may not mean just a loss of two more seats to the PAP, it could well mean a vote of no confidence in the Government and that could spell the end of the PAP era in Singapore.

For the reasons given, the ruling party will never hold by-elections in Anson and Geylang West. This must surely cast doubts on the PAP whether they really believe in the Westminster style of parliamentary democratic system which we now have. As long as the Government is secure under this present system, the system will remain intact. What happens if the Government is threatened with an imminent defeat at the polls? Will the Government still maintain the present form of parliamentary democracy? I hope an assurance can be given by the Government that Singapore will maintain a democratic Westminster style of parliamentary system and not tamper with the Constitution with a view to changing the system to a system where the basic democratic rights of the people and the supremacy of Parliament are lost to us forever. When that day comes, it will be a black day for Singapore because we would have embarked on the road to a dictatorship.

The Minister for Trade and Industry in an international conference held in Singapore recently said, "If the PAP loses, nobody can assume that the political system will remain." I will assume that the political system referred to by the Minister is our present parliamentary system. If that is the case, what he said is also true of the PAP. I can also say that if the `PAP wins the next general elections, we cannot assume that our present parliamentary system will remain intact.

The Minister also said, "No Opposition party offers a plausible alternative government." How can the Opposition offer a plausible alternative government if the ruling party keeps all doors shut to them? Why does not the Government hold the by-elections this year and it may be the start of the Opposition on its road to form a plausible Government.

On the one hand, the Government does not play by the rules. On the other hand, it says the Opposition can never win. I say this to the new leaders of the PAP: If you are men, let us have the by-elections. If you do not, I would say that you are all still boys. Why are you so afraid to lose just two more seats? You have the full Government machinery, the press, the radio, the television, on your side, yet why are you so scared? The PAP has said many a time, "Confidence is important", but obviously you do not have any more confidence left in yourselves. Let us not just talk of confidence but let us see you put to the test your confidence. The Opposition, I can tell you, is prepared and raring to have a good fight at the by-elections. Are you ready? No answers. We are ready.

The voters in Anson and Geylang West have paid their income taxes, their conservancy charges and all other outgoings and they are good, law-abiding citizens. Then, please do not deprive them of the right to choose a representative of their own choice in Parliament. As it is, both these constituencies already have been deprived of a true MP for a year, or close to a year in the case of Geylang West. They must be given a chance to have a say in this regard. The PAP has no right to send a caretaker MP to Geylang West or get a prospective candidate to act as a caretaker MP at Anson. If that is right, if that is the proper thing, then why bother to hold by-elections at all? By the same token, MPs can just be appointed and not elected by the people. They can just be sent down to the constituencies.

I am just wondering whether the PAP really and sincerely believes in the true spirit and essence of parliamentary democracy. The Government has preached the concept of excellence which I fully support, but why leave that concept of excellence out of our political system? If the Government believes in parliamentary democracy, then let us have excellence in the practice of it. When by-elections are due, let us hold them and not hedge, dilly-dally, or make all kinds of excuses. Please do not make any kind of excuses any more. Let us go on with the by-elections and prove that you are men.

The First Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Goh Chok Tong): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we all know that the Member for Potong Pasir is very keen to prove his manhood.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Aren't you?

Mr Goh Chok Tong: I am prepared to wager with any Member in this House that when we contest the next election, whether it is a by-election or the general election, that the Member for Potong Pasir or the SDP will not be there to contest against the PAP in Anson Constituency. I remember that when we had this by-election in October 1981, reading in the Straits Times about Mr Chiam rushing in to contest the election. Mr Chiam was leading the SDP. "We are going in, we are going in," said he. And he rushed into the Anson Nomination Centre. Then he bumped straight into Mr Jeyaretnam and very quickly chickened out. The SDP and the Workers' Party were contesting to be the first party to break the PAP's monopoly. And there you have a man, who says we are not man enough, rushing in into the Nomination Centre and chickening out very quickly. I do not think that spoke very well at that point of time for his manhood. I am prepared, as I said just now, to wager with him that at the next election in Anson Mr Chiam would not be man enough to stand there against the PAP. The PAP will be there, and we are telling him now that Mr Ng Pock Too will be there in Anson. We have declared who we want to field in Anson.

Would you be man enough to contest against Mr Ng Pock Too in Anson, whether it is a by-election or in the general election? I am referring to Mr Chiam, Leader of the SDP, whether he is man enough to contest in that ward.

The reason for not holding a by-election in Anson or Geylang West has been explained to the House, and this is a serious reason. It has nothing to do with the fear of a defeat. We can lose two seats in Anson and Geylang West. Actually, it is not two seats. It is only one seat because Anson was not ours. Let us say we lose one more seat. It makes not the slightest difference to Government or to the PAP in this House. But the reason for not going ahead with the by-election this year was given by the Prime Minister in July and that was: we are contemplating introducing a Bill to form Town Councils.

When Town Councils are formed after the Bill has been passed in Parliament, we envisage that certain constituencies will be grouped together so that the Members of Parliament can have a viable Town Council of three or four MPs banding together. It is possible that some boundaries will be re-delineated and it is also possible that some constituencies could be lost because, as you know, voters or the population have been shifting from the older constituencies into new towns. It is possible that Anson or Geylang West could be affected, either by a change in their boundary, delineation, or perhaps by the constituency being divided into parts which can be absorbed by the neighbouring constituencies. We do not know. It is very painful for any MP, whether he is a PAP MP or an Opposition MP, to have cultivated the grassroots only to lose them in the next election. It is for this reason that wethought it wise not to have a by-election until the Bill is presented to Parliament.

Also, we have decided that any aspiring Member of Parliament should understand fully that it is our intention that when you win a seat in Parliament you are also vested with the responsibility of looking after the constituency. Take lift maintenance or cleanliness of the environment, for example. These are two fairly important responsibilities which we intend to pass on to the Members of Parliament, whether they are PAP Members of Parliament or Opposition Members of Parliament. At the moment, any Opposition cndidate can stand on the platform and talk about manhood or talk about PAP's fear of losing a by-election, because he can just talk. There is no other responsibility attached to his getting elected into Parliament. In any future election, it is our intention that the MP understands fully that he is responsible also for the well-being of his constituents.

This Bill has taken some time for us to draft. We think it is a matter of two or three months before we come up with the final shape of the Bill and present it to Parliament, and we will take it from there. But we want to make it clear to any aspiring Members of Parliament: that in any election you contest hereafter, it is your responsibility not just to speak. It is your responsibility to back up your speech and your words with action. You must have that capability to run your constituency. If you cannot and you can persuade the voters to vote for you, so be it. You have an MP but also an MP who is responsible for your well-being in the constituency. This is an important change in the concept of parliamentary democracy, not just speeches but the ability to back up your words with action. As I said, this Bill is now in the final stages of drafting. Once the Bill is presented to Parliament, Town Councils are formed, we can talk about elections or by-elections.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, can I just have a few words.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The debate has ended, Mr Chiam.

Mr Chiam See Tong: The Minister talks about responsibility. I think I should be given a chance to clarify.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Chiam, the debate has ended.

Mr Chiam See Tong: At the moment, all Opposition Members are not given a chance to even manage the CCs. Why is that so?

Mr Goh Chok Tong: The reason is simple. Because there is no Bill to that effect. Once we pass the Town Council Bill, then the Members of Parliament will clearly have their responsibility. And it is our intention that any future candidate understands fully what his responsibilities are.

Mr Chiam See Tong: But you are not giving us that responsibility.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That Parliament do now adjourn.

Adjourned accordingly at Seventeen Minutes to Four o'clock pm to a date to be fixed. tables - BILATERAL EXCHANGE RATES OF NICS AGAINST US$, SINGAPORE TRADE AND CURRENT ACCOUNT BALANCE, US BALANCE OF TRADE (Cols. 141 - 146)