ARTICLE BY MR CHERIAN GEORGE IN STRAITS TIMES

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Mr Speaker, Sir, on Friday, 11th March 1994, I informed this House that the article entitled "Hold the guillotine when issues are of public concern" by Mr Cherian George, published in the column "From the Gallery" in the Straits Times on 10th March 1994, was a breach of Parliamentary privilege and a contempt of Parliament. I told Members that I hoped Mr George, after reading my clarification of the procedures which apply to the Committee of Supply and to Members who wish to raise issues for debate, would withdraw unconditionally his criticisms of the proceedings, the Speaker and Deputy Speaker, and publish this retraction in the same "From the Gallery" column in the Straits Times. I also said that after I had read Mr George's response to my statement, I would decide whether it was necessary to make a formal complaint to the Committee of Privileges.

Mr George responded to my statement in the "From the Gallery" column in the Straits Times of 12th March, entitled "No malice - and no offence meant". I quote:

`I am glad I am given the opportunity to clarify my comments.

They were most definitely not written in malice.

I wrote the column out of a sincere desire to give constructive feedback to an institution which I hold in high regard.

I did not presume in my column to say, nor did it ever cross my mind, that the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker had been unfair and improper in the way they applied the guillotine that day.

Therefore I regret very much that my column, in Mr Wong's words, carried the innuendo that "the Speaker and Deputy Speaker had stifled debate and were not using the guillotine procedure in a fair and proper manner".

I apologise unreservedly for having created this impression in any reader.

At no time did I or the editors with whom I discussed my column prior to writing it, ever feel that debate had been "stifled" or the guillotine abused.

I agree with Mr Wong entirely that coming to such a conclusion would certainly be "an unjust reflection on the conduct of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker in the discharge of their duties".

I withdraw my offending words unconditionally.

Indeed, as someone who has attended most Parliament sittings over the past 3 1/2 years, I am only too happy to put on record my respect for the Speaker and his deputies.

In the eyes of this citizen, they have, at all times, discharged their duties with fairness and dignity.'

Sir, Mr George has thus promptly and unconditionally withdrawn his criticisms and apologised for the innuendo in his article of 10th March. In view of this prompt response from Mr George, I will not refer the matter to the Committee of Privileges but will treat it as closed.

Mr Speaker: In view of the unreserved apology and unconditional retraction by Mr Cherian George and the remarks of the Leader of the House, I will now treat the matter as closed.