CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN (Terms of ratification)

Dr Kanwaljit Soin asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (i) what terms have been ratified in, (ii) whether there are reservations on, and (iii) what are the national plans to comply with, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs (Prof. S. Jayakumar): Mr Speaker, Sir, there are three parts to Dr Soin's Question. First, as to what terms have been ratified, Singapore has ratified the entire Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women.

On the second part, yes, there are reservations. Sir, this is a very comprehensive international treaty with some 30 different Articles on a wide range of subjects affecting women. Many countries acceding to this Convention, indeed almost a third of all states/parties, have entered reservations. Singapore has also tabled four reservations which are mainly related to the protection of the rights of minorities in our multi-cultural society, our time-tested policies on immigration and citizenship, our labour and other laws which may have restrictions or conditions on the employment of women in certain areas for their own protection or for the protection of their unborn children. The four reservations tabled by Singapore are not unusual because many others have also tabled similar reservations.

On the third part of her question, Sir, Singapore is a responsible member of the international community and we take our international obligations seriously. Therefore, before acceding to this Convention, we have carefully studied its provisions in the context of our existing laws, values and practices and we have concluded that we have already met the aims of the Convention.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, would the Minister then indicate that no further policy measures are necessary to honour the spirit and terms of the treaty?

Prof. Jayakumar: As far as I can see, the Convention's provisions are in accord with existing laws, regulations and policies and I do not see any imminent need to take any further measures.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, would the Minister agree that the treaty obligates the Government to do a few things: (1) to change the national Constitution so that there is no sex discrimination; (2) to abolish existing laws and practices that practise sex discrimination; and (3) to set up institutions that will protect against discrimination?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, as far as we have been advised by our legal experts, the answer to all three questions is no, because there is no necessity to do so.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, I am not a legal expert. Could I ask the Minister to take a lay person's reading of the treaty, which I have done, and it does obligate the Government to take progressive steps and to make a report in one year's time and then report every four years after that on what are the progressive steps taken to comply with the treaty, leaving aside the reservations?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, the question is not whether we take a lay person's interpretation of the Convention and therefore act accordingly. The Convention is an international treaty. An international treaty carries with it certain treaty obligations, rights and privileges. Let me assure the House and the Member that whatever is legally obligated by the treaty upon Singapore, Singapore will, of course, comply with the obligations. But this is not a lay interpretation. It is a question of interpretation of the treaty and, of course, as a responsible member, we will do what is necessary as required by the treaty.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, Article 10 of the treaty requires that there be equality in access to education. Would the Minister therefore care to make a comment on the quota of female medical students to the university?

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, this matter is really outside the ambit of the question asked by the Member. This is not to say that I or any of my colleagues would shy away from a debate, because I do know that the Member has raised this issue before, and the Minister for Education has in fact responded to her question of quota for medical students. In fact, if you look at the Hansard, it has been debated many years before and Dr Toh Chin Chye gave a full answer here, and that was some years ago.

If the Member feels strongly on this vis-a-vis the Convention, she is free to raise a Question at some other sitting. But I might add at this stage that I do not agree that any policies or laws of Singapore are in conflict with Article 10 which talks about equality of access of women in Singapore to educational institutions. In fact, I would have thought that the Member would stand up and cheer for Singapore, as we are one of the most progressive countries in the world in this regard. The National University of Singapore's admission intakes for the last three years show that more women have been admitted for each of these three years than men. In 1993, 3,885 women were admitted; men, 3,770. In 1994, 4,034 women were admitted compared to 3,994 men. Last year, 4,933 women were admitted compared to 4,137 men. If at all, I think the men are the ones who might want to call for a convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against men!

Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, could I be presumptuous enough to tell the Minister that I am very proud of Singapore but I would like it to become better? Could I please remind the Minister too that the figures that he has given are only for the university? But if he looks at all tertiary figures, then the ratio is not in favour of women but in favour of men.

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, lest this become a repetition of the previous debate which she is free to replicate here, I would suggest that since I have answered the three limbs of her question, if she wishes to pursue this matter or any other policies affecting any other aspect of the Convention, perhaps an appropriate moment would be at a subsequent sitting.