MR TANG LIANG HONG (Letters to Mr Speaker on suitability for selection as NMP)

Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam asked the Prime Minister what were the circumstances under which letters written to the Speaker concerning the suitability of Mr Tang Liang Hong for selection as a Nominated Member of Parliament came to be released to the press.

The Prime Minister (Mr Goh Chok Tong): Mr Speaker, Sir, Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was a member of the Select Committee that deliberated in 1992 on the appointment of Nominated Members of Parliament. Several MPs had written to the Committee strenuously opposing Mr Tang Liang Hong's appointment as an NMP. The MPs had also spoken to BG Lee at the time to express the same views.

BG Lee told me about the MPs' views, and gave me copies of the letters during the last General Election. He had asked the Speaker for the letters as he did not have them with him on the day he spoke to me about the MPs' views. The letters showed clearly that Tang was a Chinese chauvinist. I decided to release them to the media. Tang was standing for election. Singaporeans had a right to know before the election that long before Tang contemplated entering opposition politics, four Chinese educated MPs, plus Dr Tay Eng Soon, all of whom had known Tang for many years, had concluded that he was a dangerous extremist. There was nothing personal. But they considered Tang unfit to be a Nominated Member of Parliament.

By December 1996, Dr Tay Eng Soon had passed away. The other MPs consented to their letters being made public. The MPs also publicly repeated, confirmed and elaborated on the statements in their letters. There was no question of any breach of confidentiality.

I can understand Tang being embarrassed by these letters, which were written four years before he became a candidate in the 1996 elections, and therefore carried that much more weight with the people and the court. But I am surprised that the Workers' Party, which has repeatedly pressed the Government to provide Singaporeans with more information to make up their own minds, should make an issue of the publication of the letters.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I assure the Prime Minister that my purpose in asking this question was not for him to air his views on whether Mr Tang Liang Hong is a Chinese chauvinist or anti-Christian. My question was directed to the propriety of releasing them to the press. Is the Prime Minister aware that under section 8 of the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act, no publication of the papers may be allowed except on the certificate of the Speaker? Otherwise, the papers lose any protection in any proceedings brought against them. Secondly, is the Prime Minister aware that, under Standing Order No. 30 of the Standing Orders of Parliament, the papers are in the custody of the Clerk and they may not be released except upon the authority of the Speaker? May I know whether all these were complied with before they were released to the press by the Prime Minister?

Mr Goh Chok Tong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not look at the Standing Orders. The issue is a simple one. The authors of the letters are the ones who decide whether the opinions expressed therein are to be kept confidential or not. So we had the permission of the authors of the letters and they could easily repeat in public those same opinions which were contained in the letters, which they did, not just once but several times, with telling blows during the General Election.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he thinks that it is enough to say that those who wrote the letters consented? May I ask him whether it is not a question of the privileges of Parliament that is in issue here? They were letters written to the Speaker in confidence and they become Parliament papers. Were they released to the press in accordance with the Standing Orders and section 8 of the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act? That is my question.

Mr Goh Chok Tong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have explained the circumstances in which I released the letters and I still hold the view that it is entirely appropriate for me to do so. When a person stands for election, he must be prepared for whatever character flaws, if he had, to be exposed by the PAP. This is what we stand for. If there is anything which we know about a particular candidate, which is of public interest, we are going to reveal it and I breach no rule whatsoever.