Honourable Members, we are gathered today to complete the constitutional formalities consequent upon the promulgation of the independence of Singapore. When we last met in this Chamber, little did we foresee that in two years we would meet here again as a sovereign Legislature of an independent nation, a separate member of the Commonwealth and of the United Nations. It is a chastening reminder that history is not written by legal draftsmen or pre-determined at constitutional conferences. On this day, the 8th of December, nearly a quarter of a century ago, in 1941, the people of Singapore awakened to the reverberation of bombs heralding the grim prospect of a new order for Asia. Japanese bombs shook the foundations of the European Empires in Asia. Nationalist forces were let loose throughout the whole of this continent, upsetting the old order. A new balance of forces, indigenous to Asia, has yet to be found. Our survival as a people, distinct and separate from our neighbours in South-East Asia, depends upon our patience and resolution in dealing with physically bigger and hence difficult neighbours and upon our perseverance in seeking long-term solutions to the problems of finding a new balance of forces in this part of the world, a task made more difficult by the migration of different racial groups into South-East Asia during the period of European domination. The four months since the 9th of August have given us time to take stock of our bearings, time in which to push emotions into the background for a calm and realistic appraisal of the new opportunities which independence offers us, the greater authority to bring about what we have always thought necessary, a tolerant society, multi-racial, multi-lingual, multi-religious, welded ever closer together by ties of common experience into a satisfying society, satisfying both for the indigenous peoples and for those of migrant stock who came during the period of British rule. Whilst the best guarantee of our future as a distinct and separate people in South-East Asia is the creation of a tolerant multi-racial society, we must however expect obstruction and resistance to this from groups inside Singapore and also groups outside Singapore. They are the Communalists and the Communists. The first disruptive group will continue to be the communal extremists, the Ultras in our midst. There are people in Singapore who, even after a few months of separation, still talked raucously, albeit foolishly, about the implementation of one language - the national language -- in teaching at all levels including the university. If such a policy was unwise when we were part of the wider framework of Malaysia, now in the context of Singapore, the lunacy of such statements should have been manifest to all. Yet they are being made and given considerable publicity in the Jawi press. It is the Government's declared intention that its policy of four equal and official languages with Malay as the common and national language shall remain. This policy was valid before and remains valid after Malaysia, for this policy was not arrived at out of expediency. In formulating it, the immutable factors of geography and the hard facts of demography were taken into account. Separation has not rendered invalid the major premise on which this policy was based. Needless to say, the more extreme any community is about one race, one language and one religion, the more likely it is to arouse counter chauvinism amongst the other communities to the detriment of all. The second disruptive group, and in the long run the more potent, is the Communists. They also play on communal heart strings, if only more skilfully and cynically. Their followers within Singapore, with backing from outside sponsors, want to disrupt our consolidation of national identity by consciously exploiting appeals to chauvinist and communal sentiments. This can be seen from their change in tactics over questions of language, culture and education. Five months ago, in June this year, at a time when all multi-racial and non-communal leaderships throughout Malaysia were gathered in Singapore to rally and strengthen the forces for tolerant multi-racial policies, pro-Communist groups in the political and trade union fields denounced the analysis of the Malaysian Solidarity Convention that in a multi-racial society, where the races were divided in the percentages of 40, 40 and 20, it is not possible for any one group to impose its one language and culture on the others. These pro-Communist groups then joined the chorus of the Malay communalists that to refer to percentages of the racial components of Malaysia was itself an encouragement to communalism. Yet within ten weeks of Singapore's independence, these same people cynically switched their line. They now urge a revision of the status of the Chinese language on account of Singapore's large Chinese majority, even though Chinese has been one of the four official languages. We can expect them to intensify their exploitation of these issues as they seek to recover their lost ground. But we cannot afford to forget that all this is designed not for the preservation of the Chinese language and culture, but for the disruption of orderly construction and progress so that out of the resulting chaos they stand a better chance of grabbing power. For us the problem is simply how to be ourselves, and not be swallowed up in some more backward whole. We must never be isolated and left friendless in South-East Asia, in a Singapore encircled by a hostile sea of communal and obscurantist forces. So we must never allow ourselves the luxury of forgetting that survival depends upon rallying and strengthening the forces in the area who are for a secular, rational and multi-racial approach to the problems of economic backwardness and the legacy of unbalanced development in the colonial era. We have travelled a long road to reach independent Singapore. Historians will find it hard not to acknowledge that our independence was the result of the determination and spiritedness of the people of Singapore and their leaders. Long accustomed to independent ways of thought and vigorous modes of expression, it was not possible to muffle and contain them by communal terror and intimidation. If we in Singapore can succeed in establishing a tolerant multi-racial society, then the catalyst effect on the rest of the region is bound to set off social change within these territories themselves leading to the emergence of a secular nation state. In such a secular nation state obscurantist slogans of one race, one language, one religion will give way to the concept of many communities bound together by ties of geography, common experience, and economic betterment for all in close co-operation as one compact national unit. We must anticipate and prepare for every contingency. What happens to us if our neighbour of over 100 million people becomes embroiled in even greater economic difficulties? Will a government emerge that will concentrate its effort on reconstruction and ultimate prosperity, or on greater and more hazardous external adventures? Can we always expect that the Government in neighbouring Malaysia will if not friendly at least be neutral and unaggressive? It was significant that the Prime Minister of Malaysia should, soon after getting Singapore out, explain to the world that repression was contemplated as an alternative. Let us never forget that there were quite a number of persons who openly disagreed with the Malaysian Government and ostentatiously absented themselves when the vote was taken in the Malaysian Parliament for Singapore's expulsion. It was not because they loved Singapore as a component part of an increasingly multi-racial society. They simply wanted to suppress us, not knowing what the cost was going to be. These people view an independent multi-racial Singapore with considerable distaste and apprehension. And we cannot afford to assume that such people will never come into power. These are a few of several imponderables around which our destiny will be determined. We cannot afford to be caught unprepared. The unthinkable must be thought out to the most unpleasant logical conclusions. Every safeguard and counter must be worked out to meet these contingencies. None of the forces and factors that made South-East Asia so turbulent an arena of conflict has been mitigated by our separate independence. All that has changed is the constitutional framework within which we now must work. And if independent Singapore does not fulfil our desire for a more stable and more secure basis for building an enduring nation, let us be thankful that it has given us more independence of action to seek that larger and more secure basis. (In English) Honourable Members can lake heart at the thought that there are few new problems to bedevil this House. This House has gone through many a struggle, first against Colonialism, then Communism, and then Communalism. And there have always been opportunists to cloud and confuse the issues. But we have now a much more experienced and discerning people. The difference now is that any setback may never be retrieved. For sovereignty is absolute and there are no more back stops to any slide to perdition other than the use of force, a hazardous undertaking in any area already bedevilled by too much use of armed force. It is our duty, that of Honourable Members and of every citizen who wants a future for his children, to ensure that the country is never imperilled by reckless policies or foolhardy adventurers, for it is not just the two million people of Singapore, but nine millions more in Malaysia who are one people with us, whose hopes will be dimmed if we fail. The tremors from those bombs the Japanese dropped on 8th December, 1941, nearly a quarter of a century ago, have not yet subsided, for they in turn triggered off an explosion of nationalist forces. These forces wrecked the foundations of Western empires in Asia. But we have as yet to find a balance of our own making on the continent of Asia. So many of our neighbours and we ourselves would not have a separate existence if purely Asian forces were to settle the shape of decolonised Asia. So we shall have to accept British bases for some time to come. But we must effectively use that time to seek a more enduring equilibrium in this corner of Asia. We must succeed if only because we have already built so much that is good in South-East Asia and there is no other time or other place to start all over again. It is against this sombre backdrop of our abiding destiny at the southernmost tip of the continent of Asia that we spell out the legislative programme before this House. They are the steps to be taken to get into better command of our own separate destiny. The Singapore Independence Bill which recites consequential provisions arising out of the declaration of independence on the 9th of August, 1965, will be presented at the first business sitting. So will the Singapore Constitution (Amendment) Bill changing the nomenclature of the Head of State and this Legislature and the procedure by which the Head of State will in future be chosen. These two Bills will complete the constitutional change from a Singapore as state in a Federal monarchy into a Singapore which is an independent Republic. A Commission to look into means to ensure that the rights of our citizens shall be equal not only in law but in practice will be set up. The Chief Justice will be Chairman and the Speaker, Deputy Chairman of this Commission. After hearing all views on how the rights of racial, linguistic and religious minorities can be adequately safeguarded, recommendations will be made to this House on the provisions to be included in the Constitution. In the drafting of these provisions the Commission will consult the Chief Justice and/or other constitutional experts of certain Commonwealth Governments so that the provisions will have the benefit of the experience and constitutional expertise of some of the best trained judicial and legal minds in the Commonwealth. But the responsibility for deciding on these provisions will be that of this Legislature. The terms of reference of the Commission will be wide enough to enable them to consider ways whereby all views of all minority groups in the population can be adequately heard on all matters concerning them before any legislation is enacted. As an independent Republic, we have assumed two new responsibilities - Defence and Foreign Affairs - subjects closely related to our survival. We must quickly achieve sufficient strength to deal with any internal security contingency without depending on outside help. An Army Bill will be introduced to provide the framework for a hard well-trained if small regular army supported by a large people's volunteer force. But however small the regular army or large the volunteer component of the armed forces, they will nevertheless form a significant item in our annual budget. So too will the establishment of our Missions abroad. Missions will first be established immediately in some ten countries either for reasons of geographical proximity or their importance to us in matters of defence or trade or Afro-Asia solidarity. Foreign Affairs and Defence are closely inter-related subjects. The policies which we pursue in foreign affairs inevitably decide our defence commitments and our defence commitments in turn limit the range of options of our foreign policy. Our security depends upon having the minimum number of unfriendly countries and the maximum number of friendly ones. We want the least number of countries to be hostile to us if for no reason other than that we wish to be as independent of foreign defence assistance as possible. But there must be creditable alternative guarantees for our security before we can afford to be talked into a position where we give up firm guarantees of our independent survival in return for not very credible treaties of friendship and everlasting brotherhood. Meanwhile the business of government and administration must proceed. In a separate memorandum* which is being tabled in this House, my Government has set out the legislative programme and the policies which will occupy the time of this House for this Session. They are designed to ensure our continued economic progress in the shortest possible time under the new and vastly different circumstances we are faced with. Radical changes arise out of our severance from Malaysia. Our plans for industrialisation and economic development require the re-formulation of a new basis, for it is clear that there will be no Common Market with Malaysia. A compelling reason for our seeking merger and Malaysia was to give our workers a way in which we could industrialise behind the comfortable buffer of a protected domestic market comprising the combined population of Malaysia. This never came about, even in the two years we were in Malaysia. Now we have to break into the markets of certain nations who may find an interest in Singapore's survival as an independent democratic non-Communist country, and into such countries in Africa and Eastern Europe who may find trade with us beneficial economically and politically. (*See Appendix I) These nations, beginning with those with whom we have defence associations ---Britain, Australia and New Zealand --- must first be convinced that our problem is finite, and that it does not involve too much of a sacrifice on their part. The rate of natural increase of our population has been steadily declining in the last six years. It is now 2.5 per cent and will probably stabilise at below 2 per cent. This is a modest and manageable increase for a total population of two million. So the other matter to be controlled is an increase in population through immigration. The Government has already taken and will complete certain policies to limit the responsibilities of the Government to the citizens of Singapore. On re-registration all Singapore citizens will be issued with new plastic identity cards. This will be completed before the end of next year. Meanwhile regulations will be introduced to require the possession of work permits for any person who is not a Singapore citizen, and whose income is less than $750 per month. These work permits will be given liberally in the case of skilled workers, but will have to be as restrictive in the case of unskilled workers as our own unemployment problem requires. An infinitesimal percentage of the domestic markets of certain highly developed countries if open to us by the removal of quota restrictions or restrictive tariffs will be more than enough to maintain buoyancy in our economy. Economic and political stability can thus be assured. But in the long run, our viability depends upon having the widest spread of economic links with the largest number of countries in the world, so that the economic levers on our political policies will not be in the hands of a few Governments. But assured markets alone are not enough. Our workers must understand that the creation of industries and job opportunities will in large measure depend upon their capacity for hard work and disciplined performance in factories, a large proportion of whose markets will be overseas. Products must therefore not only be of good quality, but at competitive prices. In other words, there must be greater efficiency at factory floor level. The excesses of irresponsible trade unions in the early `50s and even in the early `60s are luxuries which we can no longer afford. This means that people with industrial capital, managerial talent and the manufacturing know how must be assured of sane and stable labour conditions and trade unions do not indulge in obstructionist policies or stoppages of production for reasons of political manoeuvre. In these two years of confrontation we have demonstrated to the Indonesians that it is not within their capacity to destroy or hinder the economic growth of Singapore. The expected loss of 8.7 per cent of our national income as a result of confrontation by Indonesia has been more than made up and a net increase of 2 per cent is recorded for 1964, over 1963. After we have demonstrated our capacity to expand and prosper in independence on our own, we can rationalise our relationships with our immediate neighbour, Malaysia. We may be two countries, but we are one people. The sooner all face up to this problem, the better the chances of working out a matter of fact relationship of interdependence on the basis of equal and mutual benefit. We must gird ourselves to meet these tasks. We must demonstrate not only our will but our capacity to defend what we have got and improve on it. What we lack in size of area and population we more than make up in strategic location of area and quality of population. Given dedication and determination there is little to stop us from setting the pace of social change and economic development in the region. An industrious and talented people striving to secure their future will surge forward to prosperity and strength if they are given honest administration and effective leadership. That so much has already been achieved in the six years since 1959 in spite of constant strife and turbulence is source for inspiration to greater endeavour. 10.52 a.m. At the conclusion of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech, Mr Speaker, preceded by the Serjeant at Arms, the Acting Second Clerk-Assistant, the Acting Clerk-Assistant, and the Acting Clerk, escorted His Excellency (accompanied by two A..D.C.s) out of the Chamber, and the House adjourned without question put, pursuant to the Standing Order. Adjourned accordingly at 10.52 a.m. APPENDIX I