|
|
speaking up for nature in singapore
|
| call
on youths of singapore to speak up PM's call on youths | list of all articles speak up for nature: why bother? | what others have spoken | feedback channels Radio Singapore International , 24 Aug 04 Easing of Public Speaking Rules in Singapore Lauded, but Will Singaporeans Really Step Up? Civil society members have lauded new moves by the government to make it easier for Singaporeans to speak up. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced on Sunday that licences would not be needed for indoor talks and that the free speech venue, Speakers' Corner can also have performances and exhibitions. Currently all public talks require a Public Entertainment Licence, but now indoor talks will be exempt from these requirements unless they touch on sensitive issues such as race and religion. The announcement comes after the government, last year, rejected some recommendations by the Remaking Singapore Committee to give people and artists more space to express themselves. The committee had asked for, but failed to obtain, a "designated space" for artists to perform without a Public Entertainment Licence. Bharati Jagdish (BJ) spoke to Nominated Member-of-Parliament, Chandra Mohan Nair (CMN) who explained why the government decided that now is the right time to relax public speaking rules. CMN: "It has something to do with perhaps having a new Prime Minister, to give some "sweeteners" so to speak and I think he's very concerned about the youth in Singapore and giving more space to arts groups, non-governmental organisations, civic organisations is a positive sign and I think, genuinely, the new ministers and junior ministers in the cabinet may have a new set of thinking and I would like to think that the idea is to get people to be all-inclusive, get more people involved in ideas, in the process of decision-making and so I believe this is definitely a positive sign." BJ: Now, Prime Minister Lee announced that licences would not be needed for indoor talks unless they touch on sensitive issues such as race and religion. So organisations would still have to take the initiative on their own to go through some sort of a registration process, wouldn't they? CMN: "It could be either in the form of registration or the burden will be left on the organisations. If they're going to discuss something on religion or race then the burden falls on them to get the requisite permit from the police or other authorities." BJ: But in discussing any issue there will inevitably be grey areas. How do you think we should deal with the situation if you're not quite sure about the potential sensitivities of a particular issue? CMN: "The government is probably going to push the buck to the organisers and say, "it's for you to decide". In a sense, it's the "red lane" and "green lane", so if you're sure that whatever it is you want to discuss has nothing to do with race or religion or the potential sensitivities are not too grey, then you can just move on in the "green lane" and you don't have to apply for anything, but if you're unsure, then I suppose you have to write in to the authorities and probably a permit will be required for that." BJ: So, in other words, organisations and people or individuals just need to be more responsible about what they're going to do, and they can enjoy the freedoms as well. CMN: "I believe so and I think the government must have the confidence to pass on the responsibility to the citizenry and let them take on this role of being responsible and being accountable instead of having to apply for everything. In fact, it eases the burden on the government too. And if there's a mistake committed, I hope that the government won't be too harsh as long as the repercussions of the event or talk are not too drastic. I think it's just like being an entrepreneur, taking risk of succeeding or or not succeeding. Similarly, in organising these things, some organisations might make mistakes, but give them a chance and I think after a while, things will fall in place." BJ: In your opinion, would these moves really encourage Singaporeans in general to come forward and speak and express themselves or could there still be apprehensions or perhaps a sense of apathy? CMN: "I think it would be a mixture of both. Singaporeans are very pragmatic, but having said that, it seems like an excuse for the possibility that actually they don't want to bother and they leave it to others to bring up certain issues. The government has given the signal that actually you can do it, so now the burden falls on the people to do it. I think here's an opportunity so I hope civic organisations and schools, etc. would take this opportunity to do what is available today as compared to yesterday. The opportunity is here, so no more excuses from the public about not getting more involved." BJ: Do you expect these moves to also perhaps spawn the formation of new civic groups? CMN: "In a sense, yes. I think more people would be willing to come forward because in the old days, there was always the fear or the perceived fear that something might go wrong so why take the risk. Now with the Prime Minister himself encouraging people to do it and in fact, he seems to be genuine about it and I hope he will practise what he preaches, then I think it is for, especially the younger generation of people to get together and under the constitution of Singapore, you're allowed to form associations - take full advantage of this. I hope not just the Prime Minister but the Cabinet, the MPs and especially the Registrar of Societies and the Ministry of Home Affairs would come up with statements encouraging people to come forward, form associations and get more active." Nominated Member-of-Parliament, Chandra Mohan Nair (CMN), speaking to Bharati Jagdish (BJ). |
||
website©ria tan 2003 www.wildsingapore.com |