2            But I want to focus on one key theme. That Singapore needs to remain an open, fair and inclusive society, because this theme pervades many of the arguments that we have had in the House over the last few days and in MCYS. 

 

3            Whether the issue is about disability being included, the differences on the basis of race, language or religion, differences between the wealthy and not so wealthy, differences between foreign sports talent local sports talent, foreign talent, local talent and so on and so forth. It is useful for us to keep this perspective in mind, decide whether Singapore needs to remain an open, fair and inclusive society. If you agree with me that our future survival depends on us maintaining this, then I hope you would also agree with me, the key thing is to maintain integration, not assimilation, not uniformity, not selfish pride, but to integrate all the different threads that make up Singapore society.

 

2      The key thing is that it is all about people and about relationships. And some sociologists call this social capital. The quality, strength and resilience of relationships in a network have value.

4            Two weeks ago, I had dinner with a Harvard Professor, Robert Putnam. He has written extensively on social capital in America. He is now going to spend about a month and a half with us, because he finds us of particular interest. In our dinner discussion, he said there are two types of social capital: bonding social capital; bridging social capital. 

 

5            Bonding social capital exists between people who are alike: same race, same language, same religion, same school, same political party. Bonding social capital is useful for the members of a group, sometimes can be put to less useful uses when it is used to secure an unfair disadvantage over others. Bridging social capital refers to the networks and relationships amongst people who are different: different languages, different races, different ideologies, different needs, different perspectives.

 

6            In the case of Singapore, there is a special challenge for us to build bridging social capital; it has been so since independence, because even our independence was forced upon us, because of a pursuit of this ideal of a multi-racial, fair and just society. And even now, 45 years later, this challenge still remains in play.

 

7            In the case of Singapore, we have adopted an approach based on multiple lanes.  We have constitutional and legislative provisions. Our constitution provides and recognises the special position of the Malays.  It also provides that all of us are equal before the law.  We have provisions such as the Presidential Council for Minority Rights,  and an Act on theMaintenance of Religious Harmony.  We also have policies, for instance, the Ethnic Integration Policy administered by the HDB to ensure that every estate, every block, is a microcosm of Singapore. There are no ghettos in Singapore.  

 

8            But building a multi-racial, multi-religious, harmonious, inclusive society is not just about the Constitution, it is not just about laws that we pass in this House and it is not just about policies that Ministries implement.  It is also about mindsets, attitudes, norms of behaviour and relationships – not relationships at the top but relationships across the entire strata of society.

 

9            And sometimes in Singapore, and even in this House, we take this for granted, and we don’t appreciate how extraordinary we are, and how special and how precious what we have is.  For example, I know of no other country in the world where you can get 89% of every single mosque, church, temple represented at a local level in the community.

 

10        Members of this House would realise that I am talking about the IRCCs, Inter-Racial and Religious Confidence Circles. In many countries, attempts at inter-faith dialogue are fraught with danger and politics always supervenes to interfere.  Here we take it for granted, we have leaders, apex leaders at the top of the religious organisations, as well as religious leaders on the ground meeting not only us, meeting each other, organising joint activities, organising visits, expounding and explaining their different faiths to each other, and more important, behind the scenes, away from the glare of the media, resolving problems on the ground. These are real life examples of integration at its best, and an integration model that works.  

 

11        And in Singapore, we have created common secular spaces whilst protecting more private religious, personal spaces. And we have to get this balance right. Especially in a multi-racial country where there is a majority and where there are minorities.  To give minorities that assurance that their identities, their cultures, their values their religions are not under siege; that they are free to practise and to express themselves fully is a very crucial component.

 

12        I speak from the point of view of a minority, of a person from a minority group. It is just as important for minorities and especially their leaders to resist a segregationist approach.  In other words, even as we assert our rights to be different, to be distinct, to pursue our own way of life, we must never do so at the expense of segregating our communities from the mainstream life. Because if we do that, it is not the majority that will lose, it is the minority communities. I am just flagging this out as an issue, but I want to end by stating that fortunately for us, we have been very blessed, very blessed to have national leaders, founding fathers who believed that a secular, fair system in fact provided protection for religious people and religious minorities, provided a platform for us all to pursue our dreams and achieve our best.

 

13        And at the same time, we have had religious leaders who have adopted a principled and pragmatic approach to life in a small, densely populated, highly heterogeneous society.  And as Singapore goes forward in the next couple of decades, with an ageing population, with globalisation and the increased challenge that it poses on opportunities, and the potentially widening income gaps, with greater immigration, all these issues are still in play. 

 

14        I want to end by making this point, that the foundational challenges and the foundational principles on which Singapore is constituted remain in play, and will face continued challenges in the future, and it is worth our while as Members of Parliament, as community leaders, bearing this in mind that even as we debate and argue and push for solutions – don’t inadvertently shake the foundations for our survival and our continued prosperity and progress for everyone, regardless of race, language or religion. 

 

15        Thank you, Mr Chairman.