The following is a letter from Li Shi-En Lisa which has been published in the Today newspaper on 26 April.

I refer to the TODAYonline article “PAP on Wijeysingha video: Candidates should be upfront about motives” (April 25). The PAP team, led by Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, said in a statement on April 25 that a YouTube video shows SDP candidate Dr Vincent Wijeysingha at a forum discussing gay issues. Dr Balakrishnan added that the video “promotes gay causes” and that this “raises the question on whether Dr Wijeysingha will now pursue this cause in the political arena and what is the SDP’s position on the matter”.

Firstly, I am surprised that Dr Balakrishnan does not know SDP’s position on the matter because the party has always been upfront about its stand. Its vision is that “as a nation, we must not only show tolerance but also acceptance of our fellow citizens regardless of their race, religion, sexual orientation, or political persuasion”. In October 2007, the SDP also publicly supported the call to repeal 377A in accordance with its party principles. All this information is on their website, and Singaporeans who take their voting seriously already know this.

Secondly, I am not sure what Dr Balakrishnan means by “pursuing this cause in the political arena”. If he is referring to the possibility of Dr Wijeysingha (or any other politician) raising the issue of 377A in Parliament, that is only to be expected at some point in the future, not because of Dr Wijeysingha’s personal sexual orientation or alleged personal cause, but because of SDP’s clearly-stated vision for an inclusive Singapore.

I am keen to elect politicians who are able to articulate sound, thoughtful and diverse views for discussion on any number of issues in Parliament, regardless of whether I agree with them or not. As such, I am disappointed that Dr Balakrishnan paints such a negative picture of MPs “pursuing causes in the political arena”. Isn’t that what we are voting them in for? In any case, one Dr Wijeysingha in Parliament will hardly swing the votes and abolish 377A, if the majority of politicians and Singaporeans are against this move.

Thirdly, Dr Balakrishnan describes the video’s forum discussion as having touched on topics like “sex with boys and whether the age of consent for boys should be 14 years of age”. This is a very misleading description. Viewers of the video will know that the forum speaker mentions the different age of consent for different countries, for example Sweden, where the age of consent for sex is 15 years (the speaker mistakenly says 14 years). However, not a single one of the forum participants proceed to discuss whether Singapore’s age of consent should be lowered or not, which suggests that this was never their aim.

Finally, Dr Balakrishnan says that the video “promotes gay causes”. What exactly is the “gay cause”? If gay men wanting to remove the clause that criminalises their private behaviour is the “gay cause” that Dr Balakrishnan refers to, this video could equally be described as one that supports basic human rights – the right for gay men not to be classified as criminals in Singapore. In the days of apartheid in South Africa, Nelson Mandela was jailed for fighting for the “black cause”; nowadays, we refer to this as equality.

During the April live political debate on Channel NewsAsia, Dr Wijeysingha showed Singaporeans that he is an articulate, capable speaker who is passionate for social justice. My opinion of him has not changed.

However, I am saddened by the appearance of such gutter politics from one of our Ministers and his PAP teammates, Mr Christopher De Souza, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Ms Sim Ann, [pictured above] who signed off on this misleading statement. Instead of showing us why they are better leaders for Singapore or engaging the Opposition on policy differences, they have resorted to a smear campaign based on a Youtube video posted by an anonymous netizen.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

儿童与青少年(修正)法案三读通过 将分阶段实施儿童与青少年保护

《儿童与青少年(修正)法案》已经三读通过,明年起会先扩大对儿童保护的部分,而青少年保护则有待处理。 社会及家庭发展部长李智陞昨天(4日)指出,社区伙伴在照顾儿童与青少年肩负更大的责任,而分阶段实施是为了让伙伴们能有更多时间增进落实相关方面的能力。 据现有法案,儿童与青少年受保护的年龄上限是16岁。法案生效后,其上限将提高至18岁,意味着未来个案数量将有所增加,且16至18岁青少年的需求与风险也将会不同。 李智陞指出“青少年犯罪的原因非常复杂,可能是因为来自家庭环境的挑战、负面印象或缺乏家庭支持,如今16岁以上的孩子一旦犯罪就必须接受来自社区法庭的裁判,如同成人一般,但调查显示,这些青少年却还未有完善的认知能力。” 因此,此次调整将会把18岁以下的青少年犯罪者纳入少年庭审讯,除非涉及更严重的指控。 此外,李智陞指出关于扩大儿童保护的部分将于 2020年开始实施,因为青少年收容所需要改进其安全性与保护措施,包括改造符合青少年年龄的设施、修订学业课程与就业培训计划。 另外,李智陞在回应关于强化关怀与保护令将儿童和青少年带走,是否会影响父母的角色和地位时强调,法案的宗旨是协助儿童与青少年在确保安全的环境下,离开国家保护机构,回到家庭中。 因此,在申请强化关怀与保护令前,社会及家庭发展部与社区伙伴必须先实行一系列的评估及措施,试图让孩子与其家庭能够破镜重圆。 李智陞补充,一旦孩子带离家庭,将会透过寄养方式让受暴或疏忽照顾儿童得到很好的安置,当局的目标是将三分之二的问题家庭孩子住到寄养家庭中,但现实是只有47巴仙的孩子能获得安置。 他说 “现实情况是,我们没有那么多寄养父母来照料需要得到保护的孩童。”

APP to retire around 7,000 hectares of plantation to protect carbon-rich peatlands

APP partners with Deltares to develop peatland best management practice model with…

Ex-girlfriend of physically abusive doctor points out Singapore Medical Council’s “questionable” procedures

Regarding the news of an NUS doctor who was sentenced to jail…

坐巴士睡过站 自闭儿遇事冷静应对网民赞许

普遍认知对自闭症儿童的印象不外乎智能障碍、表达沟通障碍、不爱与人互动,但其实自闭症儿童仍可经过长时间训练,与外人如何看待他们而得到改善。近日,脸书专页(Friends of ASD Families)分享一则自闭症儿童的故事,或许可打破你对他们的刻板印象! Friends of ASD Families是分享自闭症家庭所经历的脸书专页,希望借此能提高社会对自闭症的关注。 内文由一名网友Annette,分享其自闭症侄子Thaddeus的故事,说明其侄子某天要前往补习班,需要搭乘34号巴士,该巴士将经过樟宜机场。为了能到达目的地,Thaddeus也被训练辨识各个公共交通,他自己亦想要自己前往。当天下午Thaddeus需要从榜鹅(Punggol)搭乘巴士至淡滨尼天地(Our Tampines Hub)。 网友表示,家人担心侄子会分心,所以未给侄子用手机。他只需要在抵达后用补习班的电话告知即可。…