Honour in Singapore” is a mini series by TOC following the recent formation of the Honour (Singapore) non-profit organisation, made up of distinguished individuals closely related to the government and a far-right Christian group. The series will explore some of their profiles, and bring to light what the group meant by “promoting a culture of honour and honouring” in Singapore.
By Ghui and Howard Lee
Following on from our write ups on Mr Lim Siong Guan and Mr Jason Wong, both board members of the controversial new non-profit organisation Honour (Singapore), we will now take a closer look at the three remaining board members – Mr Richard Magnus, Mr Khoo Oon Theam and Mr Georgie Lee – and what steers the organisation.
To be clear, profiling them should by no means be seen as an attempt to undermine their public position. In fact, our analysis indicates that all of them have contributed positively to society in their own personal capacity. Rather, it is specifically about trying to understand their public position, what possibly influences their public decisions, and how they, collectively as Honour (Singapore), might seek to extend these values into Singapore’s public policy and society.
Government and religious links
Magnus Khoo LeeLike Lim, Magnus is a high profile member of the civil service. Appointed as a member of the Public Service Commission in January 2009, Magnus is a retired senior district judge who has been awarded the Meritorious Service Award for exceptional public service by the State.
In addition, he also holds several public positions, such as chairman for the Casino Regulatory Authority, Public Guardian Board, Political Films Consultative Committee and Bioethics Advisory Committee. He is also a board member Public Transport Council, and an expert member of UNESCO’s International Bioethics Committee. He is also an Alumnus of the National Agenda Council, World Economic Forum.
Like Lim and Wong, Magnus is an active member of the Christian community. For instance, he is an active member of the Singapore Anglican Community Services (SACS) and currently sits on the SACS board. He is also an advisory council member of Full Gospel Business (FGB) Singapore, and chairman of the FGB Strategic Gatekeepers Roundtable and Circles.
Compared to Magnus, Khoo Oon Theam and Georgie Lee have fewer government credentials, but no less of religious ones.
Khoo is perhaps the most publicly vocal in terms of his religions affinities. While Honour (Singapore)’s website describes him as the senior adviser/director of Capelle Consulting, it omits to mention that he is also the President of FGB Singapore.

Combined screen capture from STOnline
Combined screen capture from STOnline
Khoo also seems to be unabashed in professing his affiliation with FGB Singapore. In fact, when Magnus was appointed the chairman of the Public Transport Council, Khoo openly commented on his Facebook page to congratulate Magnus of his public sector appointment, saying, “You are chosen for such a time as this to prevail over the gates.”
Out of the five board members, Lee is the least involved in public service. As the director of UOB Kay Hian, he would be considered a “high flyer” in the corporate world, rather than in the public service. His membership on the board lends Honour (Singapore) credentials in representing the business world.
However, it noteworthy that Lee is concurrently the vice-president of FGB Singapore alongside Khoo, the president. Like Magnus, he is also actively involved in SACS, sitting on its advisory panel for finance.
Professionally, there is very little in common among the three other board members. However, what motivates them in their personal – and to some extent, professional – lives is their common religious focus, which seems to centre on FGB Singapore, or what we know of as the Gatekeepers.
What’s with the “gates” and Gatekeepers?
Indeed, what can Khoo possibly mean when he congratulated Magnus on his PTC appointment? It should be more or less certain that he is not talking about fare gates here.
In fact, the webpage of FGB Gatekeepers outlining its identity gives an idea of what the concept of “gatekeeping” means:

“Our goal is to penetrate the marketplace with that knowledge. The place of action to fulfil this vision is the local fellowship called “Gate” that is held weekly in the workplace. A fellowship is called “Gate” because important life and business decisions take place in this sphere of influence…
Our members are called “Gatekeepers” because they are called and chosen to make a difference in the culture of the marketplace they are in so that the gates of hell shall not prevail over them. At the various Gates, the real life testimonies of our members provide encouragement to the people in the marketplace to choose to live a Spirit-directed life through Jesus Christ.”

More literature on the FGB Singapore website provides greater clarity on how this is done:

“Why the shift from CHAPTERS to GATES and MEMBERS TO GATEKEEPERS?
Because it is the mandate of Jesus to prevail over the Gates (7). Matthew 16:17-18 and make disciples to disciple the nations. Matthew 28:19-20
Gates and Gatekeepers directly reflect our high calling. Gatekeepers are discipled in all our Gates, namely
Strategic Gatekeepers Roundtables and Circles to transform the culture of nations
Marketplace Gatekeepers to make disciples in the marketplace
Young Gatekeepers are cultural engagers who live out the Kingdom values and culture”

The religious undertones of the Gatekeepers is to be expected, as they are clearly a Christian belief-based organisation. What is more worrying is that its members are called to transpose this belief system into everyday life, reaching into the “culture of nations”, “the marketplace” (presumably meaning the business environment) and youth (where education is implied).
Indeed, can we even avoid drawing parallels between FGB Singapore and Honour (Singapore), when members like Khoo seem to openly endorse the concept of “prevailing over the gates” into a policy arm of the government?
Unlike SACS or Focus on the Family, whose primary function is to serve the community (albeit with a Christian slant), FGB’s sole agenda is evangelistic in nature. While it is the absolute right of the board members of Honour (Singapore) to also be a part of FGB Singapore, it is important to bear in mind that Honour (Singapore) is not technically a Christian organisation.
Why then are the board members actively involved in what can be described as a hard lined Christian society, purporting values to watch over “gates” that constitute Singapore’s political, economic and social life?
As it is, we have more questions than answers about the intentions of Honour (Singapore). All we see is Lim continuing to publicly deny that Honour (Singapore) has any Christian influence, with no further revelation of the NPO’s activities, while his board members have already made clear intentions to infuse the “Christian values” of FGB Singapore into public life. What does this means for Honour (Singapore) as a vehicle in “changing” Singapore society?
Top image – Honour (Singapore) website

The “Honour in Singapore” series includes:

Like this article? Support us so that we can do more. Subscribe to TOC here.

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

若确认国家安全、经济受威胁 陈如斯:总统有权宣布紧急状态

新加坡前进党秘书长陈清木早前建议,若本届政府期限到期疫情仍持续,可考虑由总统组织临时政府,直至疫情结束才召开选举。 对此,国务资政兼国家安全统筹部长张志贤昨日(25日)在国会反驳上述建议,并指尽管在面对疫情危机当儿召开选举并不理想,但展延大选至超过规定的期限也有违宪法。 他声称这类建议“有误导性且无助现况”,他指经过咨询总检察长意见后,后者认为推迟选举至规定的期限是违宪的。 张志贤强调,只有在宣布紧急状态下,才能展延选举。“尽管我国也曾渡过许多危机,不过自我国独立以来,从未展延政府任期超过宪法的规定以外。” 不过,国人为先党党魁陈如斯同样引述新加坡宪法反驳张志贤,指宪法也赋予总统,若确认局势确实危及国家安全、经济和百姓生计,总统有权发布紧急状态。 他认为,眼下冠状病毒19,已威胁到国人的经济和生活。若疫情拖沓至明年4月仍未消散,有理由可宣布紧急状态并展延选举。 陈如斯曾在2011年,与陈清木医生、陈钦亮和陈庆炎博士等人竞选总统。 陈如斯早前在接受本社专访时曾表示,在疫情危机下若召开选举,政府等同把自身利益摆在国人性命健康之上,是“不负责任的”。 他呼吁政府当前应全力抗疫,反对党也会和政府“同仇敌忾”。但是现在选举反而会分散国人的注意力,无法团结国人力量共同抗疫。 在宪法第150条下,国会依据紧急状态下的合理理据,可制定相关法律,与此同时也可展延选举。 若紧急状态结束,所有在紧急状态下制定的法律即作废,意味着那只是为协助国家渡过紧急情况下的临时措施。

SCCB: Singapore companies’ payment delays deteriorate for 3rd straight quarter

According to the report by Singapore Commercial Credit Bureau (SCCB) on Tuesday…

Housing: Supply statistics without demand statistics?

By Leong Sze Hian I refer to the editorial “Khaw: Over 200,000 new…

徐顺全:如何让行动党把新加坡人当人看?

“行动党应把新加坡人当人看。” 民主党秘书长徐顺全指出,可能很多人认为上述这番话,是一般反对党或批评政府者的常见说词,实则出自一名前行动党部长。 相信徐顺全是指前外交部长杨荣文,在2011年5月选举前的最后一场群众大会,曾提及发现很多国人对政府不满;他说:“我不是说政府做错了,但我们必须具有伸缩性,因为没有两件事情是相同的。我们都是活生生的人,我们不是机器人,我们不是东西,我们必须被当成人来对待。” 视频中,徐顺全对比2011年大选和2015年大选之后,行动党对待人民的态度,他指出,2011年选举,行动党多数票跌至60巴仙,包括无法改善地铁问题的部长林双吉;恐怖分子马士沙拉末(Mas Selamat Kastari)逃脱,难辞其咎的副总理兼内政部长黄根成;国家发展部长马宝山等人,”都乖乖卸下内阁职务。“ 此外,在人民怒吼之下,内阁宣布削减薪资、以及缩紧引进移民政策、增加更多巴士应付公众需求等,以及推出终身健保和建国一代配套的惠民政策。 ”甚至李显龙自己亲自向国人道歉两次,承诺会做得更好。“ 惠民政策、道歉、欠佳部长离职 故此,徐顺全认为,行动党会推出上述种种政策、表现欠佳部长离职、道歉等等,都是在该党于2011年选举丢失几个议席后发生。 然而,2015年大选行动党赢得70巴仙议席,行动党数月后就调整了包括停车费、市镇会、水电、学费等等费用,甚至还要在下届选举后,调高消费税至9巴仙。 他批评卫生部长颜金勇,尽管任内面对C型肝炎病毒传染事件、兹卡疫情、病床不足、新保集团病患个资外泄等等问题和挑战,迄今仍未引咎辞职。…