Minister of State (MOS) for Defence and National Development Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman attended the 6th Bali Democracy Forum today. MOS Maliki spoke on Singapore’s experience in consolidating democracy in a pluralistic society during the General Debate co-chaired by Indonesian Minister for Foreign Affairs Marty Natalegawa and Timor-Leste State Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation Jose Luis Guterres. The text of MOS Maliki’s speech is below. MOS Maliki also met Iranian First Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs Morteza Samardi on the sidelines of the Forum and had a discussion on ways to strengthen bilateral relations.
. . . . .
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
SINGAPORE
7 NOVEMBER 2013
SPEECH BY MINISTER OF STATE FOR DEFENCE AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND MAYOR OF SOUTH EAST DISTRICT DR MOHAMAD MALIKI BIN OSMAN AT THE SIXTH BALI DEMOCRACY FORUM, 7 – 8 NOVEMBER 2013
His Excellency President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
His Excellency Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa
His Excellency State Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation Jose Luis Guterres
Excellencies
Distinguished Guests
Ladies and Gentlemen
I am delighted to be here representing Singapore at the Sixth Bali Democracy Forum (BDF).
2 Since its inception in 2008, the BDF has established itself as an important international platform for the constructive exchange of views on democracy. Indonesia’s active efforts in promoting a global dialogue on democracy are commendable.
3 I believe that there is much that can be learnt from Indonesia’s experience in democracy. In the last decade, Indonesia has demonstrated how a state can make a rapid and peaceful transition to a modern, vibrant and stable democracy. Under the leadership of Indonesia’s first directly elected President, His Excellency President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Indonesia has achieved significant political, economic and social development.
4 This year’s theme of “consolidating democracy in pluralistic society” reflects the realities of the international community. As we have witnessed in recent times, the path towards democracy is not always smooth. Some democracies have faltered under the pressure of social conflict arising out of segregation and discrimination. When various socio-political divides are played up, peace can be disrupted and democratic institutions challenged. It is crucial, therefore, for us to discuss the linkages between diversity, democracy and social stability.
5 Every country is unique with its own specific cultural and historical DNA, but we can nevertheless learn from each others’ experiences. For Singapore, democracy cannot be divorced from good governance for the people, regardless of race, religion or socio-economic standing. All the various ethnic, religious, civil and socio-economic groups must believe that the government is not favouring one group over another. As such, our experience in consolidating democracy lies in how we’ve worked to foster social harmony in our pluralistic society and how we’ve attempted to ensure that the rights and interests of different groups are represented and advanced in the country. Let me share some examples.
6 First, we have enacted several policies to enhance social cohesion and nation-building. Since our independence in 1965, we have implemented policies that promote understanding and mutual respect between communities to prevent differences, both real and perceived, from igniting tensions. For example, we adopted English as a neutral working language to bridge the language barrier among the different ethnic groups. We chose not to use the Mother Tongue of a particular ethnic group to avoid any sense of discrimination among the other groups. We have also tried to grow the common space in which Singaporeans can interact to strengthen inter-community relations. In 1989, we implemented the Ethnic Integration Policy to ensure a certain degree of uniformity in the ethnic distribution in public housing neighbourhoods. Living alongside one another has helped to reduce misunderstandings and promote racial harmony. With these policies, the government has tried to build a country where differences are not a threat to the sanctity of the nation, but are respected and celebrated.
7 Second, we have an electoral system that is tailored towards the safeguarding of the interests of our minority groups. Under our Group Representation Constituency (GRC) system, Singapore is geographically divided into several constituencies that elect Members of Parliament (MPs) into Parliament as a group. In these groups of three to six members, at least one of the MPs must belong to a minority community of Indian, Malay or mixed descent. This system is important because it ensures that our minority ethnic groups are adequately represented in the government. It ensures that the policies that are made are not skewed to the benefit of a single group, but are instituted fairly for the interests of the community as a whole.
8 Last but not least, we have attempted to constructively engage our citizens and civil society in the governance of the country. A year ago, we initiated a new outreach programme titled “Our Singapore Conversation” which has engaged citizens from all strata of society in a two-way dialogue with the government. Since August 2012, we have conducted over 660 dialogue sessions lasting a total of 1,645 hours with over 47,000 Singaporeans – not an insignificant number for a tiny nation-state. This exercise has helped reveal the specific concerns of the different socio-economic groups. For instance, we found out that public transport is a key priority of citizens from the lower income group, while those in the higher income group are more concerned about public healthcare. In addition, in the running of public housing estates, the MPs aim to better serve their electorates by providing residents the opportunity to give feedback and vote on programmes to upgrade the housing estates. The inclusive nature of these initiatives is essential in helping the government make informed policy decisions, while making sure that the people’s views are heard and considered.
9 Furthermore, we have recognised and embraced the needs of our many civil groups by constructively engaging them in the policy making process. For example, in 2011, the Ministry of Law called for public feedback on proposed amendments to the Evidence Act. Women Rights group AWARE made a submission that led to the repealing of a section of the law that made it possible to discredit an alleged assault victim through her sexual history. The activism of environmental groups such as The Nature Society also paved the way for new areas in Singapore to be designated as nature sanctuaries.
10 Let me end off by reiterating that social cohesion, adequate representation and inclusiveness are important for good governance and democracy in a pluralistic society. I am confident that the sharing of experiences at this Forum will help to produce a constructive dialogue for the benefit of pluralistic societies around the world. Thank you.
. . . . .