The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (45 page)

We had done some hard thinking before the election and concluded that Lim Chin Siong and company must be released from prison before we took office, or we would lose all credibility. But having fought and won this election on our own, we were determined to start off the new government by holding our victory rally before they were released and the contest resumed.

We decided to hold it at the Padang on Wednesday, 3 June. I asked the governor to release the eight detainees the day after the rally, but before we took the oath of office. Goode wanted me to take office at once, but my concern was to have time to sort things out, get the British to agree to the release, settle my cabinet and hold the rally first. Goode protested that he had to refer to London about the release, which meant that with my timetable there would be a hiatus in government as Lim Yew Hock had resigned the moment the election was lost. He was unhappy about the delay, but I was not deterred. I urged him to give me the time I needed to put the non-communists in a stronger position before the next round began. I did not expect any immediate crisis. The
following day, he told me he had London’s agreement to release the detainees, but when he repeated that he wanted me to take office as early as possible, I said I had to consult my colleagues.

I met the central executive committee at the party’s headquarters that afternoon for an hour, and returned to Government House at 4 pm. George Thomson, the director of Information Services, later issued a statement to the journalists waiting at the front gate. It said that after two meetings lasting two hours and “After consultations with Her Majesty’s Government in Britain, and in order to have swift and smooth introduction of the new constitution, the governor, with the advice of the remaining ex-officio members of the council, decided to release the detainees concerned.” Goode had meanwhile told me he could not wait for that to happen; he would gazette and bring into force the new constitution on 3 June. I again countered that we must be sworn in only on 5 June, after Lim Chin Siong, Fong and the six other pro-communists had not only been released but had duly issued a statement publicly endorsing the non-communist aims of the PAP. I wanted that endorsement to get full coverage in the press; we would therefore take office only on the afternoon of 5 June so as not to compete with it for the headlines. Goode disagreed, but I insisted, and had my way.

Our rally took place in front of City Hall on the night of 3 June without the pro-communists. We had 43 MPs-elect on the stage, all dressed in white to symbolise clean government – there would be none of the corruption that had been rife in the past in Singapore and existed in many other new countries. I introduced my new cabinet of nine, including myself. I made a serious, almost sombre speech. There was a huge crowd of some 50,000 on the Padang – orderly, expectant and in good humour. I chose the occasion to temper and dampen their hopes and to prepare my defences for the attacks I knew would come from the communists. They were bound to push for more freedom to subvert Singapore and to use their strength on the island to help the revolution in Malaya.

I outlined the government’s position:

“We begin a new chapter. The powers of the people through their elected government are limited to our internal affairs. It is not what we really want but it is a step towards merger and
merdeka
. … The good things of life do not fall from the skies. They can only come by hard work and over a long time. The government cannot produce results unless the people support and sustain the work of the government. … There may be times when, in the interests of the whole community, we may have to take steps that are unpopular with a section of the community. On such occasions, remember that the principle which guides our actions is that the paramount interest of the whole community must prevail.”

For the British community, I had this caution:

“Do you know, we wanted to use this Padang for our election rallies at night, but a small group of Europeans who were given this field by the former colonial government refused it, although they only use it in the day for a few people to play games? Well, times have changed and will stay changed.”

In a significant speech on the English-educated, Keng Swee said they had been largely conditioned by the English-language press and the churches, especially the Catholic Church. As a class they had voted against the PAP, but they were few, and he warned them that in the course of time they would lose the privileges they had enjoyed under the British and would have to compete on equal terms with everyone else in Singapore. To survive, they must try to understand that the changes taking place were in response to tremendous social forces that lay beneath the surface, not the machinations of politicians.

The
Straits Times
and
Singapore Standard
had never published fair reports of our analysis of the causes of the political turmoil, and in consequence we had never been able to get the English-educated to understand that deep social, economic and political grievances were
driving the Chinese-educated to support the communists and to help them overthrow the existing order. Now that we were the government, they had to listen, and the English-language press had to print what we said. So we began to get our message through, a process that started that night with Keng Swee’s speech.

On the eve of the rally, Dennis had gone to Changi to tell the detainees they would be freed on Thursday, and at 8:30 am on 4 June, Lim Chin Siong, Fong, Nair, Woodhull, Puthucheary and three others walked out of Changi Prison, to be greeted by 2,000 PAP and trade union supporters who had waited outside, waving banners. They were driven to party headquarters where they met the new central executive committee. At 11 am, they saw the press, Nair acting as their spokesman, and released the document they had signed.

The next day, the newspapers carried their statement:

“To achieve complete identification with the ideal of a united Malayan nation, and to struggle by peaceful, democratic and constitutional means for the enduring objective of a united, independent, democratic and non-communist and socialist Malaya … It would be a mistake to regard the non-inclusion of Singapore in the independent Federation of Malaya as being due solely to British chicanery. The British, of course, cannot escape their share of responsibility for this cruel amputation. … The fact remains, however, that the exclusion of Singapore is also a reflection of the genuine fear of the Malay majority in the Federation that the Chinese majority in Singapore are incapable of a Malaya-centred loyalty, and cannot be assimilated into a Malaya-centred nationalism. … It is up to us in Singapore to prove that the fears and suspicions of our Malay brethren across the Causeway are groundless.”

When asked whether they supported the use of the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance, Nair replied, “Our stand is exactly the same as the PAP stand,” i.e., that it would stay on the statute books as long as the Federation of Malaya had laws providing for detention without trial. As I expected of Nair, the press reports were clear and unequivocal. But I knew that Lim Chin Siong was not sincere. For him, this was only a tactical manoeuvre. I hoped that Fong, whom Nair had spent many hours winning over, would not drift back to Lim. But I could not be certain. I tried to neutralise them by giving them prominent but powerless posts – Puthucheary as manager of a new Industrial Promotion Board, and the other four as political secretaries to different ministers.

Lim Chin Siong (seated) and Fong Swee Suan at PAP headquarters, releasing their declaration to the press soon after they were freed on 4 June 1959.

These developments were watched closely by the British, who were anxious to see how the newly elected PAP ministers would shape up in office. Bill Goode sent Lennox-Boyd, on 12 June 1959, a report on the election that made interesting reading 40 years on:

“… The PAP concentrated on presenting themselves as a democratic socialist party which had constructive ideas, and the honesty, energy and the ability to govern. Their party platform laid great emphasis on the need to strive for independence through merger with the Federation of Malaya and the need for harmony amongst all racial communities in Singapore. They advocated Malay as the common language to break down communal barriers and put up nine (sic) Malay candidates. A distinctive feature of their programme was stress on the need for reorganisation of the government machine and other public institutions, in particular to abolish the City Council, in order to eliminate ‘red tape, bureaucracy and unnecessary duplication of functions’. In party speeches, candidates developed various of these themes (sic) to suit the audience. In doing so, there were often references of a less constructive character to the alleged shortcomings of other parties, and to the alleged hostility of the English-language newspapers, of the English-educated population and of the ‘White’ businessmen. Condemnation of the Western powers or criticism of the United Kingdom government were virtually nonexistent in any quarter. …

“The split of the moderate vote undoubtedly lost the opposition many seats. In 13 constituencies a PAP candidate was returned on a minority vote, … After the election the PAP publicly admitted that they had not succeeded in winning either the Malay or the English-speaking vote. The Malays generally were frightened of the PAP as Chinese extremists, and were not won over by the bold undertaking of the PAP to make Malay the national language nor by the PAP putting up nine (sic) Malay candidates. In election rallies the top PAP leaders made every effort to win over the English-speaking white-collar workers of the City. Nevertheless, the main residential and suburban areas either returned an SPA candidate or were only won by the PAP owing to the moderate vote being split between the SPA and the Liberal Socialists or an Independent. …

“Most of the PAP assemblymen are young, many being in their 20s. The average age of the Assembly is 35, and the youngest member a PAP shop assistant aged 22. Three previous ministers, J.M. Jumabhoy, Francis Thomas and M.P.D. Nair, were defeated by PAP candidates in their 20s, Jumabhoy’s defeat being all the less palatable in that his successful opponent was a 25-year-old girl, the assistant secretary of the Women’s Section of the PAP. …

“The new Legislative Assembly will thus be dominated by the PAP majority. The following are their professions.” (Goode then gave the list: it included among others five teachers, four journalists, eight trade unionists, two hairdressers and a farmer.) “Another change which is more significant is that the first three ministers are establishing their offices in City Hall.”

We had indeed decided to make a break with the past by moving the seat of government from Empress Place to City Hall. It was where Ong Eng Guan had started his mayorship amid much tumult and commotion – but had given the underprivileged of Singapore the hope that the PAP government would have their interests at heart and would be honest in trying to advance them.

My colleagues and I were sworn into office on Friday afternoon, 5 June 1959, in the City Hall chamber where Mountbatten had taken the surrender of the Japanese military commanders in Southeast Asia in 1945 – and where, just 12 years later, Mayor Ong had thrown out that symbol of British colonial authority, the mace. I decided to superimpose on that image the imprint of the new cabinet. Protocol had hitherto required ministers to present themselves at Government House in lounge suits, to be sworn in by the governor in his white ceremonial dress uniform, complete with a white plumed hat. This time, the governor came from Government House to City Hall for the occasion. He wore nothing more formal than a light fawn suit and tie. We wore open-necked white shirts and trousers. I greeted him at the bottom of the steps and walked with him into the chamber, which was bare except for one table and a few chairs – there had been no time for decorations. Apart from the press, there were 200 party supporters who had worked hard during the election, also in white. But no wives were present, a grievance Choo holds against me to this day. She, too, had worked very hard and expected to be there. I said it would lead to trouble with the other wives, and anyway it was just a minor ceremony. She was not placated. But I could not give way.