Model ID: c4b4a21a-4f47-4d07-a6bc-237a7926a349
Sitecore Context Id: c4b4a21a-4f47-4d07-a6bc-237a7926a349;
Mr. Speaker, Prime Minister Lee first announced in his National Day Rally Speech in August 2022 that Section 377A would be repealed. Since then, this matter has been deeply debated, by members of the public, as well as members of this house. Based on my interactions with my friends, colleagues, union leaders and members, I have gathered that there are sentiments of worry and unhappiness amongst Singaporeans on this topic, despite the many engagement sessions carried out earlier involving various groups of leaders and fellow Singaporeans.
We have heard yesterday from more than 20 MPs and NMPs yesterday on this thorny and sensitive subject matter. I am heartened by the passion and conviction of the various speeches by the members of this house, and their commitment to safeguard the natural institution of marriage and family structure, as reiterated by many. On the other hand, I am also comforted knowing that we are according the necessary space to those who had previously felt oppressed by the existence of Section 377A in our books.
I would like to thank both Minister Masagos for his explanation on the implications of the insertion of a new Article 156 into our constitution with regards to marriage, as well as Minister Shanmugam’s explanation on the importance of repealing Section 377A in this House, instead of being struck down by the Court. In fact, many in our society, may not have known that prior to this announcement, there have been constitutional challenges filed in Court against Section 377A, on the basis that it violates the Constitution. PM Lee also mentioned during his National Day Rally Speech that the Attorney General and Minister of Law have advised that in a future court challenge, there is a real risk of Section 377A being struck down.
Sir, our union members and fellow workers are also residents of all the MPs here. They too, shared their concerns with me either in person, over calls, messages or even e-mails. I have received e-mails from multiple individuals and groups calling for the retention of Section 377A. This view is commonly held by more conservative and / or religious groups as they are concerned with what the repeal of Section 377A represents – that there would be an erosion of family values, and the traditional definition that marriage is between a man and woman could be challenged. There is also another view that the Government should not intervene nor police private and sexual behaviours between consenting adults. Accordingly, it should be removed from our books, especially if the Government will not actively enforce it.
With all being said, I hope the Government can enlighten laypersons like myself on the relevant processes for legislative and policy reforms. Under what circumstances would the Court be empowered to strike down the laws passed by Parliament? What can be done by Parliament to avoid the striking down of the laws? Should the matter be canvassed before Parliament for Parliament to consider repealing the same first? What is the difference between these two processes? Can an infographic illustrate these processes to make it easier for people out there to understand?
Nevertheless, I am glad that this issue is canvassed before us presently, as such a law which has far reaching implications on Singapore’s family structure and societal norms should be decided by Parliament, which has the people’s mandate, and not the Courts, which only interpret and apply the laws passed at the Parliament.
At this same juncture, I applaud the Government’s decision of introducing Article 156 (Institution of marriage) into our constitution. Article 156(2) provides that the Government and public authorities may, in exercising their executive authority, protect, safeguard, support, foster, and promote the institution of marriage. This is wholly consistent with what most Singaporeans want – which is to maintain the current family and social norms, where marriage is between a man and a woman, and children are brought up in such a family structure. We hope that existing measures such as public housing policies and financial benefits for married couples, as well as education and media policies continue to promote and safeguard the institution of marriage. Sir, I will now speak in Malay.
(Malay Speech) Tuan Speaker, perbincangan kita berkenaan pemansuhan Seksen 377 dan perubahan pada perlembagaan negara telah menarik perhatian dikalangan masyarakat kita, tidak kira bangsa dan agama. Ramai yang melahirkan kebimbangan tentang cara kehidupan masyarakat kita sekiranya pemansuhan Seksyen 377 ini diluluskan. Sedihnya tak ramai yang beri perihatin yang sama akan pemindahan perlembagaan dengan penambahan Artikel 156, yang menerangkan serta pengukuhan definisi perkahwinan dan keluarga.
Ramai yang bertanya-tanya apakah pemerintah bersetuju dengan perbuatan golongan sedemikian sehingga akur dan tunduk pada permintaan mereka. Kita semua sedar akan kemunculan semula golongan serupa ini dan ia amat membimbangkan buat masyarakat kita sekarang dan pada masa hadapan. Pemansuhan akta ini boleh dilihat sebagai kejayaan kecil buat golongan ini. Apakah mungkin dimasa hadapan mereka akan terus membuat permintaan yang lebih atas dasar hak asasi yang sama untuk semua masyarkat. Apakah pemerintah akan juga menyokong dan mengizinkan sama seperti sekarang?
Memang tidak salah untuk melahirkan kebimbangan, namun kita harus akur bahawa dunia ini milik semua mahluk ciptaan daripada manusia, haiwan, gunung, tumbuh-tumbuhan dan selebihnya yang tak mampu kita hitung pun. Golongan seperti ini juga manusia biasa macam kita juga. Kita wajar kongsi bersama kelapangan dunia ini sama seperti semua ciptaan Tuhan. Janganlah kita asingkan mereka hanya kerana keadaan nafsu mereka berlainan dengan kita. Sebarkan sifat rahmah dikalangan manusia dan mengenali cabaran mereka. Mereka tidak pernah minta untuk dalam keadaan demikian tetapi kita yang mengaku diri kita waras dan siuman, harus memainkan tugas menasihati dan berkongsi dengan mereka fitrah kehidupan sebenar.
Ayuh, kita tanamkan sikap hormat menghormati, bukan menghukum, atas dasar perbezaan pendapat, pendirian serta kepercayaan masing masing. Kita harus elakkan dari menyebarkan fitnah yang boleh memecah belahkan masyarakat kita. Perpaduan harmoni dalam masyarkat yang telah lama dibina atas dasar hormat menghormati harus terus dijaga dan diperkasakan. Bersatu teguh bercerai roboh!
Sir, I am sure that the repeal of Section 377A will bring some form of relief and comfort to those who previously felt oppressed by the same – in knowing that our societal norms have shifted, and we as a society, are ready to accept and grant them the space needed. In my personal view, the Government has arrived at a nice balance – granting homosexuals the space that they need through the repeal, while recognising and upholding the traditional definition of marriage through the constitutional amendments.
In closing, I echo what our Prime Minster said at the National Day Rally that we must maintain the mutual respect and trust that we have painstakingly built up over the years and stay united as one united people.
I stand by and support the decision to repeal Section 377A as well as the amendment to the constitution because Every Human Matters!
I also call on fellow workers and employers to treat every worker equally regardless of their gender, because Every Worker Matters!
Thank you.
# # #
