Personal Explanation

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the permission to make a personal statement regarding my supplementary question on the ownership of Parliamentary videos on 7 November 2017.

In my supplementary question on the Parliamentary video footage on 7 November, when asked for specific examples of editing, I said, and I quote, "There was a specific example where a clip was put up in relation to the Presidential Election Act debates. If my memory serves me well, it was in January or February, and the clip that was put up of certain exchanges, there were certain bits removed. It was actually communicated with Mediacorp and, through the correspondence, they actually made the rectification and put up a different clip. So, I think that was resolved quite amicably", unquote. I was asked to clarify my remarks later on that day.

I acknowledge that I could have recalled certain facts incorrectly about an exchange with Mediacorp that had occurred in February 2017, nine months earlier. I said that I would need to verify the facts with my email archive but that, and I quote, "I am sure that that will be the case when I have verified. So, I am quite prepared to accept that fact".

I would now like to definitively withdraw my earlier statements to the effect that the video had been edited with certain bits removed and that the video had been edited and only corrected after my intervention. I confirm that Mediacorp had explained this to me in February 2017 and that I had accepted that.

I would like to apologise to the House for all incorrect recollections of the chain of events in February 2017 contained in this exchange as per House conventions.

However, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I did not deliberately misrepresent the facts of that incident for this House. Firstly, I did not plan to raise this incident during supplementary questions. I did so off the cuff and only in response to the request to enumerate any incident of editing that I knew of. As it turned out, my memory of the incident was inaccurate.

Secondly, I did acknowledge that my memory of the incident may well be imperfect as I prefaced it with the phrase "if my memory serves me well".

Thirdly, I stated explicitly and twice on that day that the incident had been resolved amicably and had not accused Mediacorp of partisan editing of a video clip in that incident, which makes the matter of when the clip was corrected immaterial.

I would also like to reiterate that the main thrust of my Parliamentary Question (PQ) and supplementary question had been, firstly, the nature and ownership of Parliamentary video footage which was clarified as a result of the PQ. Secondly, whether and how videos are edited, which was also clarified by the PQ in that and if there is editing insofar as that means the arrangement of Parliamentary exchanges into the clips and so on, but not verbatim editing of exchange within a particular clip. And thirdly, why "live" streaming of Parliament is not provided, an issue where Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat explained the Government's position – which is one with which I disagree – since "live" streaming would tend to remove any concern about the reflectiveness of clips of particular exchanges uploaded sometime after the event.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, I apologise to the House for any mistaken impression created by my failure of memory. I agree that Parliamentary privilege is a privilege that should never be taken lightly. However, I did not deliberately misrepresent facts or deliberately mislead the House for whatever reason. Thank you.

Leader of the House.

As I said earlier on, the Member's intention aside, the fact is that the Member has, indeed, made untrue allegations, and I thank him for acknowledging his misleading statements and also acknowledging his apology to Parliament.

Deputy Speaker, I would like to stress here that Members of Parliament are given Parliamentary privilege to speak freely and surface different views, but this must not be misused to misrepresent facts or mislead Parliament. I am glad that Mr Perera has clarified his statement by withdrawing his false allegations against Mediacorp and apologising to Parliament. Mr Perera has, indeed, acknowledged that he has made a mistake in recollecting his facts. I would not want to read too much into his intention whether there was, indeed, deliberate allegation against Mediacorp, but statements that were wrongly made in this House deserved to be retracted if it is, indeed, untrue in this House so that the Chamber, the Members, are able to benefit from the discussion and also to restore trust in one another's statements made in this House.

It is only in that way that we are able to have a useful and effective discussion in this House because we believe that what we say here we have a serious basis for them and that we will not make any statements unless we are very scrupulous with the facts that are backing the statements. So, I hope that this serves as a timely reminder for all Members of the House of the high standard of integrity and honesty that we expect in this House. Thank you, Sir.