Debated in Parliament on 15 Oct 2012.
Mr Laurence Lien asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs if he can provide an update on the Government's stance on what it means to keep religion and politics separate.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the separation of religion and politics is a long-established principle in Singapore. Every citizen, regardless of his religious beliefs, has the same rights to express his views on public issues. In doing so, a citizen who belongs to a particular religion will often be guided by his own religious beliefs and personal conscience. However, like other citizens, he should always be mindful of the sensitivities of living in a multi-religious society and the bounds of the law.
Singapore is a multi-religious society. The different religious groups have their own deeply-held beliefs and precepts. While we accept and respect this diversity of religious teachings, we have seen many examples of other countries where religious differences have caused deep social divides and conflict. If one religion pushes hard to have its tenets and views adopted by society at large beyond its own adherents, others will push back, sometimes even harder.
Page: 801
This dynamic is accentuated if a religious group engages in politics, or if a political group uses religion to further its cause. Other religious groups will feel compelled to also enter the political arena to further their own causes or rival claims. Tensions will arise and social harmony can break down.
Hence, we need to maintain a clear line between politics and religion in Singapore. Our politics and policies must serve all Singaporeans, regardless of race, language or religion. The Government must not take sides with any religious group when making policies. If politicians use the religion card for their own political purpose and agenda, and seek to sway voters through religious appeals, it will sow the seeds of division in our society and undermine the inter-religious and social harmony we have painstakingly built.
To guard against the dangers of mixing politics and religion, Parliament enacted the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act in 1990. The Act created the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony to help the Government decide on matters pertaining to religious harmony. The current Council is chaired by a retired Supreme Court judge. It comprises members who represent the major religions in Singapore and other members who have distinguished themselves in public service or community relations. Religious representatives form the majority of this Council. Should any individual or group seek to embroil any religious group or use a religious office to further its political agenda, Government will take firm action to protect our religious and social harmony.
Mr Speaker, Sir, religious groups are an important part of our society. They make important contributions to social harmony and nation-building. The Government appreciates the positive role of religious groups in our secular state, and their understanding and acceptance of the need to keep religion and politics separate. At the same time, Government understands and respects that religious groups have deeply-held views which they wish to express and to be given due consideration. There are established formal and informal channels for religious groups to do so.
Government and religious leaders meet regularly on public occasions, such as community functions, religious events and activities under our Community Engagement Programme. Government and religious leaders also regularly meet privately, individually or in groups. Both Government and religious leaders know that when sensitive issues arise that they wish to discuss in confidence, they can do so candidly behind closed doors. This approach has worked well. These interactions help to build mutual understanding and trust, and have enabled our religious leaders to become valued and vital partners of the Government in maintaining religious harmony in Singapore.
Sir, I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his comprehensive answer. I have to declare that I am a Catholic Christian and driven very much by my faith. And it is in this context that I have raised this question. I think we can understand that we live in a multi-religious society and we need to be mindful that religions do not impose their religious tenets and views on the other members of the population.
Page: 802
My question is: do we see only the downsides of what religious institutions and organisations and religious people can offer? Can we not see them as a resource because most religions do look at the common good and do want to further the common good in society and work towards achieving that for the nation? Many people are religiously driven and they have views influenced by religion. Can we not harness that a lot more to help us in the work? This sometimes can be perceived to cross over to the political arena because politics is not just about the political regime, choosing political leaders and policies. It is also about shaping the political discourse, influencing the population —
Mr Speaker : Mr Lien, can we keep to the supplementary question, please?
Yes, Sir. Can we consider these other aspects that religion and religious institutions can offer?
Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I appreciate Mr Lien's clear articulation that he feels that politics and religion should be kept separate. If I understood him correctly, that was his opening position. I appreciate that very much because that is the position which the Government takes as well. We do appreciate the good work that religion does in our society. Mr Lien has said that he is a Catholic. I myself am not Catholic, but my whole family has been educated in Catholic schools, and we appreciate that very much. And the reason is a very simple one – Catholic schools provide good education with good values and they have been able to keep their practice of religion and their mission to provide education quite separate. I have never had an occasion, for example, in Catholic schools where they had tried to convert me, and I appreciate that very much. They teach me what their precepts are, but they have never tried to convert me.
As with all mission schools in Singapore, there is a clear separation between the education mission which is what the Ministry of Education supports and funds, and their religious practices, including what they can or cannot do in schools with the students. They cannot proselytise to the students. They cannot try to convert them, but they can continue to provide good values education for their students. In schools, we recognise that there are many religious organisations, whether they are Buddhist, Christian or others, and
So, Sir, we certainly do appreciate the contributions that religions and religious groups make to Singapore. In fact, we encourage that, but we also know that we should keep religion and politics separate so that we maintain religious harmony and social harmony in Singapore.
Page: 803
Sir, I would like to make a point of clarification. My views are a bit more nuanced. They are not clear, not so black and white. Of course, in certain instances, religion should not cross the boundaries, but my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister to consider that, in some cases, a separation of religion from politics is not entirely reasonable.
Sir, the position is very clear between that of an individual practising his religion and carrying through the practice of his religion and his beliefs into his own personal decisions. And that is quite different from getting religious groups involved in politics. I think those are two quite different things and that, in fact, as Mr Lien has suggested, is a nuanced position, and not very different from Mr Lien's. I think we need to keep that separation; otherwise, once religious organisations get involved in politics, we then run the danger of having a clash. With many religious groups entering into the political arena, or political groups seeking to use religious groups to further their political agenda, we then begin to have a problem.
Mr Speaker, I declare I am a Catholic as well. I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his answer. I wonder if I could get some clarification on a recent event. Could the Deputy Prime Minister explain or tell the House whether he had any discussions with the Archbishop on the subject of the event organised by Function 8 (F8) and, if so, what transpired during those discussions?
Mr Speaker, Sir, I will be happy to do so. As I have explained earlier in my reply to Mr Lien, Government leaders meet religious leaders regularly to build mutual understanding and trust. I have met Archbishop Nicholas Chia from time to time over the years and several times since I was appointed as the Minister for Home Affairs last May. Last year, I hosted him and a small group of Catholic leaders for lunch so that I could understand better the issues that concern the Catholic community in Singapore. I also visited the Archbishop in hospital when he unfortunately fractured his leg last August. There was no publicity or fanfare for these meetings. The Archbishop knows that any time he needs to discuss any sensitive issue with me, he can see me in private. Likewise, I would have no hesitation to share my concerns honestly and openly with him if I felt the need to do so.
Sir, it was in this spirit that I asked to meet Archbishop Nicholas Chia on 30 May 2012, together with the Chairman of the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony, Mr Goh Joon Seng. I wanted to understand better the context to the Archbishop's letter to the organisers of an organisation which calls itself F8, which was going to stage a political event scheduled for 2 June at the Speakers' Corner. I was anxious to avoid any misunderstanding between the Government and the Catholic Church. When we met, I explained my concerns to Archbishop Chia. The Archbishop stated very clearly that the Catholic Church has always maintained a position that it does not wish to be involved in political activities, and that the Church wants to work closely with the Government and does not wish to set itself on a collision path with the Government. I was greatly reassured by the Archbishop's comments, as they were consistent with his record of service throughout his 11-year tenure as leader of the Catholic Church in Singapore. He has consistently shown that he values religious harmony and appreciates the importance of separating religion and politics in our local context. He has also worked hard to forge inter-religious understanding and harmony, reflecting his strong belief in this fundamental basis of our social harmony. It also became clear from the discussion that, firstly, the Archbishop had intended the letter as a private communication to the F8 organisers. And, secondly, on reflection, the Archbishop felt that the letter did not accurately reflect his views on the subject and, if used in a manner he did not intend, might inadvertently harm our social harmony. Archbishop Chia then decided on the same day to send a second letter to the F8 organisers to withdraw his earlier letter. The F8 organisers acknowledged the Archbishop's request and, according to the Archbishop, returned him his original letter.
Page: 804
Sir, those who know Archbishop Chia well and the type of person he is, and his contributions to Singapore over the decades, will certainly know that he is not one who would endanger social harmony in Singapore. The position he took in withdrawing the letter was consistent with his words and deeds throughout his leadership of the Catholic Church and as a respected religious leader in Singapore. Mr Goh Joon Seng, who was at the meeting, in his capacity as Chairman of the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony, is a retired Supreme Court judge who knows the Archbishop professionally and personally. They have served together on the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony for 10 years and have been friends, I am told, for some 50 years. Mr Goh also is a Catholic himself and he knew that it was not in character for Archbishop Chia to do anything that would entangle the Church in politics.
Sir, although I may not know Archbishop Chia as well as Mr Goh, I have had interactions with him on several occasions. Through my conversations with the Archbishop, we have established mutual understanding and share the desire to respect the religious beliefs of the various communities in Singapore while upholding the wider interests of all Singaporeans and of Singapore.
Asst Prof Eugene Tan, last question.
Sir, I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether he could clarify on what he means by religious leaders engaging in politics. For example, if a religious group were to take the view that the Government could do more for the poor, would that amount to engaging in politics? We also know of faiths, such as Christianity and Islam, which do not draw the distinction between the private and the public realms. I think this could give rise to concerns as to whether there has been a restriction on what people of faith could engage in.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I think I have tried to answer that question which Asst Prof Eugene Tan has brought up in a different way. It is not very different from the question that Mr Lien has brought up. On an individual basis, individuals in Singapore are free to exercise their political rights as individuals. But when you bring an organisation, like a religious organisation, into politics or when political parties or people with a political agenda start to use religion to further that agenda, then you begin to have a serious problem.
Page: 805
If one religion enters into the political arena in that way, or allows itself to be used in the political arena in that way, then other religions may do so as well, and then we have the possibility of a breakdown in social harmony along religious lines. That is very dangerous for society. But as I have said, religious groups do play very important and useful social functions through their social arms. Many of them have charity arms. Many of them run education institutions, welfare homes, old-age homes, and these certainly are very welcomed. These are expressions of their own beliefs and precepts, and we welcome those. But those need to be kept separate from a political agenda of getting the religious organisation as an organisation involved in a political agenda. And I think Asst Prof Tan can see the difference between the two.
Page: 805
PAPERCUTS