1
TRANSCRIPT OF TELEVISION INTERVIEW –
THE PRIME MINISTER BEING INTERVIEWED
BY DEREK ROUND, REUTERS, JOHN HUGHES,
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, AND KEN
JALLEH, HONG KONG STANDARD, AT THE
PENINSULA HOTEL, HONG KONG, ON 14TH OCTOBER, 1968
Interviewer: I am sure the prospect of taking two months off is very
attractive to every Prime Minister in the world. Could you
tell the world’s leaders what magic formula you discovered
for being able to get away from it all?
Prime Minister: Well, I think we fought most of our fundamental battles early
and that made for a very hectic start. I don’t think we dodged
the issues and over the first 5 or 7 years we brought home, I
think, to the whole electorate the problems that they have to
live with, the short-term ones and, more important, the eternal
ones – our geographic location in Southeast Asia, the
demographic position, the geo-politics of the area, the
ideological divides in the area – and fortunately the
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 2
Communist made catastrophic mistakes from 1961 onwards.
They are out for the time being and they have decided to opt
out completely from the constitutional arena.
We have new problems – economic and security ones arising
out of the British planning and programming for withdrawal
east of Suez. All the things we can do in anticipation of
events that are likely to happen between now and 71 we have
done and I think it is probably profitable for me to just take a
deep breath and rethink some of the problems and maybe
have new ideas. Anyway, a fresh burst of enthusiasm.
Interviewer: Prime Minister, I wonder if I could ask you a question about
Singapore. I think I am correct in saying that your
government is one of the few freely elected governments in
the world that have all the seats in Parliament. Could I ask
you: Are you embarrassed or worried by the absence of an
effective opposition in Singapore?
Prime Minister: I don’t think “embarrassed” or “worried” is apt, appropriate.
I would prefer that the Legislative Chamber reflects the actual
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 3
ground position in which case I think we will probably have
about three-quarters of the seats, and then there will be an
opposition party, in the main pro-Communist, and issues will
be joined and, against that kind of a back-drop, I think we can
project our policies much more vividly to the people. Not
unnaturally they didn’t think their role was to act as a
backdrop for us, so they removed the backdrop and we have
to develop new styles, new methods of getting across the
message to the people. If we don’t, then the issues will be
blurred and people’s attention will not be in focus and that
means more troublesome elections in 1973, five years from
now.
Interviewer: Do you see the prospect of an effective opposition party
being developed before the next elections?
Prime Minister: Well, this is very difficult to say. As of now, the Communist
line, which, of course, is reflected in their open Communist
front activity, is abandonment of open participation in
parliamentary elections or parliamentary forms of activity or
parliamentary struggle as they call it. In Singapore they say,
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 4
“We take it to the streets.” I think Hong Kong knows what
that means. We have that for a long time and it has not been
successful; taking it to the streets means that the crowd must
be with you. I mean if you are chasing law and order and
suddenly you find yourself all lonesome in the middle of the
street, that is very embarrassing. You have to have a crowd
and you get lost.
Whether they will switch policy in time before 1973 when the
next elections are due to be held, I don’t know. It depends
really upon the course of events in Southeast Asia and
whether their policy will make sense in Malaysia, particularly
West Malaysia and it is a co-ordinated policy. Malaysia to
them is a non-entity. They use the word “Malaya” in which
they include Singapore and it is the peninsula which for them
is the major scene of action. I think they may be wrong. In
which case they pay a very heavy price, many more years of
futile struggle. If they are right, then we will have quite an
exciting time.
Interviewer: I refer to a statement you made yesterday about Singapore
supporting Malaysia in the dispute over Sabah. I think there
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 5
is a standing invitation to you, Sir, to visit the Philippines.
Could this materialise in the near future?
Prime Minister: May I say what I said about Sabah? I mean you can construe
it anyway you like, but our position is when we were in
Malaysia, we were part of Malaysia just as Sabah was a part
of Malaysia, we joined Malaysia together. When we were
separated from Malaysia, we considered and we still consider
Sabah to be a part of Malaysia. From time to time I have an
opportunity to visit other countries and one of these days
when conditions permit, I hope to visit the Philippines and
gain educationally from it.
Interviewer: May I ask you about your visit to Japan? Is it with a view to
obtaining more Japanese support for Singapore financially
and I also understand that the purpose is to sign a contract
with a big shipbuilding yard in Sembawang?
Prime Minister: No, no. You know the press builds up all this. First of all, it
is a nice time of the year to visit Japan or so they tell me. I
hope to spend 6 enjoyable days. Secondly, it is part of
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 6
Singapore’s policy to make friends with anybody who wants
to make friends with Singapore. The only condition is we
don’t interfere with each other’s internal policies, and all who
accept that are our friends. We like to trade, co-operate
economically or have joint ventures with with industrially
advanced nations and Japan is one of them. At the moment, I
think, Japanese investments comprise the largest single
investment by foreign industrialists. At a rough guess it is
12 ½ % of the total of our investments and I think it does no
harm to develop some rapport, government to government,
person to person.
Interviewer: I take it in the past there has been some criticism that British
businessmen haven’t been doing as much as they might to
invest in your country and I think in the last few months there
has been several British missions and, I think, a party of
British financial writers who visited the Republic as your
guests. Do you think this is likely to lead to a certain
increased interest and hopefully increased British investments
in the Republic?
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 7
Prime Minister: Yes, if followed up. I think their interest has increased.
Whether it will be followed up and whether projects will
materialise will depend upon the constant canvassing, the
effort made to sustain the interest. I am told there are about
half a dozen projects already being considered. If we keep it
up and if British capital exports are facilitated, then we
probably will have more from Britain. If it is not encouraged
by British financial policies, well, then Singapore like the rest
of the world or the rest of the Commonwealth part of the
world, will have less capital and expertise from Britain. But
the policy, to Singapore, is at least as good as any other part
of the British Commonwealth.
Interviewer: What you said just now suggests that the British Government
itself could give a little bit more encouragement to deploy
British capital while appreciating your own problems …
Prime Minister: Well, this is part of the changing economic position of Britain
and the world and for some years now, I think, successive
British governments – not just the British Labour Government
– have not particularly encouraged the export of capital. I
think the emphasis or the priority is to develop those parts of
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 8
Scotland and Wales, which is considered electorally more
beneficial.
Interviewer: Sir, if Singapore is to attract foreign investment, it must
provide security, but Britain is pulling out, the American
posture is uncertain, and regional defence alliances don’t
seem to be getting off the ground. How do you foresee
Singapore’s need for security being met?
Prime Minister: Well, I think being a resident of Hong Kong, you ought to give
me the answer to that because you have done it so remarkably
successfully. You live far more dangerously than we so and
nobody can complain that uncertainties have in anyway
inhibited Hong Kong’s growth. True, you may have paid a
slightly higher price for it, amortisation, capital and interest
thereon taking say, 4 or 5 years instead of 9 or 10 years.
Well, I would say the climate in Singapore, both physical and
political, is more moderate, more comfortable than in
Hong Kong and given a little bit of good luck and a great deal
of hard work, there is no reason why there shouldn’t be lky\1968\lky1014.doc 9
continuing security in the seventies. I don’t know who is
going to be elected in America and who will be in charge for
the next 4 years but assuming that there is no sudden write-
off of the stakes in Southeast Asia, the southeastern realm of
Southeast Asia, that means there will be a continuing interest
probably by Britain, Australia and New Zealand, perhaps not
in the same substantial form, in force levels as they are now,
but enough for the purpose. And meanwhile, of course, we
are not doing nothing and the Malaysians are not doing
nothing. So between Malaysia, Singapore and the other
Commonwealth members, we might put up more than a
credible security arrangement. And we have to do it.
Interviewer: Prime Minister, there still seems to be criticisms from time to
time that Singapore and Malaysia are not doing as much as
some people outside anyway think they should do, to co-
operate, more recently with the question of the control and
operation of your joint national airline. I wonder if you could
say something about this – do you see prospects for a good
working relationship, some degree of co-operation with your
neighbour?
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 10
Prime Minister: Well, it is unprofitable pretending that there were not deep
differences between Malaysia and Singapore which led to
separation in less than 2 years of Malaysia. I don’t think 3¼
years since separation that these differences had been solved.
It is a difference almost in ways of life but we have to learn to
live with each other. I think we made some progress towards
accepting the fact that we are different, two different
philosophies of life if you like, and there are compelling
almost irresistible pressures on co-operation. The unity of the
two in the security interest of both cannot be willed or wished
away and we just have to learn to co-operate in a very quiet
and common-sensical way or we both perish.
You can’t imagine Singapore being captured by hostile
interests and everything going on nicely and happily as before
in the rest of Malaysia. Vice versa, I do not for one moment
believe it possible to carry on our own separate existence if,
in fact, Malaysia, particularly West Malaysia, were to be
governed by forces determined to destroy Singapore. There
must be conflict and this alone makes it necessary that we
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 11
accommodate and we reach some working arrangements for
our common benefit. I think it will be done and it just has to
be.
Interviewer: Mr. Prime Minister, you have been quoted as saying that the
Americans in Vietnam are buying time for non-Communist
nations of Southeast Asia. Does that mean you support the
continued American commitment in Vietnam?
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 12
Prime Minister: Well, that is a very big bundle. Do I support the American
commitment in Vietnam? Well, the American commitment
was one made by the American Government. We neither
support nor unsupport it. I mean it is there and it has bought
time for the rest of Southeast Asia. How long do we need?
Very difficult to tell. How long does it take to build relatively
viable states along the southeastern realm of Asia? That
depends upon what effort you put in.
Interviewer: Does that mean, Sir, you would be urging the United States to
maintain the presence in South Vietnam, after Vietnam
particularly in regard to Thailand?
Prime Minister: I don’t think I have any views on that, about urging or
unurging. I don’t think it makes the slightest difference
because the United States will be moved by its own power
considerations, its own national and security interests. We
live with the result of their decisions.
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 13
Interviewer: You said earlier, Sir, that the American presidential election
is of course an internal affair of the United States but it is an
election which is going to have widespread repercussions.
Do you feel that in Asian eyes there are any particular merits
or demerits which stand out as far as any of the candidates
are concerned?
Prime Minister: Well, I think it is very improper for any member of a
government not connected with America to comment on the
merits or demerits of the presidential candidates or their
policies. We live with whoever is the President of the United
States, just as we live with whoever is Secretary-General or
the First Secretary of the Russian Communist Party.
Interviewer: Sir, in the past you had your differences with the United
States. Are there any particular misconceptions or mis-
understanding that you would be seeking to remove about
Singapore during your forthcoming visit to America?
lky\1968\lky1014.doc 14
Prime Minister: Well, this is purely a private visit. I am going there to switch
off the valves, read, talk to people, meet fresh minds, have
fresh ideas; it is not to engage in politics of any sort.
Interviewer: Could you comment on greater co-operation between
Singapore and Hong Kong the likelihood of more missions
from Singapore to Hong Kong and Hong Kong to Singapore in
furtherance of trade?
Prime Minister: Well, I think toing and froing between Singapore and
Hong Kong will be to the advantage of both. There has been a
great deal more, recently, of contacts between the two. There
has always been a great deal of trade and Singapore families
have long had Hong Kong connections and many have homes
in both places. I would think that there is almost a symbiosis
between the two centres. Both were the products of British
maritime tradition. Singapore was established in 1819,
Hong Kong in 1841. It took away the China trade from
Singapore but we managed to survive. Hong Kong lost the
China trade after 1949 and it managed to survive and reached
new levels of prosperity. And throughout the changing lky\1968\lky1014.doc 15
patterns of political and economic power in the region we
have complimented each other like sand in the time glass.
You know it moves from one segment to the other. And I
would hope that we would be of value in some way to
Hong Kong and vice versa. There is great merit, I think, in
maintaining close contact so that people, not just people with
money, but people with professional skills, expertise,
management talent, executives, the decision-makers, could
exercise their gifts over a wider area. And communications
between the two are very good, a matter of 4 ½ hours by
aircraft.
Interviewer: Mr. Prime Minister, the signal tells that we are coming to the
end of our time. So may I, on behalf of the Hong Kong and
foreign press thank you for sparing your time to answer our
questions during your visit. Though you won’t be able to turn
off during the next 2 months as much as you hope, we wish
you a very enjoyable trip.
Prime Minister: Thank you.
------lky\1968\lky1014.doc