On Wednesday, 24 June 2020, less than three weeks before the 2020 General Elections, queer women's advocacy group Sayoni published this report which graded Singapore politicians based on their views on LGBTQ issues[1]. It looked at the statements made by local politicians from 2011 to 2020 on social media, mainstream and independent news sites and the official written record of parliamentary proceedings, known as Hansard. The group also reached out to the politicians for comments or updates on their positions on LGBTQ issues, such as their views on Section 377A, anti-discrimination legislation, and policies on gender marker change and transgender healthcare.
The politicians were then graded according to the following criteria:
- Engagement with LGBTQ groups
- Positive inclusion of LGBTQ issues in policies and law, and how consistent or frequent this is demonstrated
- Advocacy against discrimination or violence towards LGBTQ individuals
- Demonstration of awareness of the specific challenges LGBTQ people face
The report found that all political parties in Singapore were unresponsive or non-committal when asked about their positions on LGBTQ issues[2]. It also listed the top and bottom five politicians on LGBTQ issues. These politicians come from various political parties in Singapore.
This is an excerpt of the document. The entire PDF file may be downloaded here:[3].
Introduction[]
All citizens should have the equal right to live free from violence and discrimination, regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression. However, LGBTQ Singaporeans are systematically discriminated against and treated as “second-class citizens”, unable to participate fully as members of society and unworthy of the rights accorded to fellow heterosexual Singaporean citizens.
We embarked on this project to emphasise the importance of LGBTQ visibility and representation in our political systems. Through archiving politicians’ public views on LGBTQ issues in the past 10 years, this project aims to advocate for greater political accountability. The words and actions of our political representatives hold power, regardless of whether they were made in Parliament or other avenues like social media.
We recognise that citizens, including LGBTQ persons and allies, are not single-issue voters, as we do not lead single-issue lives. However, we firmly believe it is important to take into account the positions politicians have on LGBTQ issues. Irrespective of their political parties or affiliations, we aim to be as non-partisan, fair, and factual as possible in sharing a snapshot of our politicians’ public views. In doing so, we hope this enables LGBTQ Singaporeans and allies to make informed choices, in and beyond their voting slips during elections. We encourage all to engage in active citizenry: be it writing to your MP and urging them to speak up on LGBTQ issues, or calling out bigotry in the workplace, with friends or family.
Changes in our institutions, laws and policies are overdue and urgently needed. We believe that the Singapore government should lead the way, in tandem with citizens and civil society organisations. Moving forward, we hope all politicians and political parties will have open dialogues with the people they are elected to represent: by addressing the concerns of LGBTQ citizens, ensuring the protection and inclusion of this vulnerable group, and upholding equality as one of the foundational principles of Singapore.
Methodology[]
During the 2011 General Elections, members of the LGBTQ community sent a joint letter to 6 political parties requesting for clarifications of their positions on LGBTQ-related issues. Building off their advocacy efforts, we embarked on this project to track how the parliamentary discourse and public views of politicians have evolved in the ten years since this previous request. Thus, our scope of study was established to be a review of the past decade (2011 - 2020).
We conducted research on LGBTQ-related news or statements made by politicians. These were found on social media, mainstream and independent news outlets, and in Parliamentary Hansard records. Following this, we emailed politicians for clarifications and comments on their public views made in the past decade. We also reached out to all other politicians, who were silent on LGBTQ issues between 2011 and 2020, for comments on their current position(s).
Additionally, we emailed political parties requesting for their position(s) on issues such as Section 377A, anti-discrimination legislation, “conversion therapy”, policies on gender marker change and transgender healthcare, recognition of same-sex relationships, media censorship, LGBTQ-affirming healthcare, and inclusive education.
Absent or silent politicians[]
Our research found that only 35 politicians have made statements on LGBTQ issues in the past 10 years. While it may be politically expedient to avoid discussing “controversial” issues, the OURsystemic violence and discrimination LGBTQ persons face means that lives are on the line. Such wilful ignorance is to turn away from the discriminatory laws, policies, and attitudes towards LGBTQ persons that legitimise their continued marginalization, engendering unequal access to education, employment, healthcare, housing and public spaces.
Research conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) has shown that perspectives on LGBTQ issues evolve over time. LGBTQ issues are seen as crucial among younger respondents who tend to be more accepting. Youths, a growing and increasingly important voting bloc, want greater government involvement and more public discussions of LGBTQ issues. Now more than ever, it is imperative for politicians to address the concerns of LGBTQ citizens openly and meaningfully.
Absence or silence ignore the challenges LGBTQ persons face as a vulnerable group, and neglects how violence and discrimination impacts our lived realities as LGBTQ Singaporeans and our “bread-and-butter”. As we grow as a nation, we need to be reminded that societies should be judged by how they treat its most vulnerable citizens, and politicians have the poer and responsibility to ensure that no one is left behind.
Fence-sitting politicians[]
Out of the 35 politicians who have made statements on LGBTQ issues, 8 made statements that we consider to be “fence-sitting”. Fence-sitting statements take any of the following form:
- Does not take an explicit or decisive stance
- Uses the discourse of prevailing “social norms” or awaiting “social views to evolve”,
in order to deflect institutional responsibility
- “Motherhood statements” that are vague or have a feel-good platitude, without any
specified plans for realisation
In our view, fence-sitting is not enough. Though perhaps well-intentioned, opting for “neutrality” on issues of injustice is to support the status quo that continues to treat LGBTQ persons as unequal members of society. While we do believe that social consensus has to be built on divisive issues, politicians hold institutional power and thus the responsibility to effectuate change, by engaging in substantial efforts to build inclusivity and respect diversity. More should be done to undertake such efforts, rather than inactively sitting on the middle ground.
Our democratically elected politicians are accountable to all Singaporeans, and we hope fence-sitting politicians will engage in more meaningful efforts to combat violence and discrimination against LGBTQ persons in the future. We invite all politicians who currently belong in this category to move proactively in protecting vulnerable and stigmatised communities, including LGBTQ Singaporeans. In other words: takinga more decisive stance, with specific plans for the realisation of equality for all.
See also[]
- Singapore politicians' views on homosexuality
- Discrimination against homosexuals in Singapore
- Sayoni
References[]
Acknowledgements[]
This article was written by Roy Tan.