Speakers' Corner a test of whether people will listen

On Sunday, the news came from Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong that Singapore will soon have its own Speakers' Corner.

The next day, Singapore Democratic Party leader Chee Soon Juan was already on air, through an interview with the British Broadcasting Corporation, accusing the government of making a joke out of free speech.

As long as the Internal Security Act was around, he said, "you're never going to have the kind of freedom of speech that democracy needs".

I beg your pardon? To say that the ISA's mere existence is a hindrance to the operation of a Speakers' Corner seems to me the equivalent of saying that the traffic police being around is a hindrance to the freedom to drive.

It is not the first time, of course, that Dr Chee has indulged in such a flight of logic.

Singaporeans will remember the mid-1990s, when his appearances before the Cost Review Committee became the stuff of reporters' nightmares, as his utterances contradicted one another in succession.

Law lecturer Simon Tay was the voice of reason on Monday's BBC programme, cautioning that it was premature to judge how the Speakers' Corner would turn out.

"It's possible that Singapore is opening up and that this Speakers' Corner could be actually an important symbol of that new maturity," he said.

Indeed.

There are, to be sure, some people who believe that the idea will be stillborn. There will be no takers, except for the cranks and the crackpots.

They argue that Singaporeans already have the Internet as a platform for free speech. There is also the Forum page of this newspaper, which is enjoying increasing reach, and receiving an increasing number of letters on an increasing number of issues.

If you think that the idea of a Speakers' Corner is an anachronism, consider this: The British government decided in November last year to set up copies of London's famed bastion of free speech and lawful assembly in towns and cities across the country.

If Singapore is indulging in some out-dated whimsy, it is certainly not alone in doing so.

One difference between Singapore's and Britain's is the requirement for a licence, no doubt simply to give the law-enforcers some prior warning and, thus, to be prepared should anything untoward happen.

The Home Affairs Minister gave the assurance that it would be very much a formality, with approval granted within an hour or so. But still, it means some self-sifting of speakers at the outset.

The cranks and the crackpots, who form the more regular performers in London's Hyde Park, are not likely to be present at the Singapore version.

This ought to be a comfort to those who fear that the Speakers' Corner will be but a showcase of Singaporean insanity. Certain minimum standards will be ensured.

How minimum, though?

That hinges on one factor. No, it is not whether people will speak. It is whether people will listen.

Only the unhinged -- slightly or otherwise -- will carry on speaking when there is no audience. The more serious-minded will do so only if there is one.

So if Singaporeans want the Speakers' Corner to succeed, the very first thing they must do is to be prepared to listen.

That means being prepared to be open to ideas not their own, however different.

Singaporeans have become so used to the business of life being no more than a life of business, of work and making a living, to make ends meet and to have enough for that car or that vacation, that many have no time to think.

Some, perhaps, are not interested to think.

But this is not to say that the onus is all on the listeners to make the idea work.

The speakers have a role too: They have to be prepared for reactions from their listeners, however adverse.

They cannot expect to enjoy the sanctity of the pulpit or the aloofness of the podium.

Indeed, if the true spirit of a Speakers' Corner is to be realised, it has to be interactive, even if in a limited way.

How the Speakers' Corner evolves will depend on whether Singaporeans give it a chance to.

How they respond to the speakers who have the tenacity to make their way up there will determine whether it is a soulless and empty shrine, or a living symbol of a democracy coming of age.