Soon after PLU’s application attempt was rejected, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong made a speech to Parliament on 5 June 1997, painting the vision of a new opening up. He said, 

“We need a new vision for Singapore, an ideal, a fresh mindset. We need to move beyond material progress, to a society which places people at its very centre . . . . a Singapore where people make the difference, in which each citizen is valued . . . .We have to move beyond tolerance, to respect the different cultures in our midst, and to gain strength from diverse ideas.” 

Thus began the tortuously slow process of liberalizing Singapore, so tortuous that most people remained skeptical of the government’s true intentions. 

The skeptics could see farce coming when, in 1999, the government launched the “Singapore 21” exercise. It was a stage-managed consultation process where the result was commanded in advance. A coffee-table book was eventually produced to show that these pre-specified outcomes had wide support:

• Every Singaporean Matters
• Strong Families : Our Foundation and Our Future
• Opportunities for All
• The Singapore Heartbeat
• Active Citizens : Making a Difference to Society.

Nonetheless, People Like Us felt that they could try to take them at their word and see what happened. Since the government wanted active citizens, and wished for every Singaporean to matter, and (1997 speech) believed in moving beyond tolerance, respecting different cultures and gaining strength form diversity, PLU decided that it was time to hold a public forum titled, “The place of gay Singaporeans in the context of Singapore 21″.

In accordance with Singapore law, where any public forum required a Public Entertainment Licence from the police, Alex Au applied for such a licence in April 2000.

It was a no-lose gambit. If a licence was given, there would be a forum where PLU could bring gay issues to the public’s attention If a licence was refused, it would be proof positive of empty promises by the government. and the negative publicity would exact a price by damaging the government’s PR efforts.  

In May 2000, the police responded to the application for the forum. The letter said,

I regret to inform you that your application is unsuccessful. The Police cannot allow the holding of this forum which will advance and legitimise the cause of homosexuals in Singapore. The mainstream moral values of Singaporeans are conservative, and the Penal Code has provisions against certain homosexual practices. It will therefore be contrary to the public interest to grant a public entertainment licence.

Most people thought the reasoning was laughable: once something was against the law, it was no longer permissible to talk about it. 

But the big surprise was when 17 and 18-year-old school students took up the issue, soon after the refusal to grant a licence for the forum. At a seminar for Pre-University students, entitled “Fostering the Renaissance Spirit”, someone from the audience asked Minister of State Lim Swee Say this question,

“Do you agree the Government should relax its control and allow Singapore to truly realise the Renaissance spirit? Some examples of control are the ban on smoking and chewing gum, and the gay forum which was denied a permit.”

The part of Lim Swee Say’s answer regarding the gay forum was this:

“….. As for the gay forum, I do not believe that a single group of people in Singapore has the right to publicise its lifestyle and impose it on others. I am an avid golfer, but I do not hold a forum on golfing to say how much I love golf and convince others it is good.”

The government was painting themselves into a corner. They were quite confused about who was imposing upon whom, and they equated not wanting to talk about golf with not allowing others to talk. 

But given the political culture in Singapore where the media shut up when the government growls at any subject, the topic soon faded from view.