Bernard Rodrigues
Singapore
“The Housing and Development Board, not to mention other landlords, may have to be prepared to write off a significant sum of money as unrecoverable debts because of the provisions of clause 16. It seems to me that this Bill requires a lot of further amendments before it can become an Act. 3.53 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead l0l*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr S. V. Lingam Sir, has the Minister any plans to organise or renovate the Museum to make it more interesting for the public and in particular for the tourists?”
“The provision of overhead bridges merely strives to remedy the symptoms without removing the cause of the problem of the kamikaze attitude of Singapore residents.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I only want to touch on the allocation of the flats, if I may. There are applications for Housing Board flats where the applicants have applied for Housing Estate A but have been offered flats in Housing Estate B, while there are other applicants who have applied for Housing Estate B and have been given Housing Estate A.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether it cannot be made law that a pedestrian must use the overhead bridges otherwise he will be committing a traffic offence. I per sonally think it is a waste of funds to build more overhead bridges if people do not use them.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I only have one question to ask as a result of what the Member for Bras Basah has said. Will the Minister for Finance consider granting an amnesty over a fixed period of time to tax-dodgers to reveal their hidden assets and income which, when revealed, will not be taxed on condition that such assets and income are capital…”
The complete record
Every one of 105 lines we hold for Bernard Rodrigues, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“The Housing and Development Board, not to mention other landlords, may have to be prepared to write off a significant sum of money as unrecoverable debts because of the provisions of clause 16. It seems to me that this Bill requires a lot of further amendments before it can become an Act. 3.53 p.m.”
“I think the problem I have raised is important and should be resolved before the proposed Act becomes operative. My second comment is the protection afforded to any payments into or out of the proposed Fund from any legal proceedings or process in respect of a debt or any other claim as provided in clause 11 of the proposed Act. The scope of this clause appears to be very wide and I do not know whether the Government has considered all the possible consequences arising from such protection. It is undoubtedly beneficial that the recipients of any payment of the proposed Fund should be protected from any harassment from moneylenders, but the possible effect of such provision in relation to some statutory boards, such as the Housing and Development Board, the Public Utilities Board, must also be considered. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.50 p.m. If a person who comes within the scope of the proposed Act runs up arrears on his rental of a Housing Board flat and is prepared to face the consequence of eviction, particularly in the case of non-citizens who have already made arrangements to leave the country, there seems no way for the Board to recover the arrears of rent. Where it relates to one or two persons the amount to be borne by the Housing and Development Board may be negligible, but where if a thousand odd persons are to take advantage of such provision the Housing and Development Board, not to mention other landlords, may have ---”
“Otherwise we would have a ridiculous situation where an expa triate employee, on expiry of his term of service, returns to his country with a not unsubstantial amount of gratuity and other payments untaxed. This is obvious from the enabling provision of clause 16 of the proposed Act where the Minister is given power to exempt an employer or a class of employers from the operation of the proposed Act. I can, however, foresee some difficulty arising from the operation of the exemption under clause 16 where the commercial sector is concerned. Exemption of an employer having an expatriate staff by the Minister from the operation of the proposed Act means also the exemption of the local staff from the operation of the proposed Act together with the expatriate officer. But as the purpose of the proposed Act is to help Singapore citizens tide over the period of their probable unemployment, the purpose of the proposed Act seems to be defeated. To me it appears that either the scope of the Act or the provision of clause 16 is unnecessarily and unduly wide. Either the scope of the Act should be restricted to those persons directly affected by the British withdrawal from Singapore, or the exemption under clause 16 should relate not to employers but rather to an employee or a class of employees. The wide scope of the proposed Act seems unavoidable, but otherwise the proposed Act becomes a piece of legislation specifically enacted against a selected and restricted group of persons. On the other hand, exemption of employers rather than of employees appears unavoidable because the proposed Act places the onus on making payments into the proposed Fund upon the employers and not the employees.”
“It is not difficult to imagine that the persons on receiving a sum of money, a sum which is much more substantial than they have ever laid their hands on, may squander away such small fortunes wastefully and rapidly, regardless of the fact that they are unemployed. A situation may result when such persons and their families, after exhausting their retrenchment benefits and have no other means of support, may join the ranks of destitute persons at present drawing meagre allowances from the Social Welfare Department. It is probably one of the reasons responsible for the decision of the Government not to include in the proposed Act a provision whereby an employee is given an option either to have his retrenchment benefits paid into the proposed Fund comprising exemption and protection, or to receive and use such benefits in any way as he wishes subject to the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance and harassment by moneylenders. But I have two comments to make on the proposed Act. First is the inclusion of the provision where any payment made into and out of the proposed Fund is exempted from the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance. The Government in making such a provision in the proposed Act must have realised that it means a loss to the Republic of not an insignificant amount of revenue. Such exemption is extended as a means of alleviating the distress and suffering of employees who are rendered unemployed as a result of the withdrawal of the British Military Services. But I do not think it is the intention of the Government that the operation of the proposed Act should extend to the expatriate staff of commercial firms.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the Redundancy Payments Fund Bill. I quite appreciate that the economic and other difficulties confronting Singapore, consequent upon the wholesale accelerated withdrawal of the British Military Forces from the Republic, render it necessary to have a Bill such as the one before the House. To minimise such difficulties, the Singapore Government has initiated a rather unique Bill which some irresponsible elements have labelled as a gross infringement of an individual's right to receive and use any sum of money payable in respect of his termination of service. This, of course, is a deliberate distortion of the purpose of the operation of the proposed Redundancy Payments Fund Bill which seeks to reconcile and protect the in terests of the individual in relation to the wider interests of the Republic. It is quite true that the individual who comes within the scope of the proposed Bill finds that the right to receive and use any retrenchment benefits payable to him as he wishes has been curtailed to a certain extent. But, on the other hand, balanced against the curtailment is the exemption of such retrenchment benefits from taxation under the Income Tax Ordinance and protection from the harassment by moneylenders. These are two significant benefits which are given in consideration of the compulsory payment of the retrenchment benefits into the proposed Redundancy Fund and should not be overlooked in any discussion of the merits of the proposed Act. I also quite appreciate that the principal intention behind the proposed Act, as I see it, is to help prevent persons who are unemployed as a result of the situation of redundancy arising in their place of employment, from becoming a burden on the State.”
“These courses, in the initial stages, will be mainly directed at producing female workers for the textile industry so that, with the skills that they will acquire in a shorter period, they will start earning better wages earlier. Indeed, trained textile and garment factory workers can easily earn from $4 to $5 per day with improved skills and better productivity. Members of the House will agree that these rates compare favourably with the rates given even to male unskilled workers in many cases. The Member for Sembawang is also afraid that by putting female workers to work at night, it may affect their family life. I do not think he need worry about this because most of the workers in these factories are between 18 years and 22 years of age, and I do not think that women in this age group have a lot of babies to look after at home. The Member for Bukit Merah is concerned about the security of women who have to go home very late at night. I think the answer, as he has said, will be to ask for more street lights and to seek better and more efficient police protection in the area. But even at the present moment, without this law being enforced, female workers still have to go home very late, because they are allowed to work up to 11 or 12 o'clock at night. But, on the other hand, if this, law is passed whereby a woman is allowed to work the third shift, then, instead of going home at 11 or 12 o'clock midnight, she may have to go home very early in the morning, at 6 o'clock, in which case I do not think we have to worry much about the darkness. Madam Chan Choy Siong rose -”
“24, in occupations such as cutters, sewing-machine operators, iron workers, packing workers and seamstresses, the average wages are up to $5.49 per day. However, during the period of training which ranges from one month to six months, female workers are paid from $1.50 to $2.25 per day according to the trade in which they are being trained. After training, they are generally put on piece rates subject to a minimum earning of $2.50 per day, which is the amount an inefficient worker earns. A worker with greater productivity earns from $4 to $5 per day and even up to $8 in the case of some workers in one particular factory. In other words, the earnings are dependent on the skill of the worker, and the greater the skill and productivity of the worker, the higher the earnings. It is quite evident that no factory will pay a worker much more than he or she is worth in terms of production. If labour costs are artificially inflated merely to increase the earnings of the workers even though their productivity is low, no one is going to open a factory in Singapore. The intelligent way to deal with this problem is to help the workers to improve their skills so that they may earn more. The National Productivity Centre at J urong is now considering the introduction of three industrial training classes for new workers before they get into the factories. The objective of these classes is to acclimatise the workers to a working environment with some rudimentary knowledge of the trade into which he or she will enter. This will enable them to imbibe more quickly the skills required for the jobs they will have to perform.”
“Sir, I never said that the workers are very lowly paid. I made a general remark, that workers are paid according to the industry in which they work. Mr Jek Yeun Thong: I beg his pardon. But last Tuesday and also today the Member for Delta says that female workers especially in Jurong are very lowly paid. The Member for Bras Basah has suggested that we should set up a commission of inquiry to look into this matter. I do not think this is really necessary. It may be a one-sided affair because, according to a sample survey conducted in July 1966, the monthly average earnings of female workers of 18 years and above in all factories was $100.80, and the highest average monthly earnings of $120.90 was recorded in the tobacco, cigarette, cigar and other tobacco product industry, whilst the lowest average monthly earnings of $70.50 was recorded in the paper product, including stationery and hard boxes, industry. The main factor affecting the differences in the rates of pay of female workers in various occupations and industries is the skill required in the performance of the job. In other words, the greater the skill, the higher the rate of pay. This is clearly manifested by the figures already given for the paper product industry in which unskilled labour is involved, as against the relatively higher monthly earnings in the tobacco, cigarette and cigar industry. In the textile and garment industry, the predominant rates of pay for female workers, other than those who are under training or who are partially trained, vary from a minimum of $2.70 to $2.90 per day of eight hours in such occupations as weavers, spinners, knitters and twisters. Whilst in the shirt and garment manufacturing industry, the average wages per day range from $2.58 to $3.”
“Point of clarification, Sir. Mr Jek Yeun Thong resumed his seat.”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 310.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether it cannot be made law that a pedestrian must use the overhead bridges otherwise he will be committing a traffic offence. I per sonally think it is a waste of funds to build more overhead bridges if people do not use them.”
“The provision of overhead bridges merely strives to remedy the symptoms without removing the cause of the problem of the kamikaze attitude of Singapore residents. I should think that the money set aside for overhead bridges and under-passes will be more fruitfully devoted to the education of road users, including pedestrians, and to bring home to them the point that by failing to observe traffic rules, they are not only risking their lives and the lives of other road users, but they are also guilty of social indiscipline.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 306++. ++ The same amendment also stood in hte names of Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi and Mr S. V. Lingam. Sir, I am conscious of the fact that overhead bridges can be white elephants as far as pedestrians in Singapore are concerned. I have observed that many pedestrians do not make use of the bridge at Collyer Quay. Instead they cross the road by cutting through the traffic. I have also observed that construction work is being carried out on the road divider at Collyer Quay which appears to be designed for the purpose of inducing pedestrians to use the overhead bridges. This is very timely and useful. But the erection of physical obstacles to compel pedestrians to use overhead bridges where available for crossing roads is rather an expensive way of popularising overhead bridges and underpasses. A more suitable remedy, I think, is to obtain legal sanction against pedestrians crossing the roads at their whim and fancy instead of using overhead bridges where these are available. The remedy is to legis late against jay-waiking by pedestrians as it has been done in many other countries. I am no motorist myself but I think it is only fair that pedestrians should be made to observe, as the other road users, the same set of rules that are designed to protect life and limb and to promote the smooth flow of traffic. In the absence of any legislation, it appears to be a waste of time to erect more overhead bridges. It is an expenditure of money which pedestrians do not appreciate and which do not materially benefit the other road users.”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead l0l*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr S. V. Lingam Sir, has the Minister any plans to organise or renovate the Museum to make it more interesting for the public and in particular for the tourists? Mr Speaker, Sir, there has been much talk by the Government about attracting tourists to Singapore. The Museum is one of the main tourist attractions. I am not so sure whether the Minister has been to the Museum recently. If not, I suggest he pays it a visit. Finally, I suggest that a notice be placed at the gate of the Museum, "Not for Tourists", in order to save the tourists dollars.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I only want to touch on the allocation of the flats, if I may. There are applications for Housing Board flats where the applicants have applied for Housing Estate A but have been offered flats in Housing Estate B, while there are other applicants who have applied for Housing Estate B and have been given Housing Estate A. This seems to be an administrative fault, and I only want an explanation from the Minister why there is such an administrative difficulty.”
“Mr Speaker, I have another question to ask in view of what the Minister has said. Is he prepared to consider exempting those retrenched due to Singapore's industrial programme from paying income tax on their gratuities'?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I only have one question to ask as a result of what the Member for Bras Basah has said. Will the Minister for Finance consider granting an amnesty over a fixed period of time to tax-dodgers to reveal their hidden assets and income which, when revealed, will not be taxed on condition that such assets and income are capitalised and invested in industries selected by his Ministry?”
“The rest of my speech, Mr Speaker, Sir, is about the Comptroller of Income Tax, and the hope that the Minister for Finance will relax the strict law on payments arising out of the coming retrenchment of the workers of the British military bases and the future retrenchment of workers due to Singapore's industrialisation programme. I hope that after union negotiations on benefits the workers be relieved from income tax.”
“Mr Speaker, the Minister for Finance did make a passing reference to the impending retrenchment of employees of British Bases, and I was just referring to the fact that he has omitted any reference to the employees retrenched as a result of Singapore's industrialisation programme although the Finance Minister, in his Budget Speech, made reference to this industrialisation programme.”
“The matter of retraining workers retrenched as a result of Singapore's industrialisation programme for alternative employment in the pioneer industries is, I regret to note, not dealt with by the Minister for Finance although he has taken great pains over the problem of retraining workers retrenched as a result of the withdrawal of the British military forces. I, however, will not confuse this House by further reference to any retraining scheme. The question of relief for income tax in respect of any lump sum payment for loss of employment is, as far as I understand it, dependent on the discretion of the Comptroller of income Tax. If the opinion of the Comptroller is that such lump sum represents the gratuity payment for permanent retirement from employment, then the recipient of such gratuity is not liable for any income tax. On the other hand, where the lump sum payment represents monetary compensation for loss of career, as in the case of retrenched workers, who in the opinion of ---”
“The result is that those import/export houses which deal with imports of foreign manufactured goods now being made in Singapore find that their volume of business has diminished and their profits have disappeared or turned into losses. Their reaction is to cut down or retrench their staff in order to preserve their profits or minimise their losses. In making this comment today, my purpose is not to voice any complaint about the necessary retrenchment of workers as a result of Singapore's industrialisation programme, but to persuade the Government to mitigate the suffering of the retrenched workers and their families as far as it is humanly possible. What I seek to bring to the attention of this House is to point out that these workers, on top of their losing their careers in which they have spent the best years of their lives, find to their disbelief that they have also to pay income tax on the retrenched benefits which they have received from their employers as compensation for loss of career. This failure to grant exemption to retrenched employees on income tax liability in respect of their retrenchment benefits is, I say, a great injustice to workers who, through no fault of their own, find themselves without employment and are not likely to obtain alternative employment within a short period of time during which their small retrenchment benefits may tide them over. As a matter of fact, it is probable that some of the retrenched workers will never obtain alternative employment because, by reason of their age, they are too old to be trained for different occupations.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Budget for 1968 which deals comprehensively with the economic situation of Singapore today. Much thought and effort appears to have gone into the preparation and presentation of the Budget for 1968. A layman such as I, where economics is concerned, would find it very difficult to criticise such a realistic Budget. While I am full of praise for the Budget which gives a proper emphasis to the problem of internal security, as a trade unionist. I wish to bring to the attention of this House a topic to which passing reference was made in the Budget Speech. What the Minister for Finance has said was "jobs lost by contraction of industries or closing down of established firms for one reason or another." And what I wish to point out is that one of these reasons, if not the principal one, is the necessary consequences of Singapore's effort to industrialise its economy. With the conversion of Singapore's hitherto entrepot oriented economy to a manufacturing industry oriented economy, it is to be expected that the change in the economic activities must be reflected in the utilisation of capital and labour in Singapore. Unfortunately, labour is not so mobile as capital and cannot adapt itself as easily to the change in economic activities. Members of the House are aware that one of the first steps which Singapore took in conjunction with its industrialisation projects was to legislate for the protection of the manufacturing industries in Singapore by imposing import quotas, import duties and other restrictions on the flow of foreign manufactured goods. particularly those of the range in competition with locally-made goods.”
“I never said Hongkong industrialists. I only said, as an illustration, Hongkong industrialists.”
“Secondly, the workers are not assured of regular employment because such a non-genuine Singapore-based factory has no market of its own and exists only as a factory to meet the fluctuating marginal demands or contingencies of the Hongkong industrial concern. It is a regrettable state of affairs and I think it is of utmost importance for Singapore's industrial development to make a distinction between the two types of pioneer industries in order to encourage the genuine and not the apparent industrial development of Singapore. This is my only comment on this Bill, but it does not in any way detract from my support for it. I only wish that the House will take notice of my comments and pay some attention to the resolution of the problem of encouraging the genuine industrial development of Singapore. 5.37 p.m.”
“In other words, the Singapore factory serves as a "relief" factory for the Hongkong textile concern in the sense that it is only when the Hongkong firm is not able to cope with orders from its overseas customers that such surplus orders are passed over to the Singapore factory. Such a textile factory, in my opinion, is not a genuine Singapore-based pioneer factory. As I see it, the Singapore factory is fully dependent on its Hongkong principal and its interest is subordinated to the interest of the Hongkong textile concern. It is not in the general interest of Singapore to have such factories which do not actually contribute to the industrial development of Singapore, because the principal objective of the establishment of any industrial concern in Singapore is to establish for itself an export market and enhance the reputation of Singapore-made goods. This is not being achieved by firms such as the one which I have just described, because whatever it is doing only serves to strengthen the export market for the Hongkong firm. My first concern is that such a firm is able to get the same relief from income tax and the same benefit as a genuine Singapore-based industry gets under the relevant legislation governing the industrial development of Singapore. My other concern, which is very important to me, is that the workers of Singapore receive a raw deal under the management of such a Singapore factory. First, the workers must comply with the constant reiteration by the Singapore Government of the need not to press for higher wage claims and other fringe benefits in order to allow the pioneer industries to compete effectively in overseas markets.”
“From my experience as the Secretary of the Pioneer Industries Employers' Union, I regret to note that there are two such categories of pioneer industries in Singapore today. In the case of the genuine Singapore-based pioneer industries which are set up by foreign investors with or without local capital, the pioneer industrial concerns are fully controlled by local boards of directors and establish for themselves their own network of export markets. In the case of the non-genuine Singapore-based pioneer industries which may be similarly set up by foreign investors with or without local capital, the pioneer industrial concerns mainly serve as adjuncts to the overseas industrial concerns belonging to the foreign investors. The policy of such local industrial concerns is dictated through local boards of directors with no effective power, but by the foreign investors from their overseas headquarters. To give an example by way of illustration, a Hongkong industrialist may set up a local textile firm which avails itself of income tax relief under the relevant legislation. In spite of the stringent provisions in the relevant legislation in respect of the valuation of second-hand machinery, this Hongkong industrialist will benefit immensely from the disposal of obsolete machinery from his Hongkong factory to the pioneer factory in Singapore. Secondly, the textile firm in Singapore, besides meeting the negligible demand of the local Singapore market, does not establish for itself any contact with any foreign market. Any export to overseas markets is directed through the Hongkong firm.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I speak in support of the Bill which, in effect, re-enacts the principal provisions in the previous legislation governing the industrial development of Singapore. As such, the Bill not only provides for the establishment of new pioneer industries and for expansion of established enterprises, but also places emphasis on the production for export. This is a Bill which everyone in this House I am sure supports. Nevertheless, I have some criticism to make against it. It is my regret that I do have some criticism to make, especially since this Bill is a comprehensive Bill governing the industrial promotion of Singapore. I appreciate that no Bill can be perfect in the sense that it provides for all possible eventualities or contingencies within the scope of the Bill. I feel, however, that it is my duty to bring to the attention of this House the main defect which I consider to be present in the Bill. The purpose of this Bill, as stated in the Bill itself, is to amend and consolidate the laws relating to incentives for the establishment of pioneer industries and for economic expansion generally, by way of providing relief from income tax and so on. It is about seven years since Singapore embarked on its industrialisation programme. I am surprised that during this period of seven years the various authorities, such as the Economic Development Board which is responsible for the implementation and the supervision of Singapore's industrialisation programme, have not found it necessary to incorporate into the relevant legislation covering the industrialisation programme of Singapore a distinction between genuine Singapore-based pioneer industries and non-genuine Singapore-based pioneer industries.”
“Sir, I thought pioneer status was given to companies to help reduce the unemployment market?”
“Is the Minister aware that despite the pioneer status given to the Shell Group, they are preparing early retirement for some 400 employees which may ultimately lead to their retrenchment?”
“Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell the House whether these bridges are being fully used by pedestrians?”
“Sir, will the Parliamentary Secretary consider fixing a time limit to take up citizenship for those civil servants who are eligible to apply for Singapore citizenship but have not done so; and what is the position of such appointments held by civil servants who are non-Singapore citizens? Mr Ramaswamy: The Government does not, today, require the serving non-citizen Division I officers to take up Singapore citizenship. But if there is any promotion, their citizenship status will be one of the factors which will be considered. GOVERNMENT OFFICERS ON SECONDMENT OR LOAN TO STATUTORY BOARDS The following Question stood in the name of Mr Ho See Beng - 3. To ask the Minister for Finance how many Government officers are at present on secondment or loan to Statutory Boards or other organisations.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members to move a motion to suspend Standing Orders in order that Questions for Oral Answer may be taken beyond 3.30 p.m, today until all Questions standing on the Order Paper are taken today?”
“One is, what about the private streets to which the workers do not go? The second question is, many a morning, workers of the Cleansing Department do not handle the public dust- bins with care. When you get up in the morning, very often you find dust-bins in the drain.”
“Is the Minister aware, for instance, that Mr K. Suppiah, formerly of the Public Daily-Rated Employees' Unions Federation, and Dr Thio Chan Bee of the Singapore People's Alliance have been meeting in Petaling Jaya, Kuala Lumpur, with various Malaysians and, in fact, were conferring on the 20th of May this year in a quiet little restaurant in Petaling Jaya at lunch time when a group of trade unionists from Singapore happened to stumble upon them, to their consternation and embarrassment?”
“Inche Buang Bin Omar Junid (for the Deputy Prime Minister)(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been asked by the Deputy Prime Minister to reply. Electricity supplies have been made available to 141 houses in Boh Sua Tian Road since May 1964. There is a scheme to extend the supplies to another 153 houses in that area and work on the scheme has started. MACRITCHIE RESERVOIR (Measures to prevent water pollution) 3. Mr Tang See Chim asked the Deputy Prime Minister whether he is aware of any measures being taken by the Public Utilities Board to prevent water pollution now that a bridge and a band-stand have been built over the water in MacRitchie Reservoir and whether he will inform the House of such measures.”
“I accept the suggestion. Mr Speaker: I give my consent. May I have the general assent of Members for the motion to be moved as proposed? Hon. Members indicated assent. Resolved, "That notwithstanding the Standing Orders of this day, the Questions for Oral Answer set down on the Order Paper be continued beyond 3.30 p.m. until all Questions on the Order Paper be answered." - [Mr Rodrigues]. ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ELECTRICITY SUPPLY TO KAMPONG DWELLERS (Obstruction by landowner) 1. Mr Sim Boon Woo asked the Deputy Prime Minister if he is aware that the efforts of the Public Utilities Board to provide domestic electricity supply to kampong dwellers at their request are being hampered by a landowner who has refused his consent to the erection on his property of wooden poles to carry overhead cables, and what action he proposes to take in the matter. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister (Inche Buang Bin Omar Junid) (for the Deputy Prime Minister)(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been asked by the Deputy Prime Minister to reply. When the major part of the work connected with the provision of electricity supply to the kampong dwellers in the Siak Kuan Road area in Changi was completed on 15th October, 1965, the owner of the land of a certain portion of the kampong objected to the poles which had been erected on his land. The matter was subsequently resolved through the good offices of the District Officer in Katong and electricity supply has been made available to all the kampong dwellers since 18th April, 1967. ELECTRICITY SUPPLY TO BOH SUA TIAN ROAD 2. Mr Teo Hup Teck asked the Deputy Prime Minister when electricity will be supplied to the residents of the Boh Sua Tian Road.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek your consent and the general assent of Members to move a motion to suspend Standing Orders to enable Questions for Oral Answer to be taken beyond 3.30 p.m. until 4.30 p.m. today, in view of the large number of questions standing on the Order Paper.”
“Otherwise, we will have the most undesirable situation in Singapore where we have sacrificed our scant capital in creating and developing our capacity for industrial production which will grind to a halt through our having insufficient outlets for our industrial products. 7.01 p.m.”
“For the benefit of the Member for Delta, I will repeat what I have just said. The reason why China is able to sell its goods at fantastically low prices, which may have no relation to the cost of production, is perhaps that it wants to obtain foreign exchange at any cost. While we sympathise with China's efforts to obtain scarce foreign exchange, the survival of Singapore must take precedence. I hope the Government will take firm steps to have bilateral trade agreements with countries such as China with which we are having a disadvantageous balance of trade. If we cannot make countries such as China buy more from us, then we must impose trade quotas and tariffs to discourage such countries from selling more to us. I am of the opinion that a severe curtailment of the import of Chinese goods will not prejudice the welfare of Singapore, as our own industries can supply a similar range of products. It is necessary for Singapore to put its relationship with our neighbouring countries on a business-like basis. In saying so, I have in mind that the attitude of certain foreign governments toward Singapore is not founded on a rational policy of mutual co-existence but on purely emotional reaction towards the existence of Singapore as an independent socialist Republic. In such circumstances, I repeat, pending a common market arrangement between Singapore and other interested foreign countries, some attempts must be made to equalise the flow of trade between Singapore and other countries, especially those countries who are selling more than buying from us.”
“In this context, I must express my considerable surprise that there has been no trade agreement with one country in particular with which we have considerable trade. I refer to the Republic of China which, as you know, Sir, last year supplied to us $217 million worth of various forms of manufactured goods, while taking from us in return not more than a few million dollars worth of rubber and other commodities. This is a most unfavourable flow of trade between the two countries, particularly in view of the fact that the goods supplied by China are similar to those which are being manufactured by our pioneer industries in Singapore. This trade with China is a double tragedy in the sense that we are losing valuable foreign exchange to China and that these Chinese goods are undercutting the products that are being made in Singapore. The reason why China is able to sell its goods at fantastically low prices, which may have no relation to the cost of production, is perhaps that it wants to obtain foreign exchange - Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta): On a point of order. Sir. Can the Member for Telok Blangah speak a little slower, as I think the Interpreters are finding it difficult to follow him?”
“This is by the way; but my point is that in the absence of a sizable domestic market, it is vital that we find an international market to serve as an extension to our local market. One of the ways in which we can develop such an international market to offset the sheer physical limitations of our domestic market is to have a common market arrangement with our neighbouring countries. I appreciate that there are many difficulties in the way of concluding a satisfactory common market arrangement, as the participating countries may have widely different interests. Even during the two years when Singapore was in Malaysia, we could not arrive at a common market arrangement which was provided for in the Malaysia Agreement. When the machinery was finally set up for a common market. Singapore was expelled from Malaysia and that was the end of the expectation of a common market between Singapore and Malaysia. Considering the many difficulties that are in the way of the formation of a common market, I envisage that the problem of having a broader market than is provided for by our domestic market may be resolved by a series of bilateral trade pacts between Singapore and other interested countries. It is encouraging to note that fruitful efforts are being made by Singapore in this direction. I have in mind the bilateral trade agreements made by Singapore with Russia, Rumania, Bulgaria and other Eastern European countries. I am sure it is also the fervent wish of all Members of this House that the Singapore Government should continue to succeed in its efforts to reach bilateral trade agreements with as many countries as possible.”
“It is high time that Members of this House were told that, if the industries in Singapore find difficulty in disposing of their products, it is not because the high cost of labour in Singapore has helped to price the industrial products of Singapore out of the international market, but because of other factors. One is the trade barriers erected by foreign countries out of political or economic consideration. Another is the psychology of the consumer who prefers to stick to well-known brands of goods. Even in Singapore, our local consumers prefer the imported brands to the locally manufactured brands when the goods concerned are identical in every respect except the brand name. I do not seek to minimise the fact that the cost of labour has a direct bearing on the cost of the final product, or that the cost of labour in Singapore may be higher than that prevailing in countries such as Malaysia, Taiwan and South Korea which have the same ambition to industrialise their economy just as we do in Singapore. But the real reason, I think, why our industries are not able to expand as fast as was expected is the smallness of the domestic market in Singapore. Singapore, an island Republic of 220 square miles with barely two million population, generally speaking, does not have a domestic market large enough to work any modern industry at its optimum level. The wage level of labour has no direct bearing on the optimum size of any industry. On the contrary, the higher the wage-level may be, the more conducive it may be to an industry reaching an optimum level of production because of the greater purchasing power of the workers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, during the past few months, I have noted with gratification that various Ministers of our Government have gone on record to the effect that Singapore is in favour of regional economic co-operation. The distinct impression given is that the greater the scope for such a common market, the more Singapore is in favour of it. From the trade unionists' viewpoint, this makes a welcome change from the headlines in the newspapers about warnings given by the Government to the trade unionists and workers of Singapore that they must first learn the A B C of economics and must not endanger the economy of Singapore by making exorbitant demands on the employers. From my experience as the Executive Secretary of the Pioneer Industries Employees' Union, I can assure Members of this House that the average wage-level prevailing among the pioneer industries is the lowest in Singapore. This is only an incidental point, but it lends emphasis to my contention that the workers in the pioneer industries recognise the gravity of the economic dilemma of Singapore by restraining themselves in order that the pioneer industries may remain viable and competitive in the international market. [Mr Lim Cheng Lock in the Chair] 6.50 p.m. I have said that the Singapore Government has made references to the desirability of regional economic co-operation. The success of our industrialisation project does not depend only on the workers in the pioneer industries being reasonable in relation to their demands for better wages and working conditions, but also on the industrialists' ability to find outlets for their products.”
“In concluding, I would like to say that the existence of the Ombudsman would serve to add to the public confidence in the public administration of Singapore or the execution of duties by public officers. 2.56 p.m.”
“That is why I am very much impressed by the recommendation of the Commission to recommend the creation of the post of Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration and to give suitable redress to citizens in the event of any maladministration or anomaly arising out of loopholes in the prevailing legislation in Singapore. While I support such recommendation for the creation of the post of Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, I must also emphasise my agreement with the declaration of the Commission that it has high regard for the traditions of the integrity, impartiality and competence of the public administration in Singapore. in my view, the creation of the post of Ombudsman would not serve as an implicit criticism of the existing system of administration, but rather it would serve as an affirmation of the sincere desire of the Government to ensure that every citizen of Singapore would not have his rights as a, citizen prejudiced in any way that is within the power of this Government to prevent or remedy. I can say this with confidence, because in our Republic we have already an efficient and competent machinery to prevent or restrain the deliberate abuse of power or deliberate omission to carry out the duties by various public officers in the service of Singapore. I support the creation of the post of Ombudsman, because it is his obvious function to give redress to citizens who are in any way aggrieved by Unintentional oversights in the course of the execution of duties by various public officers. Reading through the recommendation of the Commission on the creation of the post of Ombudsman. I can find nothing to indicate that the reason for the Commission to make such a recommendation is otherwise than I have stated.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, having read the Report of the Constitutional Commission, 1966, I must congratulate the various members of the Commission on performing a thorough job. Two recommendations of the Commission, in particular, attract my attention. One is the recommendation of the Commission to set up a Council of State. I appreciate the Commission went into the matter carefully and exhaustively before it decided to make its recommendation for such a Council. But I do not agree with this recommendation in view of the other recommendation made by the Commission in respect of an Ombudsman, or Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. As I see it, the two proposals, that is, the Council of State and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, are designed to serve as a check on Parliament. In my view, the Council of State is superfluous to the need of Singapore at present and in the foreseeable future. Singapore is physically a small Republic which does not require such a Council of State to oversee or restrain Parliament. However, I am influenced by the restrictions the Commission has recommended to be placed on the functions and powers of the proposed Council. On the other hand, the proposal relating to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration is more suitable for the need of Singapore, for in my experience as Member of Parliament for the Telok Blangah Constituency, I have come across many grievances and complaints for which there is no appropriate or effective redress by the existing machinery of administration in Singapore.”
“On a point of clarification. I think the Parliamentary Secretary has not answered the Member for Kampong Kembangan on the question of delayed implementation of the projects that have been agreed upon by the Committee.”
“I do not know whether it is implied in the assurance of the Government to those who are required to be called up for national service - that this assurance of a job to all who are called up applies equally to those who already have a job in a private firm, so that any person, whose career may be prejudiced by his military duty, will be given an opportunity for a higher job which he would otherwise have obtained if it had not been for his national service.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, another point which I wanted to bring to the attention of this House yesterday when the House adjourned is that while the Ordinance provides for the security of jobs of persons placed in the national service reserve, no provision is made to the effect that no person placed in the national service reserve shall be prejudiced in his employment by reason only of the fact that he is placed in the national service reserve for the duration of such reserve services. I have in mind the possibility that the person placed on the national service reserve may be placed at a disadvantage in respect of promotion opportunities as a result of his military training. Because of such military training requirements, he may not be able to carry out over-time work in his company whenever requested to do so by his supervisors. Because of such a situation, the management may place him in a section of the firm which does not carry much over-time requirements and, thereby, offers much less hope for promotion. Even if he is not required to perform overtime duties, the management, at the same time, may be irritated to a certain extent by the fact that such employee is compelled to take time off from work and may, naturally, react to such irritation by not actively considering such employee for any vacancy in a higher post whenever any such vacancy arises. It would be a sort of half-hearted compensation, if I may say so, for such employee to be assured of his security of employment but, at the same time, to suffer a certain degree of prejudice in his career prospects as far as his firm is concerned.”