Chew Chin Han
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, as other Members have already pointed out, this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee for further consideration, because even at a random reading now, I can see that there are many loopholes in the present Bill, because some of these quack doctors may not advertise directly but may advertise indirectly.”
“In the past few years, there have, in fact, been some advertisements published particularly in certain Chinese newspapers under different headings, such as "Love", "How to Make Love" ---- write to Box No. so and so at certain addresses. The advertisements are in small size - at $5 or $8 per square inch or so.”
The complete record
Every one of 14 lines we hold for Chew Chin Han, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“My fear is about the Commissioner's powers. If such powers are given to one civil servant, other civil servants may want similar powers, because their work will be made easier. The Director of Public Works will be `tempted to ask for such powers over the contractors and engineers; the Chief Architect will want powers over the architects; the Attorney-General will want powers over the lawyers; and the Director of Medical Services will want powers over the doctors. If all these civil servants can work well without similar powers, why should we give them to the Commissioner? I hope the Minister will explain the necessity for this unrestricted wide power. I also hope he will tell us whether any other country has a law like this and whether officers in charge of finance companies in other countries have similar power. I support the general intention behind the Bill. I would like the Minister to give clarification on the matters I have raised and to inform the House why the intention cannot be carried out without giving such wide powers to the Commissioner for Finance Companies. Furthermore, would it not be better if the Bill were sent to Select Committee because it is quite complicated? I do not believe there is an urgency to push it through for Third Reading today. I am sure that if it is referred to Select Committee, we can have not only the views of finance companies but also the views of banks, depositors and borrowers. There might be a proliferation in the establishment of new finance companies, but if we pass the Bill quickly without careful examination, it will carry a lot of dangerous provisions.”
“A provision like this makes the Com missioner a very powerful man indeed! Clause 7 also gives him such powers. So does clause 8, but here in sub-clause (4) there is a right of appeal to the Minister. But under clause 28 (3) , the Com missioner must act in accordance with the Minister's directions. I am not worried about the present Minister, but who knows what kind of a man our future Minister may be? There is no appeal under clause 9. Clause 10 gives a finance company a chance to present a case to the Commissioner before its licence is revoked. Why cannot this also be done in clauses 7, 8 and 9? So far I have referred to the Commissioner's wide powers over the issue and cancellation of licences and conditions. He has similar wide powers over the regulation of business. By clause 15, he can ask for all information and data as he reasonably requires. There is no limit - only the Commissioner's ideas of what is reasonable! He is given power to determine the minimum amount of liquid assets. This is in clause 24. By clause 26, he can order corrective action. What does "corrective action" mean? He can tell the finance companies to stop business. He can also tell them how to run their business, and if they suffer a loss, clause 30 frees him and the Government from responsibility unless he is guilty of fraud. He is given wide powers but no financial responsibility. This is very dangerous. Is there a financial wizard in the civil service who can tell competing finance companies how to run their business properly? If a company fails, the directors will naturally tell the public, "The company has failed because the Commissioner gave wrong directions." They may be wrong, but the public may blame the Government. Does the Government want the blame?”
“The small trader and the young professional man in Singapore must turn to finance companies. The explanatory statemen.t of the Bill says that it is proper that finance companies should wherever possible be assimilated with banks. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 4.30 p.m. Why must this be done? Finance companies are very different from banks. If we pass this new law, we may have no finance companies but numerous banks in a few years' time. Where then is the small trader or young professional man to go if he cannot give security to obtain a loan of more than $1,000? If the main reason for introducing this law is to control the bad finance company, is there no risk that we will kill the good finance company as well? There is a serious danger that this will be the result because there is little that is certain in a section of this Bill. A lot of discretion is given. I am not a lawyer. From my little understanding of this Bill, the Commissioner for Ftnance Companies is going to be made a very powerful man. He may even have more powers than other civil servants except the Banking Commissioner. Everything is left to his discretion. Under clause 5, he can grant a licence with or without conditions. He may refuse a licence. No rules are laid down, though he must act with the approval of the Minister. He need not give reasons. There is no appeal from him. Having given the licence, he may at any time vary or revoke the conditions or impose additional conditions. This is in clause 5 (4). Sub-clause (4) says nothing about the Minister's approval. Again, no rules are laid down to say when the Com missioner can vary or revoke conditions. All that the sub-clause says is that he can do so at any time. Furthermore, there is no appeal; no notice is required.”
“Sir, the expressed purpose of this Bill is to safeguard the interest of members of the public who deposit funds with finance companies. In moving the Second Reading of the Bill, the Minister for Finance tried to make out a case for his new law. As in any trade or business, there are good companies and bad ones, good traders and bad ones, There may be a finance company formed by persons who require money for their own business. They are unable to obtain finance from banks or other sources of loans and so they form a finance company to raise capi.tal for their own business. There may be others where the intention of the directors is to collect as much money as possible from the public on the promise of very high interest, and then do a bunk. Finance companies which are formed on this basis or which are run on these lines are a menace and the public must be protected from them. But the question I ask is, are these .the only types of finance companies? The answer must be "No". We have not heard of any finance company in Singapore failing. There are many finance companies operating in Singapore. Most are honest and provide a very useful service to the investing public who do not have enough money to buy property. Also to those who do not understand shares, they give a slightly higher rate of interest than the bank gives. There are many borrowers who cannot obtain loans from banks. They say that banks only lend money to people who have a lot of money and want to double what they have. It is impossible for the small trader or the young professional man who is just starting out in his career to obtain any starting capital from banks. In other countries, banks are not so old-fashioned as Singapore banks.”
“Sir, the problem of hawkers has indeed always been a difficult one. Though at present the hawkers are being reorganised and resited, they will continue to exist, if not flourish, owing to our social and economic reasons. They have in the past indeed provided convenient services to the people and have been a great help to those who are unemployed. Sir, one will probably agree with me that if Singapore is going to become a garden city, the hawkers will have the duty to co-operate with the Government. It is a well-known fact that among the hawkers where the food is good, the place is always less desirable. Here, I would like to name three localities just as examples. (1) Beach Road, where the satay is good, everything is good; but whilst the mouth is tasting the good satay, the nose smells something unpleasant and the feet are resting in dust and mud. (2) New Bridge Road, just outside the Chinese Tong Chai Medical Hall, there are at least 20 different types of food. Excellent food it is. There may be new stools, new tables, but before one can really sit down, one has already kicked so many craters in the compound. And if he does not fall, he will probably fall whilst sitting on a stool which is standing on uneven ground. (3) Hokien Street, where the hawkers specialise in the famous palatable Hokien wee and quick service, they open till early in the morning. But the environment and chairs and tables often curtail one's enjoyment of the food ---”
“Sir, I will speak on hawkers, and I think I had better wait until Mr Lingam has moved his amendment. Madam Chan Choy Siong: Sir, I beg to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in the past few years because of the increase in industrial development and the renewal of the urban areas, there has been an increase or shift in population in our country. In some places there are less people because they have gone to other housing estates, and in some areas, because of the former demarcation of constituencies, there is some inequality. Now we are going to divide the State into 58 constituencies. It is proper to do so. The division into 58 constituencies will make our work as Members of Parliament easier and more effective. We must know that Members of Parliament are elected not just for politics. Their main purpose is to serve the people. Otherwise the people will not support them. So more constituencies will mean that we have more Members of Parliament to serve the people better. Someone has asked, why is it necessary to divide the State into 58 constituencies? Is it for political interests? Or for what interest? What we say is that the division into 58 constituencies is to enable the Members of Parliament serve the people better. For the past few years the standard of political consciousness of the people has been raised under the present Government. Someone has said that having more constituencies will mean more expenditure. Our Members of Parliament get the lowest allowance in the world. Therefore, an increase of seven Members will mean a very little extra expenditure. Therefore, I hope that, in addition to the increase in constituencies, the number of Ministers should also increase so that they will serve the people better and more efficiently. 3.48 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, as other Members have already pointed out, this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee for further consideration, because even at a random reading now, I can see that there are many loopholes in the present Bill, because some of these quack doctors may not advertise directly but may advertise indirectly. For example, one may say that he has been abroad to give lectures and has been given some award, so that when he comes back, he will be able to serve our sick people better. This is another aspect of advertising and should be given attention. 4.01 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I personally feel that the Bill should have been introduced a few years back. But it is not too late however. A few moments ago the Member for Delta said that there were extensive advertisements both in the Chinese medical profession and the Western-trained medical profession. As pointed out by Professor Yeoh, Western-trained doctors are not allowed to advertise and the position has been clarified. The main aim of this Bill is to protect the interest of the public, not to protect Western-trained doctors or Chinese doctors or Indian doctors for that matter. We admit that there are drugs advertised in the newspapers manufactured in the Western world. But I wish to stress that in so far as drugs manufactured in the West are concerned, after clinical experiments on them have been carried out and they are approved for use, they are not allowed to be advertised. So this is quite different from the drugs manufactured by the Chinese physicians. Of course, we do not deny the efficacy of some Chinese drugs. But there are cases in which quack doctors or businessmen who call themselves doctors or physicians have advertised in the papers for their own personal gain. The Member for Sembawang has also said that the rise of the medical advertisements should also be attributed partly to the newspapers. But in my own view, the position is not so had as he thinks. I know of one case where one paper was losing business to the extent of some $3,000 a month, and it was proposed by a quack doctor that advertisement to the amount of $3,000 would be given provided the newspaper accepted him as its medical adviser; but this was turned down by the newspaper. So it shows that the position is not so bad as the Member would think.”
“But history and time have shown that fighting to the last man or "Chiaw tu chen cher" may not necessarily be the best policy when fighting a war, unless we have been well organised and well trained beforehand, otherwise we will be sacrificing ourselves, and fighting to the last man will be meaningless. Sir, I am all for the National Service (Amendment) Bill. We are a very young nation and this Bill is most essential. I hope that eventually the provisions of this Bill will be extended to cover the older age groups and those under 18 years of age on a slightly different pattern. We might as well start with them when they are young, just like the boy scouts or girl guides. We may call them "young Guards". Our "young Guards" will be entirely different from Hitler's trained youths in Europe when he made use of them to invade other countries. Ours will be different from the Red Guards. Our youths should be trained in such a way that everyone must have a concept of his duty and responsibility to his country. He must be intelligent and know how to fight for his country, and he must always be in a state of preparedness and alertness. The old Chinese saying that "Good boys should never be soldiers" is entirely wrong. It should be discarded completely in the 20th century. There is another saying "i tai Pu lu i tai" which means that the next generation is worse than the previous one. This is also a fallacy because in our well-planned and well-trained society, the newer generation must always be better than the old one.”
“During the period of the enemy's occupation of Singapore of 3 years and 8 months, we lived in great fear and hardship, suffering torture and starvation. We were living practically between life and death and felt more dead than alive. I am repeating this story in a somewhat different fashion in order to remind everyone that from this bitter lesson we have at least learnt two things. Firstly, it is imperative that we must know how to govern ourselves and how to protect and safeguard ourselves. We cannot rely upon others, though sometimes they may have fought well, maybe for themselves. Secondly, the size of the army is not necessarily the important factor in winning a war. It is the spirit of fighting, the fighting for a cause. Moreover, it is the well-trained, well-organised and intelligent army that always wins. The National Service (Amendment) Bill not only provides the necessary military training, such as how to use firearms, etc., and teach us how to defend ourselves, but it is also designed to train and organise our people into a tough, well-trained and alert community. It also gives our new society confidence and self-respect. Furthermore, it is educational. It is the beginning of a new era. It is giving us a new phase and eventually it will synchronise with our present industrial revolution. The essence of the Bill is that it is well planned and designed. We have often heard of some so-called brave people saying, "If we are invaded, we will fight to the last man." That is equivalent to the Chinese saying, "Chiaw tu chen cher".”
“it is quite all right, Sir. Our country is small, but our citizens are of high spirit, progressive, industrious and can stand any form of hardships. The introduction of this National Service (Amendment) Bill at this juncture is very timely. This Bill is to show to all nations of the world that we are a determined group, consisting of different races and living under a democratic system of equality and unity. Our country is at present undergoing great changes, and organisation is rapidly taking place in various phases. Most important of all, we like to show other countries that we are definitely not a warlike people or a warlike nation. [Mr Lim Cheng Lock in the Chair] 3.57 p.m. Instead we are people of a peace-loving nature and are trying to train ourselves to guard against any enemy. As other hon. Members have already pointed out, the Japanese invasion of Singapore at the end of 1941 has taught us a lesson - a bitter, sad and heartbreaking lesson indeed, a lesson which unfortunately cost thousands of lives. The total number of Japanese soldiers who invaded Singapore was only 100,000, but they swept through the majority of the countries in South-east Asia like wild fire; whereas the total number of British, Australian, Canadian, Indian, Malay and Gurkha soldiers totalled about 600,000, which was more than six times the strength of the Japanese invaders. Before the fall of Singapore, our so-called protectors had claimed that Singapore would never perish. On the contrary, the fact was they retreated and surrendered, leaving Singapore in the hands of the Japanese. The enemy brutally slaughtered thousands of our citizens, including infants, and also raped many women. Many people suffered from their tortures.”
“Mr Speaker, since Singapore's independence and after its separation from Malaysia, we have come to realise that as an independent country we cannot rely purely upon another country or countries to protect us in case of war, invasion or other forms of disturbances. Experience has shown that it is better that we protect ourselves than for us to be protected, to save ourselves rather than to be saved, to fight and struggle for our own survival. Since we do not wish to be a satellite country or a protectorate of any other country, every Singapore citizen should realise that to have full sovereignty, the most fundamental thing is to know how to govern and how to protect ourselves. There is a Chinese proverb, Mr Speaker, Sir. May I quote it in Chinese first? Yuen sui chew pu te chin huo. Translated, it means that if there is a fire in the neighbourhood, the waters from the land further away cannot reach and stop the fire in time. For example, if there were a fire at Jalan Besar and we were to wait for the fire brigade from Kuala Lumpur, I am sure the whole of Singapore would be totally engulfed even before it arrived from Kuala Lumpur. Therefore, we would have to use our own fire brigade. [Interruption]”
“In the past few years, there have, in fact, been some advertisements published particularly in certain Chinese newspapers under different headings, such as "Love", "How to Make Love" ---- write to Box No. so and so at certain addresses. The advertisements are in small size - at $5 or $8 per square inch or so. I wonder if the Minister has taken any steps to do anything about it.”