Chin Harn Tong
Singapore
“Singaporeans expect the Ministry to ensure the machines such as cranes and gondolas are properly maintained and operated. Presumably, they are imported for use here only if they are suitable for the purpose.”
“If some employers are too shortsighted to see beyond their pockets, the Ministry should be more active and energetic in rectifying their vision. Practically, every PAP MP in this House, at one time or other, has spoken or written about Singapore's people as being its most important asset.”
“This reluctance is understandable when viewed in relation to the Government's refusal to subsidise commercial activities. However, while the bus companies are private sector companies, the Government has also indicated an intention of privatising the operator of the MRT.”
“I would suggest that the Government consider setting up an Employment Arbitration Court to deal with matters which are now left to the discretion of the Minister and the Commissioner for Labour, and allow individual workers to refer their complaints to the Employment Arbitration Court.”
“In order to be fair to Dr Soin and to be fair to the proposed Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill, I move that Parliament do postpone the debate on this Bill until the Government has introduced the Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill, and we could debate the two Bills together during the Second Reading of the Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill.”
“For that matter, our Government should channel the water conservation tax into water research and not the general revenue. Even if the levy imposed on consumers using more than 20 cubic metres of water a month does not yield much, the fact that our Government finances water research will serve to underline the seriousness of our water sit…”
The complete record
Every one of 268 lines we hold for Chin Harn Tong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 6.
“Sir, I rise to speak on the sub-standard performance of the RTS in relation to its News programmes. It is a matter which is entirely within the control of the RTS and which can be put right without any expenditure. I refer to the slipshod manner in which TV News and Newsreel are broadcast. Wrong pictures are flashed on the screen while some other news captions or reports are being read out. A good example would be the TV coverage of the present Parliamentary session. The coverage may be creating an impression that some of the Members of this House have exchanged names with one another! My concern is that if the RTS personnel are not sufficiently conversant with local events and personalities to match pictures and captions of local events, how can they be relied upon to do wider coverage of foreign news with which they can be presumed to be less familiar? Misleading information is worse than no-information.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in order to ameliorate the traffic problem the ROV has placed more and more restrictions on private motor cars and, as a result, public transport vehicles will now play an increasingly important role. On many occasions the ROV has emphasised this fact. However, what is baffling is that although the ROV has emphasised the importance of public transport vehicles, it has imposed restrictive measures on taxis - an important link in public transport which are contrary to the principles mentioned above. With regard to surcharge on taxis, it was raised from 25% in 1972 to 55% in 1974. It has now been raised to 1 00%. What difference is there between private cars and taxis? The policy of the ROV is to encourage more people to use public transport. But the ROV has, in fact, applied to taxis the same measures used against private cars. Does it mean that taxis are not regarded as public transport vehicles? The ROy levies an ALS fee which was originally $3 but subsequently raised to $4 a day on private cars entering CBD during the morning peak hours. Now this measure is also applied to taxis. The purpose of levying such fee on private cars is to reduce the number of motor cars entering the City area during such peak hours. But what is the purpose of imposing such measure on taxis? We do not quite know. As we all know, when motorists and their fellow passengers forgo the use of their cans when entering the CBD, they have of course to depend on public transport, especially taxis. Under these circumstances, taxis, as a means for public transport, should be actively encouraged to play an important role. The Chairman: May I remind Members that if they want a reply, they must give the Minister time to do so.”
“I hope that the HDB can look into the matter and find an alternate means of containing any possible outbreak of fire without resorting to the drastic expedience of bricking-up ventilation openings.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in touring my constituency on several occasions I visited a few blocks of one-room HDB flats, and I must say that I was rather taken aback by what I have seen. To be fair to the HDB, the blocks of flats I visited are the old types. On each floor two rows of flats share a common corridor. The first unpleasant impression I received on setting foot on each floor is that of entering into a dark tunnel. It may well be that each corridor would be well-lit at night. But as it was day-time and the lights were switched off, it took a bit of time for me and my friends, having stepped in from the sun, to adjust ourselves to the gloomy condition of the corridor. Previously the corridor was not so dark because each flat had an opening near the top of the wall lining the corridor. Because of such openings the corridor was quite bright. Moreover, the opening allows air to circulate more freely in each flat and serves to ventilate the corridor. I was given to understand that these apertures were bricked-up to contain any possible outbreak of fire in any of the one-room flats sharing the common corridor. If it is so, I would like to know how frequent does fire break out in such one-room flats as to justify the bricking-up of such openings. My concern is that the flats were originally designed with such openings to facilitate the ventilation of the flats and the corridor as well as to brighten up the corridor during daytime. As it is, the existing environmental conditions of the occupants of these one-room flats, which must have been the greatest density of occupants per room in Singapore, are miserable enough without being further worsened by the adoption of such measures as to the sealing up of ventilation apertures.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the explanation given by the Minister of State for Labour, although not entirely satisfactory, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“I am not happy with the staffing of the Non-unionised Workers Section. I am given to understand that the officers of the Section are certified interpreters. Undoubtedly, these interpreters are competent to advise non-unionised workers on their nights under the Employment Act, as they have been and are probably still attached to the Labour Court which enforces the provisions of the Employment Act. But among the workers who seek the assistance of the Non-unionised Workers Section, there are some who require advice and assistance on their rights under some other statutory enactments such as the Industrial Relations Act. My concern is whether the officers manning the Non-unionised Workers Section have the relevant experience and training to give the wide range of advice and assistance they are called upon to give on behalf of the Ministry. It is all very well to promise about highpowered personnel overseeing the conduct of the industrial relations by the Ministry. But if little or insufficient attention is paid to both the professional and the human aspects of the Ministry's performance of its services to the public, the promise regarding the Industrial Relations Division becomes rather hollow.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, at the end of yesterday's session, I was commenting on the need to avoid unnecessary duplication of work in the Industrial Relations Division, with particular reference to the Preventive Mediation Labour Assessment Section and the Conciliation Section. As it is, I am given to understand that the Preventive Mediation Labour Assessment Section will, for instance, at the request of an employer, try its best to prevent an outbreak of dispute between the employer and his workers. If the attempt at prevention fails and a dispute takes place, the Preventive Mediation Section hands over the case to the Conciliation Section. To me, it seems more logical that the Preventive Mediation Section should continue with the handling of the case until its conclusion one way or the other. Under the existing arrangement, the relevant officer in the Conciliation Section will have to spend more time briefing himself as to what was done by the Preventive Mediation Section. I think that is a needless waste of time. I hope the Ministry can make some arrangement to ensure that the Preventive Mediation Section can also do the work of the Conciliation Section and vice versa. Then there is the section captioned as the "NON-UNIONISED WORKERS SECTION." The superficial impression thereby created on the public is that the Ministry conscientiously looks after the welfare of workers not represented by trade unions. But I have been given to understand that the officers in that Section are not too enthusiastic in their work. Recently a few workers who went to that section, with a view to invoking the Minister's power of reinstatement under section 14 of the Employment Act, found themselves being made to wait for more than two hours before they were attended to.”
“In that respect it would be of interest to Members of this House if the Minister can indicate whether the Ministry has been able to resolve a higher proportion of the trade dispute under conciliation since the setting up of the Industrial Relations Division. I am inclined to have my doubts about the effectiveness of the Division. For instance, when I inquired from my trade union colleagues about the "Preventive Mediation Labour Assessment Section", I could not receive any definite reply as to the function of that Section. It would appear that both the officers in that Section and trade unionists have no clear idea as to what the Section is supposed to do. If there is a confusion oven the respective functions or a duplication in the work of this Sectior and the Conciliation Section. I hope the Ministry will quickly look into the matter. 8.00 p.m.”
“"Industrial Relations Officers and union officials should know among other things more about how the problems of workers and management can best be explained to each side and resolved effectively". It may well happen that given the best of will and ability on the part of the personnel management of the employer and the Industrial Relations Officers of the union, they still cannot settle a dispute. Here is where the conciliation machinery created under the Industrial Relations Act can help both parties to work out an agreement. I have no doubt that the officers who are to be recruited for or posted to the Industrial Relations Division of the Ministry are competent and trained civil servants. My only concern is whether such officers are competent and trained in industrial relations matters. I am not aware that the Ministry itself has conducted any training courses or schemes in industrial relations for its officers, nor am I aware that any other Ministry or department of the Government has conducted any training courses or schemes in industrial relations matters for civil servants. I hope I am wrong and that the officers who are to man the Industrial Relations Division will be officers with sufficient experience and expertise in industrial relations matters. It may also help if the Ministry can ensure that due cane is taken in the manning of the Division to prevent too frequent turnover of staff in the Division. As I understand it, there had been a change of the Head of the Division within one year of its establishment. Even if it is conceded that the change is unavoidable, the need for such changes should be minimised for the proper and effective functioning of the Division.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AGA 1111*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sia Khoon Seong.) Last year I had occasion to query the Minister for Labour regarding the announcement by his Ministry on the proposed reorganisation of the Ministry and the establishment of an Industrial Relations Division. This year I am happy to note that the Budget estimates for 1976 in respect of the Ministry of Labour clearly reflect the intention of the Ministry to create a high-powered Industrial Relations Division. For example, there is provision for nine Division I Officers for the year 1976 as compared to the provision for only two Division I Officers in 1975 and the previous year. Such increase is in itself desirable in view of the importance placed by the Government on the question of industrial relations in Singapore. As Members of this House may recall, the Minister for Labour in his address at the opening ceremony of the SILO-PIEU Triennial Delegates' Conference on 27th February this year at the Singapore Conference Hall has given emphasis to the desirability of promoting harmonious industrial relations in Singapore. Taken in conjunction with the objectives of the 1976 budget, that is, to encourage foreign investors and develop new projects in Singapore. the importance of giving priority to industrial relations in Singapore cannot be overstressed. As the Minister stated in his speech. "There is therefore a need for more professionally trained managers in industry and better trained branch officials and HQ industrial relations officers". The Minister went on to say.”
“I think it is most undesirable and unhealthy to have an attitude of mind which views the Budget solely in terms of the Government's obligations to the people but ignore the question of personal obligations of the people themselves to the Republic. The Budget is a financial statement which cannot and does not take into account the degree and extent of the inter-personal activities of those performed by voluntary civic and social workers, ,even though these activities greatly help to oil the functioning of our Society. My point briefly is that the success of any Budget is ultimately dependent on the personal initiative and capacity for sacrifice of the people for whose benefit the Budget has been drawn up. 7.29 p.m.”
“My purpose in referring to the few Singaporeans who seek greener pastures rather than face up to realities is to draw attention to the attitude of mind underlying the whole matter. On the one hand, the Government is blamed by the emigrating Singaporeans for not allowing them to lead a way of life which is prejudicial to the interest of the other Singaporeans by reason of Singapore's socio-economic circumstances. On the other hand, the Government is also blamed by the stay-put Singaporeans for not imposing more restrictions on the emigrants so as to force them to live up to their obligations to the society from which they have benefited so much. With such an attitude of mind, the Government makes a very handy scape-goat for every conceivable grievance. Either the Government is blamed for doing too much or doing too little. Those who are aggrieved that they cannot lead what they consider a fashionable way of life choose to blame the Government for being unduly restrictive rather than adapt themselves to the socioeconomic circumstances of Singapore. Those who are angry with the Government for appearing to be unduly liberal towards the former group of persons by not making them do their duties to Singapore choose to ignore what they themselves can or ought to do to promote greater self-identification with national interest. As it is, most Singaporeans seem to have fallen into the habit of expecting the Government to do everything for them. Thus, for them the Budget Statement seems to represent not a comprehensive statement by the Government of what the Government intends to do or not to do in respect of the economy of the nation as a whole but as a specific refusal or omission to do what respectively concern them most during the next financial year.”
“But it must not be forgotten that the Government is not a miracle worker and that there are definite limits to the power of the Government to do all the things which the Government wants to do or ought to do. To make my point clear, let me illustrate the matter with a reference to a noticeable trend among some of the professional and the elite classes of Singaporeans who indulge themselves in a form of escapism. While it may be exaggerating to describe the trickle of Singaporeans seeking to emigrate to other countries as a brain-drain, the fact remains that certain Singaporeans consider themselves to be completely dissatisfied with the socio-economic conditions in Singapore as to have the desire to start a new life in a strange country. If they leave it at that, that would be the end of the matter as far as I am concerned, But they have seen fit to blame the Government for creating conditions which are intolerable to them and which have forced them to emigrate from Singapore. In so blaming the Government, they seem to have the support and sympathy of their friends and acquaintances who belong to the same professional and elite classes of Singaporeans. In brief, their grievances seem to be that Singapore is too highly disciplined a society for them and their children, They do not seem to care that without such discipline Singapore would not have been able to continue to be a viable, independent Republic. They also seem to forget that they also enjoy far more privileges and perks than most Singaporeans and that with such greater privileges come correspondingly greater obligations towards the society.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Budget now before the House is as reasonable as can be expected in the circumstances prevailing in Singapore and in the world. Of course, if one is determined to find fault with the Budget as presented by the Minister for Finance, it is conceivable that one may be able to criticise with justification the Budget on some ground especially the failure to give more tax relief in respect of personal incomes. But I myself am not particularly inclined to criticise the Budget on any such ground, and I am personally of the view that we all should be thankful for a Budget that does not seek to increase taxes, particularly on basic commodities. My concern is that, while we have every reason to be grateful that the present Budget proves the past policies and leadership of our Government to be correct, we may get into the habit of thinking that our Government can be relied upon to do everything necessary and proper for our future interest and welfare. Such an attitude of mind, coupled with the increasing participation by the Government in the socio-economic activities, may cause individual Singaporeans to become complacent as to their own role in promoting the well-being of Singapore. Sad to say, such complacency is becoming more apparent among some Singaporeans. If anything goes wrong in Singapore, these people simply blame or curse the Government for not preventing the thing from going wrong. If the Government does something to prevent the same thing from going wrong they criticise the Government for not doing so in a different way. It is all very well and easy to put the blame on the Government.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, since the Minister does not seem to be able to do anything about it, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Minister not answered my second question about price tagging of commodities.”
“If no action has ever been taken, I wonder whether the Department could instruct the wholesalers when selling their commodities to the retailers, to mark the retail prices of those commodities in order to prevent the retailers from exploiting tile consumers.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head V be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead CBA 1107. Sir, in recent years, Singapore has been affected by international inflation. The prices of some goods have accordingly gone up, for example, bread, kway teow and mee. The prices of these commodities have been adjusted several times. In fact, "adjustment" means "price increase". I do not know why the merchants do not use the words "price increase" but prefer to use "price adjustment". Perhaps they want to use euphemistic words so as to confuse the minds of the people. All these price increases are in multiples of 5 cents or 10 cents. But during the second half of last year, food producing countries had reasonably good harvests. Prices of basic commodities have come down, but the prices of bread, mee and kway teow came down by only one cent or two cents. The increase or decrease of prices of some essential goods have to be approved by the Department of Trade. Therefore, I would like to ask what explanation can the Department of Trade give for this unreasonable situation. Bread, mee and kway teow are the daily staple foods of the people and changes in prices affect their living to a great extent. Therefore, they are entitled to receive an explanation. Sir, I note that retailers have a very unsociable attitude towards consumers. At the time when prices increase, they will immediately mark up the prices of their existing stock. But conversely when the prices of commodities come down, they still sell their existing stock at the same high prices. This is very unfair to the consumers. I would ask whether the Department of Trade has taken any action against such retailers.”
“However, to ensure that there is no further misunderstanding or groundless blame against the taxi drivers and that no unnecessary trouble is caused to members of the public, why not let the ROV stipulate that whenever a taxi is unable to pick up a passenger along the way, a sign with the wording "Temporarily not for hire" should be conspicuously displayed on the taxi. I hope that the authorities concerned will consider my suggestion. At a Parliament sitting last year, I said that suitable arrangements should be made on that side of the road opposite the special bus lanes to enable public vehicles which are not permitted to use the bus lanes to stop there to pick up passengers or to allow passengers to alight during busy hours. But the Minister in charge did not give me a direct answer. I would like to point out again that this regulation on bus lanes introduced by the Ministry of Communications is causing great inconvenience to taxi and bus drivers and passengers. In order to avoid in-convenience, many passengers have refused to travel by taxis and buses. Therefore, in order to suit the convenience of the passengers, some drivers have to risk the offence of stopping their vehicles on the side of the road where a yellow line is drawn. Mr Speaker, Sir, traffic fines have increased following inflation. Moreover, implementation of the Points Demerit System may deprive these workers of their rice bowl at any moment. There- fore, I would appeal to the Minister again to reconsider the provision of suitable stops for the convenience of passengers and drivers of taxis and buses. 5.30 p.m.”
“This is to ensure that those who hold taxi licences but do not have taxis to drive have a chance to earn a living. If we can do this, we will be able to look after the livelihood of the taxi drivers more extensively and more fairly. Our policy should be to help the majority in need, and not to enrich those who are already well off. One may read in the newspapers about complaints by some passengers. I have also received complaints from some passengers that when they hail an empty taxi, the taxi driver refuses to stop. We, of course, agree that severe action should be taken against those taxi drivers who refuse to stop their taxis without good reasons. But there are cases when taxi drivers do not stop their vehicles for some good reason. For example, when there is a change of shifts or when they are called by telephone to fetch some passenger somewhere, then they will not be able to stop their vehicles half-way to pick up other passengers. So when a complaint is made, the traffic authorities do not consider all these reasons. They invariably condemn these taxi drivers for the alleged offence of refusing to pick short-trip passengers. However, the taxi driver's argument is, "Since I did not stop the taxi at all how could I know that the passenger was going to take a short-journey?" People also accuse taxi drivers for refusing to pick up fares. But the drivers say, "We are earning a living on the road, so why should we refuse to pick up passengers without good reason?" In fact, their argument is quite reasonable.”
“Those with full-time jobs and who take up taxi driving as a part-time employment usually do so after their full day's work. In the circumstances, they are bound to be exhausted and inefficient in their driving. Their consequent lack of concentration may pose another traffic hazard on the public thoroughfares. They are a danger to themselves and to other road users because they may cause accidents, perhaps fatal accidents involving their passengers or other persons at any moment anywhere. Mr Speaker, Sir, last year the Government launched a campaign to keep Singapore accident free. The Ministry of Communications has also frequently stressed on road safety. But surprisingly, nothing has been done in respect of such part-time taxi drivers who may endanger the lives of their passengers and other road users. On the other hand, because some taxis are taken up by these part-time taxi drivers, those genuine taxi drivers who depend on driving taxis for a living find that their livelihood is in great jeopardy. If they are unemployed, and cannot get any taxis to drive because there are more drivers than taxis, this situation induces the taxi owners to be more haughty and overbearing towards them and even exploit them, thus causing even greater hardship to them. In view of this, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to propose to the ROV that holders of taxi drivers' licences who have other forms of full-time employment and who drive taxis as a part-time job, or those who hold taxi driving licences but do not depend on taxi driving for a living, should not be allowed to renew their licences after expiry. I also propose that taxi owners who do not drive their own taxis should have their licences cancelled.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, after having ruled for 16 years, the Government has achieved excellent results in looking after the interest of the people in general. However, it does not mean that there are no shortcomings. In fact, if we are to look around carefully, we will be able to notice them clearly. One of them relates to the question of taxi-driving licences. According to my understanding, at present there are about 15,000 licensed taxi drivers but the number of taxis on the roads is only 5,000. In other words, a few thousand people holding taxi drivers' licences have little or no opportunity to drive taxis. Of course, I am not blaming the ROV officers in charge for this situation. In fact, the reason for this situation is that many years ago the Authorities concerned had not been very strict in the issue of taxi drivers' licences. Since this disproportionately excess number of taxi drivers is evident, the ROV has got no reason not to face the issue squarely. Because of this, certain problems have arisen. We have got some people who hold licences but are unemployed or are unable to get taxis to drive as a proper occupation, even if they want to. Secondly, there are people who already have a full-time job but because they also hold taxi drivers' licences they do taxi driving as a part-time job. Thirdly, there are people who already have permanent jobs and do not drive taxis at present but because they hold taxi drivers' licences they continue to hold such licences in case they may want to drive taxis in future. Perhaps, ROV officials are not aware of the effects caused by such a situation. And, in fact, this is a situation which causes concern and sympathy.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 7.15 p.m.”
“If it is not possible for civil servants to be effective referees, then it may be time for the Ministry to consider retransferring its quasi-judicial function in industrial matters to a more effective third party such as the Industrial Arbitration Court.”
“Recently, a constituent complained to me that he was unfairly retrenched by a prominent hotel and that his trade union could not do anything for him except to secure his retrenchment benefit which was quite substantial. He wanted work, not money payment. I investigated into the matter and found that the management transferred him to another section of the hotel and he was working there for a short time until his retrenchment consequent upon the closing down of that section by the management. I have every reason to believe the employee's allegation that the transfer was cynically effected by the management for the purpose of retrenching him and that the management had at the same time engaged new employees for the section he was formerly working in. The retrenched employee in question is healthy, able and willing to work, and has a good work record. His only "crime" is that, after many years of faithful, loyal service, he has reached the top of his wage-scale. It is true that under the existing laws retrenchment is the absolute prerogative of the management. But all the same, the officers of the Ministry, if they want to, can bring their considerable powers of persuasion to bear on employers who abuse their statutory privileges. This House has presumably enacted the far-reaching employment legislation in the belief and expectation that the civil servants responsible for administering the legislation would see to it that erring employers do not take unfair advantage of the situation. It would appear now that such belief and expectation have turned to be mistaken, as the civil servants in question are not able or willing to act as referees and ensure fair play between employers and employees.”
“The second is that there is no intention to set up the proposed Division in 1975. The third is that the decision was taken too late for the Budget estimates to be revised. I personally hope that a supplementary budget appropriation later this year will prove my third explanation to be correct. In any event, whatever the true explanation may be, the air of uncertainty over the Ministry's proposed Industrial Relations Division serves to confirm my dissatisfaction with the Ministry on its handling of industrial matters. Singapore depends on its human resources, including labour, for survival and success. Thus great importance has been placed on the concept of tripartite cooperation in Singapore. I would have thought that the Ministry would pay chose attention to the supervision of industrial affairs and would give careful consideration to the ways and means of improving industrial affairs. If it is so, then it would not have been necessary for the belated decision on the reorganisation of the Industrial Relations Section. It would appear that either the Ministry does not give sufficient thought to industrial matters or the officers dealing with industrial matters are lacking in enthusiasm. As Members of this House may he aware, the enactment of various employment legislation in 1968 had effectively removed certain industrial matters out of the scope of negotiation between employers and employees, and then vested these matters wholly within the discretion of employers, the Minister or the Industrial Arbitration Court. Now, one of these matters is the retrenchment of employees.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AGA 1111 * ( * The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Ho See Beng, N. Govindasamy and Cheong Yuen Chee) In so moving, I have in mind the state of industrial relations in the Republic for which the Ministry of Labour is responsible. In my view the administration of Industrial Relations in Singapore by the Ministry leaves room for improvement. It is for this reason that I was happy to note in the Addendum to the President's speech at the opening of Parliament that the Ministry intended to reorganise itself and, among other things, set up an Industrial Relations Division with more punch than the existing industrial Relations Section. But after reading through the Budget estimates for the Ministry, I begin to have doubts about the Ministry again. For one thing, the Ministry has up to now not said one word as to when the proposed Industrial Relations Division will be set up. If the Budget estimates are a reliable guide, it would appear that the Ministry has no intention of setting Lip the proposed Division during 1975. The proposed Division was, reportedly, to he staffed by more high level officers. But the estimates show that, during the financial year 1975, the number of Division I posts in the Head Office of the Ministry is to be reduced from 11 to 7, and the number of Division I posts in the existing Industrial Relations Section remains at 2. It is only natural that I begin to wonder where the high-level staff, necessary to give added strength to the Ministry's Industrial Relations Division, are to come from. 6.45 p.m. There are three probable explanations. One is that the extra personnel is to be found at the expense of the other sections of the Ministry.”
“The Minister in his annual Budget statement has correctly dealt on the need for development. But any form of development is bound to affect not only our economy but also our environment, for better or for worse. If the effect is bad, as when it results in some form of pollution, then it is necessary that steps are taken to prevent or minimise such pollution. The provision in the Budget for additional development does not seem to consider the need for additional expenditure on anti-pollution measures. The greater danger is posed by chemical pollutants since their toxic effects are built up slowly in human tissue and are not readily apparent at the beginning. By the time the full toxic effects of chemical pollutants are felt, it may be too late. It is pointless to create jobs for our workers, only to turn them into bed-ridden patients in later years. It may also be appropriate for me to remark at this juncture on the absence of any Government action on the level of pollution emitted by SBS buses, which is most annoying to other road users. Effective anti-pollution planning, however, may necessitate the coordination of action by two or more Ministries. That brings me back to the first matter I have commented upon. One Ministry may sponsor and administer a piece of legislation, but it may enforce that legislation only through or with the aid of another Ministry. This is a problem which has not been dealt with by the Government up to now. 7.00 p.m.”
“The existing graduated scale of road tax, that is, before 3rd March, 1975 on petrol-driven vehicles has presumably been drawn up to discourage Singaporeans from owning vehicles with unnecessarily large engines. Every drop of petrol that is needlessly burned up merely adds to the pollution of Singapore's atmosphere and the size of Singapore's foreign exchange spending. It is also to be presumed that the justification for this graduated scale of road tax continues to be as valid as ever. That is why I find it hard to see any real need for a re-adjustment of such scale in favour of owners of petrol-driven vehicles of over 2000 cc, because the bigger the vehicle the greater the luxury. That brings me to the third matter on which I want to comment, that is, the question of pollution. Singapore, of course, is a small island with a proportionately thin strip of territorial water and tiny air space over which Singapore can exercise any control in so far as anti-pollution measures are concerned. The pollution of Singapore's seas by the "Showa Maru" disaster and the pollution of our atmosphere by forest fires in neighbouring countries show the extent to which Singapore is vulnerable to external events and circumstances. But within these rather narrow limits Singapore should and could provide all reasonable facilities and measures to combat and control any form of pollution in Singapore. An illustration in point is the `formation of a centralised command to combat oil spill in and around Singapore waters - mainly the Anti-sea Pollution Unit of PSA - a measure which the Government deserves to be congratulated. But such praise cannot be given to the Government in relation to its effort in controlling other forms of pollution in Singapore.”
“But then again, some grievances may be genuine as there may be anomalies which have somehow been overlooked by the committee in its deliberations or which have not been readily apparent before implementation of such an Act or a decision. I would suggest that, to facilitate the accounting by the executive to this House, separate budgetary provisions be made for any committee or body which exists beyond the jurisdiction of any particular Ministry or the portfolios of the different Ministries be revised to provide for such committee or body. The second matter relates to the Minister's proposal to increase the road tax on petrol-driven private vehicles. The apparent justification for an increase in this particular tax is the anticipated fall in revenue from other sources taken in conjunction with the proposed increase in the development expenditure. Then again, the brunt of the proposed road tax increase falls on the owners of petrol-driven private vehicles in the 1001-2000 cc range. The apparent justification is that the affected category of vehicles constitutes the bulk of private vehicles on the road in Singapore. Any tax measure that would significantly help to keep down the number of cars on the road would apparently help to ease road congestion in Singapore. In that sense, the Government has evidently intended to kill two birds with one stone, that is, raise funds and at the same time relieve traffic congestion in the Central Business District. In the case of road tax on petrol-driven private vehicles, a certain amount of confusion has resulted from the proposal to impose the heaviest tax increase on vehicles in the 1001-2000 cc range.”
“In that respect, the development plans outlined by the Minister, for giving a booster jab to our economy and making available the funds for this purpose, cannot be disputed. Just as it is said that an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure, it is logical now to channel a significant proportion of our limited funds into development projects to prevent a slowdown of our economy rather than to squander later on far more funds in reactivating an economy that has been allowed to slow down significantly. I have, however, comments to make on three matters which have been unsatisfactorily dealt with or completely omitted in the annual Budget statement and in the Revenue and Expenditure Estimates. The first matter relates to the establishment of a high-powered body, such as the Road Transport Action Committee, on which five Ministries are represented by their respective Permanent Secretaries and to the enactment of a statute such as the Road Traffic Act, portions of which are administered and enforced by two different Ministries. Sir, I would like to make it clear that I support the establishment of such a high-powered body which is normally associated with one Ministry, in particular, and which is so constituted as to avoid bureaucratic red-tape in order to resolve the traffic nightmare. I appreciate that it is not practical or feasible for every Ministry to enforce by itself every statute it has to administer. Nonetheless, any committee, even a high-powered one, and any enactment, in the normal course of its operation or implementation, may give rise to grievances which require to be resolved. Some of the grievances may be petty or groundless.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Honourable Minister for Finance, in presenting his Budget Estimates for 1975, has clearly shown that he has done his homework and that he has given careful consideration to every possible factor or circumstance which may affect Singapore's budgetary affairs. At a time when most countries in the world, apart from the oil-producing countries, are having economic convulsions, the 1975 Budget Estimates prescribe a preventive dose of remedy against economic recession. By the skilful management of our economy and with the cooperation of all concerned, Singapore has done considerably better despite the fact that we have neither raw material nor energy resources. While the major industrial nations of the world are expected to recover from their present economic difficulties in the near future, Singapore's outlook for the future seems rather bright. But, as the Minister himself has cautioned, there will be a time lapse before the economic recovery of the industrial powers of the world can have an effect on Singapore's economy. Again, something unforeseen may crop up to delay the expected economic recovery or its effect on our economy. It is reasonable, in the circumstances, not to anticipate any such economic recovery before early 1976 but to have our own plans of development so as to maintain our economy at a steady pace in the meantime. If we were to do nothing in the hope that our own economy would surely benefit from the general economic recovery of the world, we might find that our economy would have lost so much momentum as to be unable to take advantage of any future economic boom.”
“When the new Road Traffic Act is implemented next month, the Police will be issuing tickets on the spot for traffic offences. I fear that certain policemen might abuse their power by issuing tickets at random and so prosecute the public on the slightest pretext. The general public, particularly the transport workers who depend on the use of vehicles as a means of livelihood, will be burdened with inconvenience. On the one hand, they have no money to engage lawyers. On the other hand, they will have to try to avoid the trouble or inconvenience of having to go to court. Since they are not prepared to appear in court, they have no choice but to accept whatever offers made by the Police to compound the offences. If this continues, the misunderstanding between the Police and the people will be worsened and their impression of the Police will become more unfavourable. The authorities must pay special attention to all these problems I have just raised when implementing the new Act which is meant to improve road safety. The authorities should be more stringent in the supervision of subordinates who, in executing their duties, should conduct themselves properly in order to win the cooperation of the public and so make the new Act a success. 2.38 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in my speech yesterday I cautioned the authorities concerned to be more careful in the implementation of the new Road Traffic Act next month. I expressed my hope that the members of the Police Force will be as fair as possible in the performance of their duties and will not abuse their wide power and cause unnecessary hardship to the public particularly the transport workers. On this point I would like to mention something in relation to the cooperation between the Police and the people. I feel that the improvement of relations between the Police and the people does not depend on just a few exhibitions, seminars or Police Weeks to achieve the purpose. In actual fact it depends on the impression that the Police has made on the people. Usually when all these exhibitions and seminars are over, everything is forgotten. There have been complaints from transport workers that whenever they have to make reports to the Police, the Police Officers on duty are more interested in covering up for their colleagues who are implicated in the reports than in taking down factual statements from the complainants. In other cases when their colleagues are not implicated, the Police Officers are rude and even hostile towards the complainants. They treat the people like criminals or as their personal enemies. Sometimes a policeman simply stops a taxi only to look into this or that matter in the obvious expectation of finding some faults to report to his superior. The cooperation between the Police and the people is mutual. If Police Officers do not improve their attitude towards the public, then how can they expect the public to cooperate with them? I will now come back to what I have said just now.”
“The main crux of the whole matter is that the police officers themselves should behave properly in the course of their duties and gain the respect of members of the public.”
“This new legislation will greatly enhance the power of the traffic police to do good or evil. I would like to remind the authority concerned that in implementing this new law, more care and justice should be exercised. I have received complaints from various sources that some police officers have abused their powers. They seem to be very fond of persecuting certain motorists and harassing them with innumerable summonses. At first these motorists put up with this over-excessive implementation of the law because of fear, until they could bear it no longer. When they complained to me I straightaway referred them to the relevant authorities, after which the complaints were easily resolved. In some cases, the traffic police officers themselves are guilty of traffic offences by not setting good examples. There was a case where one police personnel himself did not observe the traffic rules and knocked into somebody's car, yet he threatened the other party involved in the accident. I am very concerned about such policemen when such wide powers are given to them, thereby creating more ill-will between members of the public and the police. This is particularly so in the case of transport workers who are on the road the whole day to earn their living. With such wide powers, the traffic police are able to break the rice bowl of these workers and affect their livelihood immensely. All the cases that I have mentioned touched on the relationship between the Police and the people. In the past, of course, the Police took note of the question of public relations and there have been a number of Police Weeks, forums and Public Relations Promotion campaigns and so forth. In my view, campaigns, exhibitions or forums alone cannot succeed in promoting public relations.”
“Those who propound that the old people should be sent to Homes for the Aged should take note that their proposition will not solve the problem because the old people will still feel lonely and miserable in those Homes. The attitude taken by the Government in this direction reminds me of the many grievances that I have come across in my Meet-the-People sessions. I have received complaints from those who live with their parents in one- or two-room flats that the space available is very limited and as a result, old parents have to sleep in the sitting room while further addition to the family makes the premises even more congested. When they ask for larger flats, the normal reply from the Housing Board is that the allocation of larger flats will be made on a "first come first served" basis without taking into consideration the fact that the old people have to sleep in the sitting room. Because of this situation young couples are compelled to move out of the flat of the parents and set up their own homes, thus leaving their parents behind. Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the encouragement by the Government for young couples to stay with their parents, I propose that priority for transfer to larger flats should be given to people who have their parents living with them in Housing Board flats and who find that the accommodation is inadequate. This is one concrete step towards the encouragement of young people to have their parents stay with them. If the present policy remains unchanged, then the young couples may have to move out and stay on their own and this would be contrary to the Government's policy of looking after the aged. From next month onwards, the Ministry of Communications will implement the new traffic ticketing system and the points demerit system.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion to thank the President for his speech to this house. According to the President's speech, last year there was a 7% economic growth in Singapore, while our foreign reserves exceeded $6.5 billion, showing a 20-fold growth compared with 1959. 1974 was a most eventful year for many countries. The energy crisis and inflation have caused many developed countries to suffer. All over the world unemployment is mounting and many factories have closed down. In some countries there have been no economic growth at all, and some countries have only 2-3% growth. But in Singapore, without natural or energy resources and with very limited land, we have been able to achieve a growth rate of 7%. This is a clear indication that the Government and the people are able to adapt themselves to changing circumstances, and we could change according to the changes that are taking place. This is also one indication of our ruggedness and our cool-headed adaptability, which are very laudable. The President said in his speech that our economy may probably do better in the second half of this year. We must therefore prepare ourselves, always with our fighting spirit to meet the better times ahead. The President has pointed out in his speech that steps will be taken by the Government to make it attractive for young couples to have their parents live with them, so that their children can be educated and taken care of by their grandparents and at the same time the problem of the welfare of the old people can be solved. To have taken note of this matter is something praiseworthy. This is entirely in keeping with the ethical values of the eastern culture.”
“Sir, a few days ago the Minister for Communications distributed a chart to this House showing the distribution of the total transport trips on a 24-hour basis. A study of the chart shows the aggravation of peak-hour travel by school children. In most countries, there are only two peak periods. However, the mid-day peak seems to be peculiar to Singapore. In a speech made at a dinner held jointly by the Tiong Bahru and Henderson constituencies to celebrate the election victory on 14th October, 1972, the Prime Minister stated that it was desirable that primary school children should not travel to school beyond a two-mile limit and secondary school children should not travel beyond a four-mile limit. In view of this and the fact that there are more than half a million school children in Singapore, will the Minister for Education inform the House whether steps have been taken towards the implementation of such a scheme for school children to attend schools in their immediate neighbourhood, and to construct schools in areas where there are none, for such purposes? I would also like to know whether the Ministry of Education has given a directive to principals to assist parents in forming car pools. Sir, you will recall that the Minister for Communications has mentioned the success of this scheme in the Methodist Girls' School. This being the case, why cannot we ask the other schools to follow suit?”
“Strong objections were raised by taxi drivers to both the limited period for adjustment and the recommended rate. Once the ROV was convinced that the period is too short, and the restriction to only six specified workshops is unreasonable, the market rate for adjustment of taxi-meters drops down to less than one-third of the recommended rate. After all, adjusting a taxi-meter does not require more than 15 minutes. The ROV officials would never have allowed themselves to be misled by the workshop-owners if they had bothered to consult the other interested parties, that is, the various organisations representing taxi drivers.”
“It also probably explains why summonses are issued to call in taxi drivers for routine clarification in respect of lost property previously handed in. The effect on taxi drivers on being served with summonses is demoralising. Their first thought is that their exhaust is smoking too much and they have to spend hard-earned cash on unnecessary repair or adjustment before keeping their appointment with the ROV. The question is why do the ROV officials, who by now must be aware of the unpleasant effect of summonses on taxi drivers, continue to use summonses for this purpose? If they must do so, why cannot they clearly spell out the purpose of the Summonses? I would hate to conclude that the ROV officials are showing a could-not-care-less attitude towards taxi drivers. But it helps to explain why some taxi drivers hand over lost property to newspaper offices where they can expect, as least, appreciation. Perhaps the ROV officials, in common with other public officials, have good cause for their apparent impatience with and suspicion of members of the public whom they come into contact with in the course of their duty. It explains why the officials seem reluctant to consult members of the public before making decisions greatly affecting the public. Take the matter, for example, of the adjustment to the taxi-meters following the recent decision to revise the taxi-fare for the first mile. The ROV officials were satisfied with consulting only six taxi-meter repairers. In return for their undertaking to adjust the meters of 5,000 taxis in Singapore in two weeks, the ROV agreed that any adjustment of taxi-meter must be carried out within the specified period of two weeks and that the recommended rate be $40 per meter.”
“Whether I am right or wrong in my explanation of the policy governing the issue of summonses for smoky exhaust, I hope the ROV will cause to eliminate or minimise the element of human error in the issue of summonses for smoky exhaust. It is common knowledge that human witnesses to the same event or incident are unlikely to agree in every detail on what they have seen. A police officer, who is acquainted with the principle of diesel engines, would know that all diesel engines give out smoke when starting or accelerating and would know what constitutes an unduly smoky exhaust. Another police officer may construe the slightest sign of smoke as constituting a smoky exhaust. I would, therefore, suggest that the ROV conduct for all police officers a practical course of instruction on how to judge a smoky exhaust with naked eyes. As it is, prosecution for smoky exhaust is becoming more and more like persecution. In some cases, taxi drivers are asked straightaway to pay a compound fee for smoky exhaust without a test being conducted for that purpose. There is always the danger of the routine nature of official duties making public officials indifferent to the effect of any exercise of their powers. Such danger is illustrated by the reaction of the ROV officials to the handing in of lost property by taxi drivers. They ask harassing questions of taxi drivers such as, "Why did you allow passengers to leave their belongings behind in your taxi?" "Why did you not unwrap the parcel to check whether the contents are valuable?" The impression created is that the ROV does not wish to encourage taxi drivers to return lost property, presumably because of the additional work it entails for the ROV staff.”
“It seems that if a police officer on duty spots what seems to be a smoky exhaust, he issues a ticket to the driver of the offending taxi, requiring him to take the vehicle straightaway to the ROV depot for compulsory test for smoky exhaust. Now, the ROV Department is one of the busiest offices in Singapore and the ROV officials, I must state, are generally hard pressed for time. All taxi drivers dread the prospect of having their vehicles tested at the ROV depot for smoky exhaust. It means they have to be off the road for several hours, it means their earnings for that day are drastically reduced. And if they have to hire or pay instalment on their taxis, it adds to their burden. What makes it worse is that more often than not the officially conducted test conclusively proves the degree of smoke is under the acceptable level. The result of the tests is not surprising when it is considered that every taxi has to undergo a half-yearly inspection by the ROV. But the protests of taxi drivers that their taxis have undergone the half-yearly inspection the day before or not too long ago are ignored by the summoning police officer. A disturbing thought is that all police officers must have clear instructions to disregard the fact of half-yearly inspection when issuing summonses for smoky exhaust. The ugly implication is that someone in authority has serious doubts on the integrity, honesty or competence of the ROV officials in relation to the conduct of thorough, proper half-yearly inspection and requires the police force to serve as a balance and check against the ROV.”
“Similarly, with the taxi drivers wearing badges on their shirt-fronts, it is difficult for passengers in the back-seat of taxis to read the badge number, particularly so at night. Experience has shown that complaining taxi passengers invariably identify the taxis rather than the taxi drivers. Instead of requiring taxi drivers to wear badges, I would suggest that every taxi driver be issued with an identification card, similar to but larger than the laminated plastic identity card, bearing the photograph, name and identity card number of the driver. This identification card should be slotted into a suitable holder near the taxi-meter, and illuminated at night so that the identification of taxi drivers for any purpose should offer no problem. The introduction of such identification card would do away with the ridiculous necessity of charging taxi drivers with the technical offence of not wearing their badges. It would also prevent unscrupulous taxi-owners from hiring their vehicles at higher rates to unlicensed persons who manage to get hold of badges to wear. It is too often easily forgotten by those persons responsible for enforcing law and order that they themselves can also be responsible for public disrespect towards law and order. Disrespect is created when the manner of enforcement makes a mockery of law and order. Take, for example, the prosecution of taxi drivers for smoky exhaust. Any failure to maintain engines resulting in the unnecessary pollution of the atmosphere should, by all means, be severely prosecuted. There has been an increasing tendency, however, for summonses for smoky exhaust to be indiscriminately issued.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is with regret that I rise to voice my criticism of the Registry of Vehicles. Having been closely associated with the ROV, I understand and appreciate the difficult working conditions of its officials and their inability to change or regulate such working conditions. But, nonetheless the shortcomings of the ROV are too painfully obvious. It is my hope that the powers-that-be who are in a position to change or regulate the working conditions in the ROV would take note of not only the shortcomings but also the underlying cause of such shortcomings. There are, for example, many things which, in my view, the ROV can do or refrain from doing so as not to make life unduly difficult for all persons seeking to earn a livelihood as taxi drivers. Take the matter, for example, of the badges which all taxi drivers must carry on their person to identify themselves as licensed taxi drivers. They are required to pin their badges on their shirt-fronts. As I see it, the badges are worn for two purposes: one is to assist enforcement against unauthorised persons driving taxis; the other is to enable passengers to identify taxi drivers who offend them. None of the two purposes seems to have been achieved. A taxi driver's badge does not in itself indicate a particular person is so entitled to wear it. The ROV enforcement officer has to check the identity card of the person wearing it with the record kept in the office to confirm whether the wearer is so authorised to drive a taxi. With several thousand taxis on Singapore roads at any one time of the day and with more than 15,000 taxi drivers on record, enforcement by the ROV has been practically reduced to the ritual of enforcing the wearing of badges of taxi drivers.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in view of the satisfactory explanation given by the Minister for Communications, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Teong Eng Siong(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, over the past few days in this House, Members have contributed a great deal of views for the benefit of the Minister. I hope that the Minister will not be bedevilled or puzzled over those views. What I am going to say is not only on a matter of policy but also of reality. I hope they will be of help to the Minister. Sir, in the past few months, the Ministry of Communications has adopted a number of measures and schemes to improve the public transport system. The introduction of bus lanes and the supplementary public transport service are some of the measures that have been taken. The public transport system has aroused public interest, particularly from the working class.”
“But taxis and mini-buses are not enjoying the same privilege apparently on the ground that they do not form part of the public transportation system. Taxis and mini-buses, however, can rightly claim to form an integral part of the public transportation system in that they supplement the general bus services and cater for persons who are either prepared to pay more for greater comfort and convenience or forced by circumstances to use a faster means of transportation. Moreover, taxis and mini-buses are socially more desirable than private cars in the context of Singapore's congested roads as an average taxi or mini-bus carries more persons than an average private car per trip or per day. In pleading for the reduction of ARF for taxis and mini-buses, I have in mind the difficulty of a taxi-driver to own a taxi. The life span of a taxi is statutorily limited to seven years. With the recent increase of the ARF to a total of 55 per cent and the higher rate of interest on loans, a taxi-driver finds he may have to buy a new taxi as soon as he has completed paying his instalments on his taxi. This is if he is fortunate enough to be a member of NTUC COMFORT. But it is a fact that a yellow-top taxi-driver cannot hope to own his taxi in a lifetime unless he has a lucky windfall. The concept of taxi-drivers beneficially owning the taxis they drive in is socially desirable. For one thing, the drivers tend to take better care of their vehicles, doing their utmost to keep their vehicles clean and in a roadworthy condition. Compare the average SBS bus and the average school-bus, and one can see the difference. For another thing, the plight of taxi-drivers who have to hire a taxi from day to day from unscrupulous owners is most unenviable.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it may be that the road transportation is a complex and taxing responsibility which may cause the Ministry to overlook some matters and to make rather conflicting decisions. Before I deal with the topic of taxis and taxi-drivers, I should like to touch on a matter which is a sore point with Scheme A bus drivers. I refer to the reserved bus lanes originally for the exclusive use of the SBS buses on certain major roads. Now it seems that Scheme B buses and lorries are also permitted to use these reserved bus lanes. But Scheme A buses bringing office workers to the City are barred from using these lanes. Worse still, some roads, such as Robinson Road, have a reserved bus lane on one side and traffic signs prohibiting parking and stopping during peak hours on the other side, making it impossible for passengers to be set down at any point along the roads. The bus drivers are angry as they are paying the same tax, registration fees and additional registration fees, and performing similar services as those of the Scheme B vehicle owners. I hope the Minister can give serious consideration to the use of the reserved bus lanes by Scheme A buses. Now I shall deal with the topic of taxis. Those Singaporeans who drive taxis and who aspire to own their taxis must find the Government's policy towards them rather puzzling. I refer to the imposition of the additional registration fee (or ARF) on taxis. In streamlining the ARF in October, 1972, the opportunity was taken to increase the ARF to 25 per cent to discourage private car ownership by jacking up the price of each car by about 25 per cent. Omnibuses and goods vehicles, therefore, have been paying a much lower rate of the ARF in line with the Government's policy to promote public transportation.”
“Sir, I have another amendment under the head, Registry of Vehicles. But this amendment is on policy matters. Bus commuters in Singapore have, on the whole, been ill-served by the bus companies during the last two decades. The performance of the management of the SBS up to-date seems to be in the grand tradition of mismanagement of Singapore bus companies. 1 would not, however, bore this House by listing out all the defects of the SBS. Let me touch on a few significant points. The SBS is a huge, complex organisation as far as Singapore goes. Yet the SBS is run as a one-man show in the style of a Chinese family business. The 1.7 million passengers carried daily by the SBS, the several thousand employees of the SBS and a few hundred thousand other road-users, tend to direct against one another their frustration over the shortcomings of the SBS. Only if the management of the SBS were to loosen their purse-strings and employ more executives with the professional expertise, the SBS might be able to meet its social obligations. Nothing could be more symptomatic of the SBS's mess than the fact of only one qualified mechanical engineer, employed early this year, with a few assistants and without modern workshop facilities to service a fleet of 2,000 odd buses. The result is for one reason or another that the SBS can put on the roads an average of 1,400 buses during peak hours, when double that number is required. I am reliably told that in one SBS depot of 300 buses, --”