Chua Sian Chin
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak on this Bill as a person who had been in Government for many years and before that in legal practice for more than eight years and now back in legal practice. While I was in Government, I had cognizance of the shortcomings of the legal profession.”
“It is 62 members out of a total of 1,335 practising lawyers. This has brought about a situation which no responsible government can let it pass in the public interest. The Government has good reasons to deal with this situation firmly. In fact, the present amendments have only made a small inroad in self-regulation.”
“At the same time, a minority group of activists has also chosen to take on the Government by calling an Extraordinary General Meeting of the Law Society to pass fierce resolutions against the Government. This group comprised only 62 members.”
“Though he has only limited Constitutional powers and acts on the advice of the Cabinet, he is the symbol of the unity, loyalty and aspirations of the people of Singapore.”
“- to hold classes for children of his constituents. What right has he got? The PAP MPs equally have no such rights. It is the right of the Government, if they think so, to have such classes. In fact, through the People's Association, they have been holding kindergarten classes in the community centres.”
“It is the Government who says that, and the Government has the right to say it because they are responsible for the Government of Singapore. And it is not what I say or what you say. Let me turn to the Member for Potong Pasir. He also produced some exhibits which are equally bogus.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,639 lines we hold for Chua Sian Chin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 24 of 33.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Singapore Red Cross (Incorporation) Bill when enacted will accord the Singapore Red Cross Society the status of the national Red Cross Society. This will enable it to take its place in the League of Red Cross Societies and be bounded by the International Committee of the Red Cross which administers the Geneva Conventions, on which I spoke a little while earlier. The Red Cross is dedicated to the prevention and alleviation of human suffering in peace and in war. In peacetime it is concerned with disaster relief. In addition to the Society's local activities in this respect it will, after the Bill is passed, be the national society which will participate in disaster relief operations which may be mounted internationally or regionally by the League of Red Cross Societies. In war-time it will be the agency for the protection of the wounded and sick of the parties in the conflict. Outside the periods of stress or national disasters, the Society also plays the role of medical auxiliaries to the public health and welfare authorities. Amongst the better known of its services are its ambulance service and assistance at accidents. It is hoped that its new role of a National Society will expand to other fields of activities which supplement the national medical services. The Bill also reserves to the Society the right to use the Red Cross emblem or title and provides a penalty of $1,000 or six months' imprisonment or both, for the use of the emblem or title by any other person. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.”
“Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 5 - Amendment made: In page 5, line 21, after "and", to insert "at". -[Mr Chua Sian Chin]. Clause 5, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 6 to 12 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. First to Fourth Schedules inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read a Third time and passed. SINGAPORE RED CROSS SOCIETY (INCORPORATION) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.44 p.m.”
“The Conventions specify that persons taking no active part in hostilities and those out of action due to illness, wounds, captivity or any other cause, should be humanely treated and protected against inhuman treatment, and that those who suffer should be given relief and care without distinction. The Conventions also lay down certain minimum standards which contracting parties should also observe in the case of an armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one contracting party. However, the Conventions should in no way prevent a state from exercising its rights of sovereignty and punishing, on the basis of its own national law, any person guilty of undermining the security of the state. In accordance with the obligations prescribed in the Conventions, this Bill makes it an offence punishable with life or up to 14 years' imprisonment for any person to commit any of the grave breaches set out in the Conventions. The Bill also contains procedural safeguards for the trial and defence of a protected prisoner of war, a protected internee or a person accused of grave breaches set out in the Conventions. With the formal accession by Singapore to the four Conventions and the incorporation of the Singapore Red Cross Society by an Act of Parliament, the Singapore Red Cross Society will now be able to take its place in the League of Red Cross Societies at Geneva and participate with other national Red Cross Societies in the affairs of the League. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Chua Sian Chin]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.42 p.m.”
“Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Geneva Convention Bill is to give effect in Singapore to the four Conventions adopted at the Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries held in Geneva in 1949. It is the intention of the Singapore Government to accede to the four Conventions, the texts of which are set out in the Schedules to the Bill. To-date, the Conventions have been acceded to by 132 countries. It is considered desirable that Singapore should now formally join in with those countries in upholding the fundamental objective of the Conventions, which is the observance of certain principles of human rights in situations of armed conflict. Broadly, the Conventions lay down basic humanitarian rules, which should be observed by all contracting parties, in all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the contracting parties, even if the state of war is not recognised by one of them. They also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a contracting party, even if such occupation meets with no armed resistance. The first Convention deals with the amelioration of the condition of the wounded and sick of the armed forces in the field. The second Convention deals with the amelioration of the condition of wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of armed forces at sea. The third Convention deals with the treatment of prisoners of war. The last Convention deals with the protection of civilian persons in time of war.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not have anything more to add, except to thank the two speakers who have very strongly supported the Bill. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the BiIl.---[Mr Chua Sian Chin]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 4.35 p.m. Clause 1”
“We shall require all the co-operation from parents, teachers, doctors, social workers and, in fact, the whole public if we are to successfully meet that problem. It is going to be an uphill task all the way. Of course, highly deterrent laws against drug traffickers will help us tremendously in our fight against drug trafficking and addiction. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.15 p.m.”
“In it, they have recommended that clause 27 (c) of the Bill be amended so that professional social workers be exempted from the law of having to divulge confidential information gained from drug addicts in the course of their work in rehabilitating the addict. This suggestion cannot be accepted since even doctors are not exempt from revealing such confidences if this is required by the Courts. However, clause 32 gives protection to persons acting under authority from any civil or criminal liability. This should be adequate for the protection of the social worker who acts in good faith. They have also suggested the listing of approved institutions to include non-governmental institutions for the treatment of drug addicts. It is not necessary to do this in the main Act. This can be done under regulations to be made under the Act. They have also suggested the setting up of an advisory panel of persons to determine the drug pushers from the drug addicts. This recommendation has been made on the assumption that it is difficult to differentiate between the two. Such arm assumption is, of course, not correct. The Central Narcotics Bureau, together with the doctors involved in the rehabilitation of addicts, will certainly know how to make the distinction and act accordingly. They have also suggested that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee to consider their aforementioned proposals. In view of what I have stated in reply to the Association's recommendations, reference to a Select Committee is clearly unnecessary. Finally, I wish to state quite categorically here that whatever heavy penalties that are being provided in this Bill, they by themselves are not sufficient to solve the drug problem in Singapore.”
“For instance, any person being the owner, tenant, occupier or person in charge of any premises who permits the use of such premises for the purposes of smoking, administering or consumption of a Class A or B drug will, if found guilty, be liable to imprisonment of up to ten years or a fine not exceeding $40,000 or both the minimum penalty for this offence is two years or $4,000 or both. The current penalty is three years or $10,000 or both. Unauthorised possession on conviction will draw a maximum sentence of ten years or $20,000 or both, with a minimum punishment for a second or subsequent offence of two years or $3,000 or both. The current penalty for possession of raw opium is five years or $10,000 or both, and for a dangerous drug prepared for medical use, three years or $10,000 or both. A District or Magistrate's Court is empowered to hear and determine all proceedings under this Bill and to impose the full penalties provided. Clause 34 provides for the making of regulations especially for the trade and use of controlled drugs for licit purposes. Certain professional persons-doctors, dentists, pharmacists, veterinary surgeons and others - who use or handle such drugs in the course of their professions or businesses will be authorised to possess controlled drugs, and in certain cases, where applicable, to supply such controlled drugs. Doctors and dentists will be required to report any person suspected of being a drug addict. The new regulations will provide for the keeping of more detailed records of import, sale, supply and use of controlled drugs so as to provide better means of checking the movement of controlled drugs within the Republic. The Singapore Association of Social Workers have submitted a memorandum on the Bill.”
“Anyone who has been addicted to any of the controlled drugs and especially those who have had their first acquaintance with such a drug can take advantage of this provision to have himself rehabilitated. Powers have also been provided for the Director, Central Narcotics Bureau, under clause 33, to require any person, whom he has reasonable grounds to suspect to he an addict, to be medically examined and, it necessary, to undergo treatment at an approved institution. All outpatient clinics and centres have been organised to provide for treatment of drug addicts. A referral clinic has been established at the Outram Road Hospital. A second one is planned for Alexandra Hospital. A special ward for the hospital care of addicts will be opened within the year. Besides the drug trafficker there is also another danger, though on a lesser scale, that is, the tourist drug addict, particularly among the hippies. To seek out such drug addicts amongst the huge and increasing number of tourists entering Singapore, powers have been provided in clause 28 of the Bill for an immigration officer, where he has reasonable grounds to suspect any person to be a drug addict, to request that person to provide a specimen of urine for testing. Entry of any person, other than a Singapore citizen or a permanent resident here, will be prohibited if he refuses to submit to such a test or if the test shows the presence of a controlled drug. It is Government's firm intention to exclude entry of such tourist addicts for their habits are imitative and the youth of our Republic must be protected from it. The Second Schedule also lists the penalties provided for other offences under this Bill.”
“The danger is that when he finds that the effects of such a drug are not too upsetting but rather pleasant in the transient light-headed feeling it induces, he continues to take it. After this, he so very easily progresses to more potent drugs that will give him that same feeling of euphoria after failing to get it with those drugs which he first used, even in increasing quantities. Once he becomes "hooked" On a hard drug, e.g, morphine or heroin, his path to ruination and disaster is certain. He will not be able to stop taking such a drug as the physical and mental symptoms known as "withdrawal symptoms" following will be unbearable. It is known that once a person is hooked to a hard drug, he will lie, cheat, steal or even kill just to get the drugs. Thus, a drug trafficker is the most abominable of human beings if he can be deemed "human". He is a merchant of "living death" which he brings to a fellow human being. He, therefore, deserves the maximum punishment. Members of this House will, however, note that it is not all punishment written into this Bill. A clear distinction has been made between the drug addict and the trafficker and pedlar. I am moving an amendment at the Committee Stage to remove the provision of a minimum sentence of two years for a second or subsequent offence for smoking, self-administering or consuming a controlled drug as provided in the Second Schedule to clause 29, which was inserted as a result of an oversight. For those addicts who wish to stop this vicious habit, there are provisions under clause 33 (3) for them to volunteer for treatment at an approved institution. Any statement given for the purpose of undergoing treatment will not be admissible as evidence against him in any subsequent prosecution.”
“For this offence a maximum penalty of 30 years or $50,000 or both, and 15 strokes of the rotan, and a minimum penalty of five years or $10,000 or both, and three strokes of the rotan have been provided. The existing law on dangerous drugs provides for the offence of trafficking, but there is no distinction as regards the age of the person to whom the drugs are sold. The penalties for the offence of trafficking in the existing law are $10,000 or five years, or both. These penalties are obviously totally inadequate as deterrents, Government views the present situation with deep concern. To act as an effective deterrent, the punishment provided for an offence of this nature must be decidedly heavy. We have, therefore, expressly provided minimum penalties and the rotan for trafficking. However, we have not gone as far as some countries which impose the death penalty for drug trafficking. Drug addiction is a problem increasing in size daily. What was once smoking opium and marijuana (the dried plant which is known locally as ganja) or the consumption of opium pills amongst a comparatively small group of middle-aged or elderly people has developed into the taking of methaqualone (known popularly as MX pills) or the smoking of marijuana amongst the younger age group in their teens or early 20's who can be found not only in the street or coffee-shop but also in the school and the university. The young person falls under the influence of such a drug in a variety of ways. It might be the result of boredom, sense of adventure to know how it feels by taking it or he might be inducted to it before being accepted as one of the circle of so-called "friends".”
“Whilst welcoming trade, visitors and tourists, we must at the same time be constantly on the alert for the trafficker, the addict and the hidden consignment of controlled drugs. Law enforcement officers must be adequately empowered to stop, search any ship, aircraft, train or vehicles whenever there are reasonable grounds to suspect that controlled drugs are hidden and, if found, to seize such drugs and to detain any person found therein. Such vehicle will he liable to seizure under certain conditions. The ill-gotten gains of the drug traffic are huge. The key men operating behind the scene are ruthless and cunning and possess ample funds. They do their utmost to push their drugs through. Though we may not have drug-trafficking and drug addiction to the same degree as, for instance, in the United States, we have here some quite big-time traffickers and their pedlars moving around the Republic selling their evil goods and corrupting the lives of all those who succumb to them. They and their trade must be stopped. To do this effectively, heavy penalties have to be provided for trafficking. Clause 15 specifies the quantities of controlled drugs which, it found in the possession of a person unless the contrary is proved, will be presumed to be in his possession for the purposes of trafficking. The Second Schedule to the Bill shows the various penalties for offences committed under the Bill. For unauthorised traffic in a Class A controlled drug, for example, morphine, opium, heroin, the maximum sentence is 20 years or $40,000 or both, and ten strokes of the rotan. The heaviest penalty will apply to those convicted of unauthorised trafficking in a Class A controlled drug to persons under the age of 18 years.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill is a consolidation of the Dangerous Drugs Act enacted in 1951 and the Drugs (Prevention of Misuse) Act of 1969. It also incorporates additional provisions to provide for a firm and extensive control on certain dangerous and harmful drugs of addiction as well as heavier penalties. These drugs, defined as "controlled drugs" in this Bill, are known to the pharmacologist as hallucinogens, narcotic analgesics, central nervous system stimulants and tranquillisers. The Dangerous Drugs Act was enacted about 21 years ago and the controls provided therein are grossly inadequate for the 70's, with the introduction of a host of new drugs of medical value if properly used. Control has been brought in line with those in force in other countries closely concerned with the spread of the addictive use of such drugs within their own countries and the increased international traffic which supplies such demands. The different categories of control as recommended by the United Nations have been incorporated into this Bill. The Bill will provide adequate powers for law enforcement officers in the Customs, Police and narcotics officers of the Central Narcotics Bureau to exercise close vigilance on all movements of controlled drugs and to seek out the addicts to such drugs. The Central Narcotics Bureau, under a Director, has been recently created to enforce the provisions of the Bill especially in regard to illicit use. Singapore, by its geographical position and development, is now a strategic centre of communication and international trade.”
“The number of such arms as on 3rd November, 1972, was as follows: Rifles 52 pieces Air rifles 73 pieces Pistols 62 pieces Revolvers 21 pieces Air pistols 15 pieces Shotguns 44 pieces Krises 63 pieces Swords 115 pieces Hunting knives 17 pieces Walking sticks with daggers 54 pieces Daggers 72 pieces Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.----[Mr Chua Sian Chin]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.54 p.m. Clause 1 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill seeks to amend the Arms and Explosives Act (Chapter 238 of the Revised Edition) to empower the licensing authority to forfeit any arms or explosives deposited with him in accordance with the provisions of the Act or any rules made thereunder or any other written law for the time being in force, if such deposited arms or explosives are not claimed by its owner or owners within six months. The following arms are deposited with the Arms and Explosives Branch of the Singapore Police Force: (a) Arms belonging to the person whose possession of such arms becomes unlawful in consequence of (i) expiry of his licence; (ii) suspension of his licence; (iii) cancellation of his licence; (b) Arms belonging to transit passengers which are handed over to the police for safe custody; and (c) Arms brought into Singapore and waiting for licences to possess. There is no difficulty in dealing with arms falling under category (a) aforementioned, as the law on this is clear. Any arms deposited with the police in consequence of the expiry, suspension or cancellation of licences become forfeit if no licence to possess is taken within six months. Arms falling under categories (b) and (c) aforementioned, however, pose a problem, for currently there is no provision in any written law for the disposal of arms not claimed by transit passengers or for which a licence to possess in Singapore is not approved. Such arms have accumulated in the armoury of the Arms and Explosives Branch of the Singapore Police Force over the years and are occupying valuable storage space.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have already answered the question. I said that the Traffic Police has formed a Selective Enforcement Squad within the Mobile Squad to take action. Perhaps the Member for Bras Basah did not comprehend the answer. That was not done before. REVISION OF SALARIES AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE FOR GOVERNMENT SENIOR OFFICERS (Statement by the Minister for Finance) 2.46 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Traffic Police has formed a Selective Enforcement Squad within the Mobile Squad to take action against drivers of public service vehicles found speeding or driving in a dangerous or reckless manner. In addition to Court prosecution or fines, the Traffic Police also recommends to the Registrar of Vehicles to suspend the driving licences of bus drivers in serious cases.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the number of serious accidents (including fatal accidents) between 1-5-71 and 31-10-72 involving omnibuses was 413. The breakdown of this figure is as follows:- Amalgamated Bus Company Ltd. 58 United Bus Company (Pte.) Ltd 123 Associated Bus Service Ltd. 232 --- 413 === As regards the second part of the question, a total of 67 persons were killed in these accidents.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, drivers of lorries which spill sand, stones, earth, etc. On public roads are ticketted under the Environmental Public Health Act. Further, if the spillage is on a small scale, it is cleaned up by labourers of the Environmental Health Division. However, if it is extensive, the contractor is required to clean it up, or the Environmental Health Division will do so and bill him. In some cases, water-waggons are also deployed for emergency flushing of spillage on public roads. Where the littering is expected to be protracted, the contractor is required to provide his own flushing facilities to the satisfaction of the Environmental Health Division. If the spillage damages the road, the haulage contractor is required to repair the road to the satisfaction of the PWD or the PWD will do so and bill him. The Traffic Police takes a serious view of such lorries violating traffic rules. Those who drive the lorries in excess of the prescribed speed limits are fined or prosecuted. A Selective Enforcement Squad has also been formed within the Mobile Squad of the Traffic Police Division to deal with such offenders. For the period 1-1-72 to 31-12-72, 502 cases of spillage by lorries on roads and 3,167 cases of speeding by lorries were reported to the Police and appropriate action taken against them. BUS ACCIDENTS (Particulars) 5. Tuan Haji Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi asked the Minister for Health and Home Affairs (a) how many serious omnibus accidents occurred between 1st May, 1971, and the latest convenient date, giving breakdown figures in respect of each bus company; and (b) how many persons were killed in those accidents.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, all Immigration staff on recruitment undergo training for a period ranging from one to four weeks before they are deployed at the various offices and check-points. During the training they are instructed among other things to be courteous and helpful to members of the public, as they are working in a department which has constant dealings with the public. Serving members of the Immigration staff are regularly reminded to be courteous and polite in dealing with the public. Departmental circulars on courtesy and correct attitude towards the public have been issued from time to time. Since June last year, seven such circulars were issued and the latest one was issued on the 18th October, 1972. Further, senior officers of the Department from time to time give lectures and briefings to the staff that their rudeness to the public will not be tolerated. There were occasions when disciplinary action was taken against members of the staff for being discourteous to the public. A Deputy Assistant Controller of Immigration, a Division II officer, was dismissed in 1969 for being rude to a member of the public. Members of the public who know of specific instances of discourtesy or rudeness by any of the Immigration staff are invited to write to my Ministry, giving details. Immediate investigations will be instituted and appropriate action taken, including dismissal wherever necessary. However, general allegations of discourtesy without giving specific details will not be helpful. REGISTRY OF COMPANIES (Improvement measures) 4. Dr Tan Eng Liang asked the Minister for Finance if he will consider taking measures to improve the workings and efficiency of the Registry of Companies as the watch-dog and supervisory body under the Companies Act.”
“Of course, the Traffic Police welcomes more up-to-date equipment, so that they can be more efficient and more effective. We will discuss the matter with the other ministries with a view to getting more up-to-date equipment. IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT (Public relations) 3. Dr Tan Eng Liang asked the Minister for Health and Home Affairs if he will look into the cultivation of proper attitudes of the staff of the Immigration Department in their dealings with the public.”
“Vacancies with regard to personnel are mainly due to retirement or resignation of officers. Recruitment exercises are now being carried out to fill them.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, hon. Members may be pleased to note that as a result of the views expressed in this House yesterday that the proposed increase in accouchement charges for A class should be very much higher than those for C class, I have, after consultation with some of my Cabinet colleagues, decided to increase further the proposed charges for A class. The new rates for A class will be as follows:- A Class $ Delivery for 1st child 250 Delivery for 2nd child 300 Delivery for 3rd child 350 Delivery for 4th child 400 Delivery for 5th and higher order child 400 May I also take this opportunity to answer a question posed yesterday by an hon. Member as to how we were going to prevent parents from having more children after allocating Housing and Development Board flats to them. The answer to the question is that priorities for the allocation of HDB flats will not only be for the application for the first flat but also for application for transfers to a bigger and better flat. In other words, if those who after having been allocated flats continue after 1st August, 1973, to have more children, then their application for transfers to bigger flats in the future will drop very low in priority. They should then not blame anyone other than themselves if' they and their bigger families had to remain in their smaller flats for a very long time. ADJOURNMENT MOTION (Business Motion)”
“CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA BILL "to make further provision with respect to the carriage of goods by sea, and to repeal the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (Chapter 184 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Finance (Mr Hon Sui Sen); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. NATIONAL STATISTICAL COMMISSION OF SINGAPORE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the National Statistical Commission of Singapore Act, 1971 (No. 27 of 1971)", presented by Mr Hon Sui Sen; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. MONETARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Monetary Authority of Singapore Act (Chapter 195 of the Revised Edition)", presented by Mr Hon Sui Sen; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. INDUSTRIAL TRAINING BOARD BILL "to provide for the establishment of a body corporate to be known as the Industrial Training Board and for matters connected therewith", recommendation of President signified, presented for the Minister for Education by Mr Lim Kim San; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament after 10th November, 1972, and to be printed. NATIONAL CADET CORPS BILL "to provide for the raising and maintenance of a National Cadet Corps and for matters connected therewith; and to repeal the Malayan Air Training Corps Act (Chapter 231) and the Singapore Sea Cadet Corps Act (Chapter 236)", presented for the Minister for Education by Mr Lim Kim San; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament after 10th November, 1972, and to be printed.”
“Well, if twins were born in the first delivery, then it is counted as the first delivery and you pay the fee for the first delivery. Of course, after having got twins, if you have a third one, then the fee will be charged as for a third delivery. But if the Member for Sembawang happens to have twins, then we will be more flexible in our interpretation. BILLS INTRODUCED 3.17 p.m. ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Environmental Public Health Act (Chapter 155 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for the Environment (Mr Lim Kim San); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PUBLIC UTILITIES (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Public Utilities Act (Chapter 211 of the Revised Edition)", presented by Mr Lim Kim San; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act (Chapter 104 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Law and Home Affairs, and National Development (Mr E. W. Barker); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT) (PROTECTION OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE) BILL "to amend the Constitution of Singapore", presented by Mr E. W. Barker; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.”
“Sorry, I missed that point. In fact, I have already answered that in my Ministerial Statement. May I just quote it? `Families with four or more will have little priority. This, however, will be implemented so as to be kinder to those who already have large families.' I hope that answers the Member's point.”
“As I have said in my Ministerial Statement, if a person cannot pay the higher accouchement charges, how then can he have the means and the ability to bring up a child so that he or she will have an even chance in the future for a better life? The point brought up by the Member for Bras Basah is that birth is an accident. I do not think I should comment on that. I hope the Member for Bras Basah has not come into the world by accident!”
“As far as publicity about family planning is concerned, I have said that we have had the family planning service since 1966, six years ago. In fact, a White Paper on family planning was presented in this House by my predecessor. Campaigns on family planning had been launched before and there is no excuse for members of the public not to know anything about family planning. Our surveys have shown that although they know what family planning is, a percentage of them do not want to accept it. Therefore, it is not the case of the public being ignorant of family planning. The point that was brought up is that we are limiting the number of children to two. What we are advocating is that two is the ideal. It does not mean that you cannot have three or four. If you can afford it, by all means, have three or four. But if you cannot afford to bring up two children properly, then I think it is criminal for you to bring up three or four. It might be satisfying to you yourself, but please remember that the third and fourth child you bring forth may have no prospects of a better life in the future. Regarding accouchement fees, the Member for Kim Seng mentioned that there is not much difference between the C class and the A class. Well, there is a difference, but it narrows down to the point when the mother comes for her fourth child. As I have said, this is a matter of cutting down the subsidies. We subsidise the first two children. For the third child, we subsidise slightly less, but there will be no subsidy whatsoever for the fourth and fifth child.”
“Sir, may I take the point brought up by the Member for Anson about a couple having two female children? Although he is rather vague and diversified in his comments. I think his point is that if you have two female children, you may want a male, then what happens? In this modern, urbanised and industrialised Singapore, the sexes of the children should not count. After all, we have the Women's Charter, and so on. We have equal pay for women. So we should not discriminate between male and female children He also mentioned that restricting the number of children to two is a rather dangerous policy. On the contrary, and I have stated this in my Ministerial Statement, if you do not limit the number, particularly in the case of families who cannot afford to bring up their children properly, you are going to create social tension between those who are poorly paid and unskilled, because their parents were not able to educate or nurture them, and those from small families because their parents have given them the best. Therefore, limiting the number of children per family will mean that in 15 or 20 years time, we will have less social tension. We will have a more just and equal society. If we do not do so, whatever we do in subsidies we cannot bring about a more just and equal society. I am sure the Member for Anson wants to have a more just and equal society in Singapore. The point brought up by the Members for Bukit Ho Swee, Changi and Mount-batten, is that not enough time has been given to persuade the people to confine to small families. As I have stated, we have just held a mass family planning campaign. I wonder what the Member for Changi was doing then. Did he go round to his constituents to propagate the concept of the small family?”
“This is for the good of our nation as a whole, and kinder to those who still ignorantly believe that the more children they have, the more benefits they will get from them. 2.55 p.m.”
“The new rates will be as follows:- ACCOUCHEMENT CHARGES A B C Class Class Class Singapore Non- Resident Resident $ $ $ $ 1st 200 100 40 2nd 200 150 75 No 3rd 250 150 100 acceptance 4th 300 250 200 5th or 350 300 250 higher order The term "Singapore resident" means Singapore citizens and includes persons in possession of Singapore blue Identity Cards, or married to a Singapore resident. Non-residents will not be accepted in our C and B class maternity wards. Expectant mothers who have come into Singapore specially to deliver their children will be taken in only into the maximum fee-paying A class wards. I must point out that these new rates still mean heavy Government subsidies for the delivery of the first and second child in C class wards. They are less for the third child and none for the fourth. There will be a waiver of these fees on condition the woman or her husband undergoes sterilization. More use of sterilization as a means of family planning for those who have completed their families must be encouraged. These new rates will be brought into effect about 9 1/2 months from today, that is, 1st of August, 1973. The National Family Planning and Population Board have made birth control services freely available to all over the last seven years through its network of family planning clinics in the Maternal and Child Health Services. A nation-wide mass family planning campaign was launched only recently to urge parents to have small families. Abortion is available at little or no cost to those who need them, especially in cases where contraceptives have failed. This policy of the two-child per family will be encouraged in all aspects of social and economic policy. Conversely, the large family will be actively discouraged in every way.”
“Singapore cannot afford the fourth and fifth child for parents without the ability to bring them up properly housed, clothed, fed and educated. The results will be disastrous, in juvenile delinquency, social resentments and tension, as differences in earnings and circumstances widen between the children of the successful small families and those of the unsuccessful large ones. Housing Board priorities for allocation of flats will be changed so that those with two or less children will have the highest priorities. Families with three will drop slightly in priority. Families with four or more will have little priority. This, however, will be implemented so as to be kinder to those who already have large families. In accordance with this policy of encouraging small families, income tax relief in respect of children will in future be reduced, from the present five, to only the first three children. Those who already are enjoying income tax relief on five children will, of course, continue to do so. My colleague, the Minister for Finance, will make a statement on this after all the details have been worked out. Paid maternity leave both in Government Service and under the Employment Act will be reduced from three to two confinements after 1st August next year. The Government's duty is to encourage family planning and to discourage large families. The Government has decided to increase the accouchement charges for deliveries of higher orders of children in the Government hospitals. Parents must be made more aware of the actual costs of bringing their third, fourth or fifth child into society. If they find the new subsidised rates difficult to bear, then they will never be able to bring up the children properly to earn a decent living.”
“In fact, the greater the feather-bedding of large anti-social families, the greater will be the numbers of large families. The costs of the subsidies will be compounded all along the line, from housing, to nutrition, to education. In effect, the Government has to increase taxes to subsidise people with low incomes and large families. It is a vicious cycle which we must break. It is kinder in the long run to put disincentives on large families. Certainly it will carry less danger of social tension, overcrowding and generally lowered standards in the very limited space of Singapore. The quality of the environment and standards of life must suffer unless we take strong measures now to stop large families. Moreover, social friction and tensions will increase between those with small families whose children will in turn do well, because of better health and social factors, and those with large families whose numerous children will do poorly because they are deprived of adequate food and care. To bring up each child up to his or her fullest potential, we must break this vicious cycle. Further, too frequent child-bearing means physical exhaustion and adverse effect on the mother's health. The incidence of women dying as a result of child birth rises sharply after the fourth pregnancy. Weakened mothers are unable to work and supplement the family income. If our society is to become more just and equal, smaller families must be actively encouraged, and large ones actively discouraged. Accouchement fees, maternity leave, priority points for homes will be so adjusted to encourage two children per family. The third child is a luxury for all but those who can afford to lavish the same care on three as they can on two children.”
“Children suffering from inadequate protein, iron and vitamins during their formative years, tend to be seriously retarded in their brain development. This is clearly reflected in a study of Primary VI examination results among a group of 1,123 children. This study showed that among children who are well-nourished 77 per cent of them passed, and only 23 per cent failed. Those who are averagely nourished 51.4 per cent passed, 48.6 per cent failed. But of those who are under-nourished only 23.9 per cent passed, and 76.1 per cent failed. Health and malnutrition factors were compounded by lack of maternal care and of books and recreational toys of educative value. The Government plans to eradicate the present pockets of malnutrition in children to ensure the mental and physical development of our young. But these plans can only be partially successful. The problem must be tackled at source, by preventing such large families. As our economy expands, wages will go up, But the rise in wages will not bring a better life to those families who increase their burdens by having more children to feed, clothe, and nurture. When parents have more children than they can adequately feed and care for, these children will have poorer diet and health. Their education and training will suffer and they will remain at the lower levels of lower incomes in unskilled jobs. No amount of subsidies by the Government can remedy the lack of adequate food and care at home. Subsidised meals in schools cannot make up for what they should get at home. Children do not go to school until the age of six, by which time permanent damage would already have been done. One meal in school for slightly more than half the year, excluding holidays, cannot repair the damage.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, our President's address to this House emphasised the need in the next five years to strive for higher standards in everything. We want higher quality in jobs, schools, hospitals, social and recreational amenities and homes. The crucial pre-condition for fulfilling these objectives is smaller families. Only then can more resources and care be given to each child, by the parents and by the State. Our National Family Planning Programme has in the last six years been able to achieve some measure of success. It has brought down the high birth rate of 28.8 per thousand in 1966 to 22.3 per thousand in 1971. But there are many people who do not practise family planning. These couples still want large families. About 35 per cent of children born are of a fourth or higher order born to the family. The problem is made worse because most of these children are born to families who are least able to feed them and nurture them. These parents cannot give their children opportunities equal to those of children in smaller families. In an industrialised and highly urbanised Singapore of the 1970's, a large family is a tragedy for the children, a burden to their parents, and a drag on the whole society. Infant mortality in Singapore is one of the lowest in the world. It is not necessary to have large numbers of children to ensure the continuity of the family line. A study of the incidence of anaemia cases among children revealed that 25 per cent of the cases were from families with three or less children. Seventy-five per cent of them were from families with more than three children. The majority of the parents with three or more children cannot afford to provide their children with adequate and proper nourishment.”
“The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Chua Sian Chin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. DANGEROUS FIREWORKS BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.21 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Kampong Kembangan has referred to clause 15 of the Bill where it is provided that if a body has not been claimed for more than 24 hours after death, the Director may dispose of the body as he thinks fit. Clause 15 is, in fact, a repetition of the old provision of section 4 of the existing Act where it is stated: `Where the body of a deceased person has not been claimed from a hospital, nursing home or other institution, maintained on public funds, for more than twenty-four hours after death, the Director of Medical Services may authorise, in writing, the use of the body or a specified part of the body or the post-mortem examination of the body for the purposes for which an authorisation in writing may be given under the provisions of paragraph (a) or (b) of section 3.' The concern of the Member is: what about dead bodies belonging to persons of the Muslim religion? The present practice is that if the body of a dead person belonging to the Muslim religion is not claimed for more than 24 hours, the Director of Medical Services would invoke section 4 of the existing Act, which I have read out just now, and get the Muslim Religious Council to dispose of the body in accordance with Muslim religious rites. As far as the dead bodies belonging to the Muslim religion are concerned, they have not been touched by the Director of Medical Services, but he requests the Muslim Religious Council to do so. That has been the practice since the existing Act was passed in 1965, and I can assure the Member for Kampong Kembangan that when this Bill is passed the same practice will continue. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.”
“The present practice under section 4 of the Act is that Muslim corpses are exempted from post-mortem. Can the Minister for Health give an assurance that this practice will be continued when the Bill is passed?”
“(iii) So as to avoid ambiguity as to which surviving relative or person who could legally authorise removal of parts of a body or the carrying out of a post-mortem, the Bill lists the relatives who may give valid consent in an order of precedence. By this, the wishes of a relative in a higher order in the list will take precedence over those relatives in a lower order. Here again, a safeguard has been written into the provisions in that, if there be any conflict between relatives in the same order of priority, the authority to examine or remove parts of the body will not be given. I should, however, like to mention that although it may be desirable to make this law as comprehensive as possible, we have deliberately not touched on the point concerning the removal of an organ from a living donor. In fact, there is no need to do so because within the medical services and profession there are codes of conduct which govern medical practice and which lay down rules on determining death, obtaining consent for donation of tissues and for the examination of bodies. At the present stage of medical development in Singapore, the provisions as embodied in the Bill together with the safeguards should be sufficient to enable the use of the body or parts of a body for transplants and the advancement of medical knowledge, education and research. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.14 p.m. Tuan Haji Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Kampong Kembangan)(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Minister for Health mentioned just now, this Bill will replace the present Medical (Therapy, Education and Research) Act, 1965 (Cap. 160). Section 4 of the present Act is incorporated in the Bill under clauses 12 and 15.”
“It is designed to facilitate the donation and use of human tissues and organs for transplant operations and other medical purposes and provides favourable legal provisions for such activities. To make its full beneficial impact on the community the purpose for which such anatomical gifts can be made, the provisions have been extended to include education and the advancement of dental science. The existing Act has no reference to dentistry. The salient points in the Bill are as follows: (i) It permits the removal of an organ or the use of the body or parts of the body for examination or for medical education where a person has specifically willed it in writing or orally in the presence of two or more witnesses. A safeguard is provided for revocation of the gift by the donor at any time. (ii) Where no specific wish has been expressed to make a donation of parts of a body or for a medical examination of the dead person, authority to do so may be given by relatives or by the Director of the Medical Institution if the body is not claimed after 24 hours. The safeguard here is that if it is known that the person had specifically objected to such procedures, then the procedures cannot be carried out. The provisions in the Bill which differ from those in the existing Act are as follows: (i) Omission of all references to the ambiguous expressions, such as "persons in lawful possession" and "having made such enquiries as may be practicable". (ii) And, this is more important, that the donor's wish takes primacy over all others. In the existing Act, any relative may forbid the removal or examination of the body and can thus veto the wishes of the deceased.”
“In the United Kingdom, the corresponding law known as the Human Tissue Act, 1961, on which our own Act was modelled on, had also been found to be inadequate. Like our Act, it was supposed to be comprehensive and to provide a charter for the advancement of medicine, research and education. It had replaced a preceding Act known as the Corneal Grafting Act of 1952 and an earlier Act known as the Anatomy Act, 1832. It was probably on the models of these previous Acts that the ambiguous term "person in lawful possession" had come down through to our present Act. Because of this evident defect, the Health Minister in the United Kingdom in January 1969 formed an advisory group on transplant problems to make recommendations on amendments, if any, to the Human Tissue Act, 1961. In the United States of America the corresponding law is known as the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act. It is the product of three years of intensive study by a special committee of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State laws. It had considered earlier drafts and reviews by medical and scientific groups and also received the endorsement of the American Bar Association. Rather than touch up our existing Act with amendments here and there, it was decided to repeal it and replace it with an entirely new Bill modelled on the United States Uniform Anatomical Gift Act. The present Bill before the House has, therefore, two purposes, namely, the repeal of the existing Act and its re-enactment. The objectives and scope of its provision remain the same while the operation of its provisions is now made clear and is without ambiguity.”
“(ii) As illustrated by the example I have just given, the properly stated wishes of the person may be overruled by some relative at death. (iii) The phrases, that "such reasonable enquiries as may be practicable" must be made by "the person in lawful possession of the body of a deceased" to see whether any of the surviving relatives (who are not defined) object to the gift, are ambiguous. The vagueness of these provisions is especially deplorable in view of how critical it is that in transplant operations the time lag between donor's death and the operation should be kept as short as possible. A good deal of time is lost in going around sounding every relative to find out whether or not he or she objects to the use of the body for the purposes of the Act. The phrase "the person in lawful possession of the body of a deceased" is invoked in the case where no specific statement has been made by the deceased before death. In which case the person lawfully in possession of his body can give consent. However, under the present law it is not possible to say with any degree of certainty who such a person is. There has, therefore, been much debate over the interpretation of the words "person in lawful possession". It was originally used by the draftsman of the Anatomy Act of the United Kingdom of 1832. This was a piece of legislation passed in the aftermath of the ghoulish activities of the body snatchers of Burke and Hare. The words were interpreted to include the Master of Workhouses and likewise the Board of Management of a hospital where an individual dies. This appears, however, to have been restricted now as not to include the hospital management but executors or close relatives of the deceased.”
“Perhaps this was the result of insufficient experience and over-caution at the time when the Act was framed. At that time the only transplantation operation routinely done in Singapore was the corneal transplant. Kidney transplant operations had not been quite perfected nor yet undertaken in Singapore. There was, therefore, little experience to fall back on in the drafting of the Act. The rapid advances in medical science and technology had in the meantime overtaken the legal provisions of the Act. One defect of the Act soon became apparent. To ensure the success of the transplant, the tissue must be removed from the dead body as soon as possible after death. The legal provisions as provided by the Act do not allow this to be done because of the formal procedures to be taken. Some of these provisions are, worse still, quite ambiguous. Another defect is that the law allows any surviving relative to forbid a donation with the result that the hospital is unable to comply with the wishes of the donor who made them before death. The serious defects in the Act may be listed as follows: (i) There is no definition of what is meant by any "surviving relative". There is no precedent to fall back on. Hence it could happen, even though this is only a theoretical possibility, that any relative, no matter how far removed, could come forward to object to the operation being conducted. This actually occurred in the famous case of the death of the American authoress, Grace Metalious, who had specifically willed her body to a medical school. But this was forbidden by her next-of-kin. The resultant controversy led to an amendment to the law of the State of Massachusetts.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Medical (Therapy, Education and Research) Act, 1965, (now Cap. 160 of the Revised Edition) was passed by Parliament on 31st December, 1965, and was brought into operation on 7th January, 1966. It embodied two objectives: (i) To allow under certain circumstances the removal of organs or tissues or the examination of the body after death. Such procedures could be undertaken when the person before death had expressly stated a desire that his body at death be used for any of the purposes of the Act. In the absence of any stated wishes of the person before death, the relatives could give the necessary consent for the procedures to be carried out. (ii) To provide sufficient safeguards to ensure that the freely expressed wishes of a person are carried out. If there was a specific wish to donate his eyes or an organ, this would be carried out. Conversely, if there was a specific objection by the person no such procedures would be carried out. The safeguards, however, went further, primarily for goodwill, that no such procedures could be carried out even if the person had explicitly wanted it before his death, if there was any objection by any surviving relative. Almost from the onset it became apparent that there was a conflict in the purposes of the Act. As a result, it has not been as successful in its application in promoting the purposes of medical advancement. Because of the stringent provisions and ambiguities, there have been instances where the hospital failed to obtain organs from a dead person despite his having given consent before death or despite consent of his relatives having been given.”
“Sir, as I have stated quite recently, there is a shortage of cleansing workers in Singapore, and therefore a start has got to be made to mechanise our cleansing work. Due to the high rate of turnover of cleansing workers who resign to take up more lucrative jobs in the industrial sector, the Public Cleansing Branch of the Ministry of Health is at the moment working on a field strength of about only 83 per cent. Also, with the high degree of literacy among our younger population, public cleansing work is not their first or second choice of an occupation. That being the case, the situation, as far as shortage of cleansing workers is concerned, is not going to improve as the years go by. Therefore, the solution is to mechanise public cleansing. But, as I have stated before, street cleansing work is labour-intensive and to mechanise it would mean that there will be quite a number of problems associated with such mechanisation. For example, the mechanical sweeper will not be able to sweep drains, scupper holes, side-tables, and so on. Further, with regard to side lanes where we have hawkers and car parking lots, the operation of the mechanical sweeper will be quite limited. But as far as the financial provision for mechanisation is concerned, we have already ordered four mechanical road sweepers with a suction device. For the information of the Member for Punggol, they will be arriving in June. First of all, we will use them to clean the main roads as a pilot scheme. If they prove to be successful, they will be used to clean other roads as well.”
“As far as siting of the plants is concerned, there is no definite decision yet. I hope it is not going to be in the Punggol constituency. But with regard to date as to when they will be set up, let me say that this is not a small project. It takes some time to process the report and tenders have to be called. But before tenders are called, funds will have to be raised, perhaps through loans from banks or international organisations. Then only after it has been decided that a type of incineration plant is best suited for Singapore will the contract be awarded to build the incineration plant. So it seems that it will take at least another two years before work can commence.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there has been progress since then. The report by that firm of consulting engineers has already been received and has been considered. In fact, the report has recommended that a huge incinerator together with one or two compaction plants be built to take care of the refuse disposal for the whole of Singapore. The matter is in the hands of Treasury, who now has the task of raising enormous sums of money to purchase this huge incinerator, which incidentally will cost about $50 million, and also to purchase the compaction plant. The specific proposal is that this compaction plant has a capacity of 400 tons per day and the incineration plant can dispose about 1.200 tons per day. I agree with the Member for Punggol that this is a matter of urgency, because we are at the moment running short of swampland to dump our refuse, and the amount of refuse collected every day is increasing very rapidly.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the explanation lies as follows. The release of funds under this vote is subject to the Development Planning Committee sanction. In this case, there have been some protracted negotiations between my Ministry and the Ministry of Finance with respect to the number and type of refuse collection vehicles required. When approval was finally obtained, it was unfortunately too late in the year to place orders and to pay for the vehicles. These special refuse collection vehicles cannot be bought off the shelf so to speak, like sundry goods. The delivery period is about six to 12 months. The funds were accordingly revoted. Tenders for the supply of these refuse collection vehicles have already been finalised and orders are being placed. I can assure the Member for Punggol that this money will be spent this year.”
“Sir, there has been some misunderstanding on the part of the Member for Punggol with regard to this vote. As a matter of fact, the original submission by the Ministry of Health for this item was an estimate of $42,000 for furniture and equipment required for the rehabilitation centre at Mandalay Road. This request was made in 1970, and Treasury had approved the project, in principle, by entering this request in the 1971-72 Development Estimates. However, a provision of only $10,000 was shown in the 1971-72 Development Estimates, as Treasury was of the view that we were unlikely to spend more than this sum in that financial year 1971-72. However, Treasury was requested to make the full provision of $42,000 for furniture and equipment in the 1972-73 Development Estimates. They have agreed, and this accounts for the present figure. Therefore, there is actually no increase in the cost of furniture or equipment. It has remained unchanged since 1970 at a total figure of $42,000 which was approved.”
“It is considered that there is a need for similar powers for the Eugenics Board. Clause 2 of the Bill gives effect to this. Mr Speaker, Sir, I have dealt with the main amendments proposed in the Bill and have explained why they are necessary. I would, however, like to assure the House that the existing safeguards enshrined in the principal Act remain, and these are - (a) that the authority of the Eugenics Board will continue to be required to authorise sterilization; (b) that sterilization will not be carried out against a person's, will, in each case, the consent of the person concerned being necessary; (c) that sterilization will be carried out only in Government hospitals or in approved institutions; (d) that sterilization will be effected only after a period of seven days has elapsed following the Board's approval of the application, giving sufficient time for a change of mind; (e) that no medical personnel will be obliged to carry out sterilization if it is against his, conscience. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Mr Chua Sian Chin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. SENTOSA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BILL Order for Second Reading read. 6.31 p.m.”