E.W. Barker
Singapore
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This is a simple Bill which seeks to amend section 33 of the Land Acquisition Act on the amount of compensation payable to owners of land compulsorily acquired under the Act.”
“For the five-year period from 1st July, 1981 to 30th June, 1986, the HDB demolished a total of 8,098 units. As the HDB's new accounting system was only implemented from 1st April, 1985, the Board does not have ready information on the value of flats demolished prior to 1st April, 1985. RELOCATION OF CREMATORIUMS 4.”
“The HDB did not allocate any MP's office to the previous PAP MPs for Anson and Potong Pasir constituencies. NUMBER OF H.D.B. UNITS DEMOLISHED 3.”
“I would not know. Why don't you ask them? I don't know. Sir, to put things in a nutshell, it is the legal profession amongst all the professions that help in the administration of Singapore. Doctors help to cure you of diseases.”
“I am not saying it's wrong. I am not telling you stories. I am relating. So they decided to take us on. When we went into Select Committee, the first day and the later part of the second day, there was confrontation between the Committee and the lawyers.”
“As the Member for Anson would know, the Minister for Law is not in charge of prosecutions or the conduct of any criminal proceedings in court, nor does he give any directives on these matters.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,152 lines we hold for E.W. Barker, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 32 of 44.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the second motion standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper and which reads: 'That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Ordinance (Chapter 246), approves the reclamation by Government of that portion of the foreshore and sea-bed at Pulau Ayer Chawan containing an area of approximately 332 acres as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/68" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.' Sir, in March this year the Government acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1965, the only two pieces of private land at Pulau Ayer Chawan, thus bringing the whole island under state ownership so as to facilitate comprehensive development for industrial purposes. The Jurong Town Corporation, which has now taken over the industrial development functions of the Economic Development Board, has recently completed negotiations with Esso (Singapore) Private Limited to lease the island to the company for the development of a $200 million oil refinery. This development necessitates the reclamation of certain areas in the island. Although the area of Pulau Ayer Chawan is about 511 acres, only 179 acres are above the high-water mark. The remaining 332 acres are technically foreshore requiring to be reclaimed by filling. The 332 acres of foreshore and sea-bed at Pulau Ayer Chawan which are to be reclaimed are shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "Land Office Reclamation Plan No. 1/68", a copy of which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members. The reclamation is to be done in two phases. The initial works will cover an area of 141 acres as indicated by the line of black crosses on the said plan.”
“Consequent upon the rapid growth of the Jurong Industrial Estate, more land is needed for industrial expansion. It is proposed, therefore, to allow the Jurong Town Corporation to reclaim the remaining lot of the Pandan nature reserve comprising some 356 acres of swamp land. Thus, it becomes necessary to delete this lot from the Schedule of the Nature Reserves Ordinance. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, 'That this Parliament, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 4 of teh Nature Reserves Ordinance (Chapter 235), resolves - (a) that paragraph 1 of the Schedule of the said Ordinance be delted and the following sustituted thereof:- "All those pieces of land situate in the Mukims of Sembawang, Mandai, Ulu Kalang, Bukit Timah and Toa Payoh in ht Island of Singapore forming part of the Public Utilities Board Catchment Area descibed as follows:- Approximate Area Lot. No. Mukim Acres. Roods. Perches 13-2 Sembawang No. XIII 3 3 13.60 13-3 Sembawang No. XIII 667 2 - Parts of 31-2 Mandai No. XIV 3,144 0 - 28 Ulu Kalang No. XV 3 2 34.00 29 Ulu Kalang No. XV 0 0 12.00 30 Ulu Kalang No. XV 5 1 14.00 13-16 Ulu Kalang No. XV 3 2 09.2 Parts of 155 Ulu Kalang No. XV 2,687 1 15.0 66 Bukit Timah No. XVI 576 0 - Parts of 115-2 Toa Payoh No. XVII 900 0 - The boundaries of these areas are more particularly delineated and edged green in Certified Plan No. 13109 filed in the Office of the Chief Surveyor, Singapre."; and (b) that paragraph 5 of the Schedule to the said Ordinance be deleted. RECLAMATION (PULAU AYER CHAWAN)”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the first motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: 'That this Parliament, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 4 of the Nature Reserves Ordinance (Chapter 235), resolves - (a) that paragraph 1 of the Schedule of the said Ordinance be deleted and the following sustituted therefor:- "All those pieces of land situate in the Mukims of Sembawang, Mandai, Ulu Kalang, Bukit Timah and Toa Payoh in the Island of Singapore forming part of the Public Utilities Board Catchment Area described as follows:- Approximate Area Lot. No. Mukim Acres. Roods. Perches 13-2 Sembawang No. XIII 3 3 13.60 13-3 Sembawang No. XIII 667 2 - Parts of 31-2 Mandai No. XIV 3,144 0 - 28 Ulu Kalang No. XV 3 2 34.00 29 Ulu Kalang No. XV 0 0 12.00 30 Ulu Kalang No. XV 5 1 14.00 13-16 Ulu Kalang No. XV 3 2 09.2 Parts of 155 Ulu Kalang No. XV 2,687 1 15.0 66 Bukit Timah No. XVI 576 0 - Parts of 115-2 Toa Payoh No. XVII 900 0 - The boundaries of these areas are more particularly delineated and edged green in Certified Plan No. 13109 filed in the Office of the Chief Surveyor, Singapre."; and (b) that paragraph 5 of the Schedule to the said Ordinance be deleted.' The motion deals with two areas of nature reserves - one at MacRitchie Reservoir and the other in the Pandan nature reserve. Part of the nature reserve at MacRitchie Reservoir has already been converted into a park, and it is now necessary to regulate the position by amending paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the Nature Reserves Ordinance as proposed in my motion. Part of the Pandan nature reserve was reclaimed many years ago to provide land for the industrial estate at Jurong.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I lay upon the Table a Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Economic Development Board (Transfer of Assets) Bill. Certificate of Urgency handed in.”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, I have the President's recommendation for the introduction of the Economic Development Board (Transfer of Assets) Bill. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr Tang See Chim) (for the Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to transfer certain assets of the Economic Development Board to the Minister for Finance." Bill read the First time. Second Reading”
“But in spite of the Women's Charter, the Member for Delta is still not satisfied. In this respect, we in Singapore give consideration to women every day. In fact, every day is a women's holiday. So I really do not understand this request. But she has support from the Member for Ulu Pandan. Mr Speaker, Sir, suffice it to say that like other Members of the House, I myself would prefer more and more holidays. But as I pointed out earlier in my opening speech, in view of the British withdrawal - I hope perhaps with no severe unemployment or economic problems following in its wake - this is one of the measures we are taking to ask our people to work harder - which means you, me and everybody else. I ask Members to bear with me. If our island prospers, I am sure the Government will ask me to come :back here and on that day it will be my pleasure to move amendments to increase the number of holidays. But let us first show that we can work hard and that we deserve more holidays. 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 Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. DESTRUCTION OF DISEASE-BEARING INSECTS BILL Order for Second Reading read. 6.36 p.m.”
“The result of this Bill will bring us back to the less playful conditions which existed before we started to add on to our holidays as we had to please more and more religious and cultural groups in Singapore and Malaysia. I am sure I have the support of hon. Members. In common with all the measures that have been introduced in this House at this present sitting, the main object of this Bill is to contribute more towards the national well-being. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 6.11 p.m.”
“In the recent measures introduced by Government in order to prepare the country for the eventual departure of the British Armed Forces and for the economic upheavals that may follow in its wake, we have decided that the number of industrial holidays should be reduced to 11. At the same time, it was also thought proper that the number of public holidays in Singapore should correspondingly be reduced to coincide with the total number of industrial holidays per year. Not only then would the workers, but also all those resident and working in Singapore, whether in Government departments or in the private sector, be given every opportunity to make their contribution towards the national effort to remain viable economically, and progress even during the difficult years ahead. It would perhaps be appropriate for me, in making this speech, to tell the House that Government sought the views of the various religious communities in our society on the proposed reduction of public holidays. The Hindus, for example, given the choice of having Deepavali or Thaipusam as a public holiday, have chosen the former. The Muslims have, after discussions and correspondence with the Muslim Advisory Board, retained Hari Raya Puasa and Hari Raya Haji to enable members of our community who are of the Muslim faith, to discharge their obligations and attend mosque on those specific days. The Christians have retained Christmas and Good Friday, the two most important dates in the Christian calendar. The Buddhists have retained Vesak Day. Thus it will be seen that the choice of holidays that will be retained in Singapore have had the blessings of the Inter-Religious Organisation, an organisation represented by all the religious persuasions in Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Holidays (Amendment) Bill seeks to reduce the number of public holidays in Singapore to 11 per annum. The number of holidays in Singapore has always been set out in an Ordinance and the number of 'public holidays has from time to time been varied in such a manner that it would appear that each time there is a change in the number of public holidays in Singapore, this has been, more often than not, towards an increase in the number of holidays. I think it fair to observe that until we joined Malaysia, the number of holidays was fairly constant. Although the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, now the President of the Republic, is empowered by notification in the Gazette to appoint special days to be observed as public holidays, such discretion accorded to him lay only when an increase in the number of holidays or when a substitution for an existing holiday was being contemplated. When we joined Malaysia, this Ordinance was repealed and in substitution therefor the Malaysian legislation was introduced to Singapore. In 1966 we re-enacted the Holidays Act setting out the legality or otherwise in regard to certain acts which may or may not be done on public holidays. By then, of course, the number of public holidays had increased to the present number of 16 per annum. Quite apart from these holidays, there were certain rest days provided for in the various Ordinances and Acts dealing with workmen and labourers. These enactments set out certain compulsory industrial holidays which had to be observed and for which certain benefits would be paid to workmen who were required to work on these days.”
“The proposed amendment will restore the position to what it was before 1966, and deter owners from making excessive claims and act as a restraint against an owner proceeding with an appeal regardless of the Collector's award and the amount of his own claim, as even if he succeeds in obtaining a slight increase, he will not be entitled to any costs. Clause 3 of the Bill is merely a re-enactment of the existing provision of section 32 (3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1966. Although it is proposed to repeal section 32 of the Act, this particular provision, section 32 (3), is being retained as it does not really deal with costs but with the power of the Appeals Board to confirm, reduce, increase or annul the award made by the Collector. Opportunity is also taken, in clause 2 of the Bill, to amend section 8 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1966, to enable the Collector to require the person interested in any land acquisition to furnish information relating to the basis, or mode of valuation by which the amount of compensation claimed by such person is arrived at. This will enable the Collector to rationalise the basis of such claim. 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 Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. HOLIDAYS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 6.03 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Bill flow before the House seeks primarily to repeal section 32 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1966, and re-enact it on the lines of the corresponding provision in the repealed Land Acquisition Ordinance (Chapter 248) to provide, inter alia, that when the claim of an appellant exceeds by 20 per cent or more the amount awarded by the Appeals Board, he shall not be entitled to his costs, and to give discretion to the Board to reduce his costs or require him to pay part of the Collector's costs when his claim is considered excessive or where he has been negligent in putting his case before the Collector (clause 4). It is desirable to effect this amendment, as under the existing section 32 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1966, it is provided that the costs of an appeal to the Board shall be in the discretion of the Board and shall either be fixed by the Board or, on the order of the Board, taxed by the Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the High Court in accordance with the scale prescribed by the rules of the court for the time being in force. As this leaves the question of costs completely to the discretion of the Board, it could be interpreted that the normal High Court practice in awarding costs to the successful litigant is to be followed, which, in its application to land acquisition appeals, will result in costs going the way of the appellant even if he succeeds in obtaining from the Board only a very small fraction of his claim.”
“In so providing, this Bill follows the statutory provisions to be found in most Commonwealth countries that have legislated on this subject. The principal reason for this is that questions of law arising from hire-purchase agreements are invariably complex and are, it is considered, more suitably dealt with by the High Court. A novel provision, which does not appear either in Australian or United Kingdom legislation, is clause 14 (5) of the Bill which confers protection upon the owner where the hirer terminates the hire-purchase agreement. The Explanatory Statement to the Bill outlines in a general way the various provisions of the Bill. I would like to mention here that the Singapore Advocates and Solicitors Society has been consulted in the drafting of this Bill and many of its suggestions and recommendations have been incorporated in the Bill. In spite of this, it is the intention of Government to refer this Bill to a Select Committee so as to provide opportunities to other interested bodies and members of the public to present their views on the Bill which I commend to Members as a useful measure for coping with the social and commercial requirements of our developing nation. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 5.50 p.m.”
“The goods to which this proposed legislation will apply are motor vehicles, radio sets, television sets, gramophone sets, tape recorders and any combination thereof, refrigerators, deep-freeze food preservers and any combination there of, air-conditioners, washing machines and sewing machines. The effect of this provision is, on the one hand, to limit the application of the legislation to certain specified goods, and, on the other hand, to enable Government to adapt this legislation to meet Singapore's changing economic and social needs. I must stress, however, that, in the preparation of this legislation, the Government has not overlooked the consideration that protection should also be given to the unpaid seller's interest in the hired goods; he can re-possess the goods 21 days after serving a notice for non-payment of instalments due. Further, the rights of third parties who may acquire possession of goods that are the subject of a hire-purchase agreement have also been taken into account. It will be observed that in the definitions of the terms "hire-purchase" and "contract of guarantee", transactions in which the hirer is a dealer of goods have been excluded. The reason for this is that, being engaged in the business of hiring, a dealer does not need the protection that this Bill is designed to give to the ordinary members of the public. Stocking arrangements that are entered into between a hire-purchase company and a dealer are accordingly outside the scope of this Bill. It will also be noted that jurisdiction over transactions in respect of hire-purchase agreements is vested in the High Court except in some matters arising under clauses 10, 14 and 23 of the Bill.”
“The Bill takes, as it were, a middle course between, on the one hand, the policy adopted by the United Kingdom legislation (which limits the application of the legislation to hire-purchase agreements where the hire-purchase price does not exceed £2,000 sterling and applies to all classes of goods) and, on the other hand, the Australian and New Zealand legislation (which sets no financial limit to hire-purchase agreements and applies to all classes of goods). The policy in our Bill is that it should apply only to certain categories of goods which from their nature are normally purchased under hire-purchase agreements. No financial limit is specified. It is with these broad principles in mind that the present legislation has been drafted and this Bill, like the Malaysian Hire-Purchase Act, 1967, incorporates many of the recent concepts that have been written into the existing hire-purchase legislation of the United Kingdom and Australia. The Bill has, as its foundation, three points fundamental to consumer protection of any kind. Part II provides adequate disclosure requirements in a written statement. Built-in terms in favour of the buyer as to the title to goods and their merchantable quality with implied warranties and conditions are found in Part III. Finally, the Bill in Part VII prohibits contractual provisions that are unconscionable in their purpose or operation. The term "hire-purchase agreement" is defined in clause 2 of the Bill. The provisions of this Bill will cover all hire-purchase agreements relating to such goods as may be specified in the Schedule by the Minister.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, as a result of higher living standards and the compelling desire of more and more people in Singapore to acquire what may be called luxury consumer goods, such as motor-cars, refrigerators and television sets, there has been a tremendous growth in recent years of instalment credit transactions carried out by resort to hire-purchase agreements. The Bill now before this House is principally designed to control the form and contents of hire-purchase agreements and to spell out the rights and duties of parties to such agreements. It is also designed to control instalments-sale financing to achieve certain objects, namely, to curb inflation by restricting credit facilities; to specify classes of goods for particular purposes, or to divert manufacturing activity and the lending of money to more productive purposes. The legislation provides for the exercise of this control by laying down minimum deposits on hire-purchase agreements or by restricting periods for which payments by instalment buyers may be spread. Quite apart from this, a more pressing reason that prompts Government to introduce this proposed legislation is the urgent need to confer protection upon the less sophisticated members of the community who enter into hire-purchase agreements and often experience hardship because of the harsh and oppressive conditions which sometimes appear in these agreements.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a survey carried out has shown that there are 124 shop-houses and 211 residential homes along this stretch of road. I cannot say exactly how many persons will be affected. 2.41 p.m. REPORT OF CIVIL SERVICE SALARIES COMMISSION OF SINGAPORE, 1967 (Statement by the Minister for Finance)”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, work on the widening of Upper Thomson Road between 4¾ m.s. and 6½ ms, has been carried out up to the maximum possible width. Further widening can only be carried out when the existing shops and houses which line both sides of the road are demolished. The Housing and Development Board plans to construct two shopping centres with residential flats to re-site the occupants of the shops and houses along this stretch of road. One centre will be built at the 4¾ m.s. Thomson Road, near the Home of the Little Sisters of the Poor, and the other near the junction of Thomson Road and the Island Club Road. In order to build these two centres, a few structures will have to be demolished and their occupants resettled. The occupants of the other structures along both sides of this stretch of road will only be resettled when the building of the two centres is completed, after which Upper Thomson Road will be widened into a dual carriage way.”
“Mr Ng Yeow Chong asked the Minister for Health when repairs will be carried out to the damaged concrete pavements around the Old Airport Road Market.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, occasionally an unpleasant odour comes from the sewage treatment works at Kim Chuan Road. Though unpleasant, the odour is certainly not harmful nor injurious to health. The smell is caused by the treatment works being heavily overloaded because of increasing development in the eastern sector of the island. However, the new extensions to the treatment works, costing about $13 million, are now nearing completion and when the new units are fully in operation, the incidence of this nuisance will be greatly reduced, if not completely abated. Mr Speaker, Sir, I will mention here that the treatment works were first built in 1940 and the Airport was built more than 20 years later, in the 1960s. JALAN TIGA AND OLD KALLANG AIRPORT ESTATE (Hawkers' Centre for unlicensed hawkers) 12. Mr Ng Yeow Chong asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will ascertain from the Housing and Development Board whether the Board has any plans to set up a Hawkers' Centre to accommodate unlicensed hawkers congregating at Jalan Tiga and elsewhere in the Old Kallang Airport Estate. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development (National Development Division) (Mr Ho Cheng Choon) (for the Minister for Law and National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Housing and Development Board has been studying the possibility of constructing a Hawkers' Centre to rehouse the present hawkers in the Kallang Airport Estate. As soon as a suitable site for a Hawkers' Centre is available, the scheme can be finalised and construction of the Hawkers' Centre will commence. OLD AIRPORT ROAD MARKET (Repairs to damaged concrete pavements) 13.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek the general assent of the House to move at this stage a motion for Parliament to adjourn at five o'clock today? Mr Speaker: Do I have the general assent of Members for the Leader to move the motion indicated by him? Hon. Members indicated assent. Resolved, "That notwithstanding the Standing Orders, this Parliament doth adjourn tonight at five o'clock." -[Mr Barker]. ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS DEFENCE EXPENDITURE (Issue of Defence Bonds) 1. Mr Ng Yeow Chong asked the Minister for Finance whether the Government will consider the issue of Defence Bonds to obtain loans from the private sector to meet the additional expenditure for defence.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek your consent and the general assent of hon. Members to move a motion for Parliament to adjourn earlier at 5.45 tonight?”
“The answer is "Yes". If the premises are not used for poultry-rearing or other commercial purposes but exclusively for residential purposes, then the Public Utilities Board will charge the domestic water rate and that only. RECRUITMENT OF MORE FEMALE OFFICERS TO PUBLIC SERVICE 10. Madam Chan Choy Siong asked the Minister for Finance whether the intake into all grades of the public service recently has been of male officers mainly, and if he will consider taking steps to promote the recruitment of more female officers to the service.”
“Mr Ang Nam Piau asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will ascertain from the Public Utilities Board whether the Board will take steps to revise water charges from the commercial to the domestic rate in respect of some consumers in the Thomson Constituency who are charged commercial rates but who do not use the water for poultry-rearing or other commercial purposes, where this is genuinely found to be the case.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Member for Kampong Kembangan could indicate the specific localities where there are complaints of voltage fluctuations, the Public Utilities Board will carry out detailed investigations and take the necessary remedial action. There has been a general increase in electricity demand in the hon. Member's constituency. The Electricity Department of the Public Utilities Board is examining the need for reinforcing the distribution system to cope with the power demand as well as to obviate the adverse effects of voltage fluctuations. SURVEY INTO SINGAPORE'S MINERAL DEPOSITS POTENTIAL 8. Mr P. Govindaswamy asked the Minister for Law and National Development whether any survey has been carried out into the mineral deposits potential of Singapore including its islands and foreshores, and what are the results; or whether such a survey will be carried out. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development (Law Division) (Mr S. Ramaswamy) (for the Minister for Law and National Development): In 1950, a survey into the granite resources on Singapore and the surrounding islands was carried out for the purpose of determining its availability for construction purposes and road works. A report on this survey was published and presented to the then Legislative Assembly on 19th December, 1950. Since then, no other geological surveys have been carried out. If circumstances warrant it, Government will be prepared to undertake or authorise such survey into the mineral deposits potential of Singapore, its surrounding islands, foreshore and sea-bed. REVISION OF WATER RATES FOR NON-COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IN THOMSON 9.”
“Whilst the prices of pigs and pork in the market have increased somewhat, the prices of poultry have not and are, in fact, slightly lower than normal. The increase of pork price is due to a temporary shortage of the supply of pigs from the farms consequent on the outbreak of swine fever in the latter part of last year. However, this shortage is only temporary and I expect the situation should improve when the young pigs at present in the farms have grown to marketable weight. ELECTRICITY SUPPLY (Complaints of voltage fluctuations) 7. Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will ascertain from the Public Utilities Board what steps will be taken to improve the electricity supply in areas where metal and wood works are carried out, as the operation of the heavy machinery used in those works often adversely affects the electricity supply to other consumers in the vicinity.”
“Sir, the Government does not consider that there is any need to control or interfere with the export trade of tropical fish and the Government does not intend to establish an agency for such control. However, I can assure the hon. Member for Punggol that the Primary Production Department is always in close contact with producers and exporters of tropical fish and, in fact, the Department renders considerable assistance to these exporters. MEASURES TO STABILISE PRICES OF PIGS AND POULTRY 6. Mr Hwang Soo Jin asked the Minister for Law and National Development what measures are being taken by the Primary Production Department to stabilise the prices of pigs and poultry.”
“If the area of the building is over 700 square feet, then you need an architect's plan. If the applicant can satisfy the third requirement which I have referred to - ground rent receipts and/or property tax receipts - to prove ownership of the building as against ownership of the land, then you do not require the landowner's permission. Perhaps in the cases referred to by the hon. Member, the applicants could not produce any documentary evidence of ownership of the building. I say "perhaps", but I would be happy to look into and cause investigations to be made in respect of any particular case of which the hon. Member may come to know. AGENCY FOR CONTROL AND EXPORT OF TROPICAL FISH 5. Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Minister for Law and National Development whether he will consider establishing an agency under Government supervision to assist in the control and export of tropical fish.”
“The policy of the Chief Building Surveyor's Department with regard to the submission of plans for the reconstruction of temporary dwelling structures in Alsagoff Estate is the same as that for all other areas in the Republic. Applications for reconstruction of temporary dwelling structures are required to be submitted with the following documents: (1) the sketch plan for the proposed structure; (2) a temporary permit licence issued by the Chief Building Surveyor's Department to prove that the existing structure is an authorised one; and (3) either ground rent receipts and/or property tax receipts to prove ownership of the building. The construction or reconstruction of temporary structures without the Chief Building Surveyor's permission is an offence under the law. In order to contain the growth of unauthorised structures which finally become slums, the Chief Building Surveyor's Department is continually taking enforcement action against the persons responsible.”
“Sir, most of the structures erected in Alsagoff Estate in Kampong Kembangan Constituency are unauthorised. Many of these structures are used as metal-works and saw-mills. Court action has been taken in respect of most of these structures, and the Chief Building Surveyor's Department will continue to take such action in this area which has become somewhat notorious for unauthorised structures. RECONSTRUCTION OF TEMPORARY DWELLING STRUCTURES (Policy on submission of plans) 4. Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi asked the Minister for Law and National Development what is the policy of the Chief Building Surveyor's Department in regard to the submission of plans for the reconstruction of temporary dwelling structures in Alsagoff Estate.”
“However, if in the future the need for a second carriageway arises, Jalan Bahar can be easily converted into a dual carriageway as all the necessary earthworks and kerbs have already been completed and only the metalling need be done. UNAUTHORISED STRUCTURES IN ALSAGOFF ESTATE 3. Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi asked the Minister for Law and National Development whether he can confirm that the many structures, erected in Alsagoff Estate in the Kampong Kembangan Constituency and used as metal-works and saw-mills, are authorised structures.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with the hon. Member that the drainage system in Joo Chiat Constituency is inadequate. This situation has been made worse by indiscriminate and thoughtless dumping of rubbish into the drains by some residents of the area. The lands in this area are generally low-lying and the drainage system rather antiquated. Overall radical improvement would be extremely costly and could only be carried out in conjunction with an urban renewal scheme. However, the Public Works Department is at present taking steps to carry out minor improvements to the main outlet drain running parallel to Haig Road and the subsidiary drains. The Department is also stepping up the making up of private streets in Joo Chiat. These works include the making up of earth drains into concrete ones. When these earth drains are reconstructed together with the other minor improvement works, the situation should improve. However, as my colleague, the Minister for Health, has pointed out the other day, the residents of the area must help to do their best to see that rubbish is not thrown into the drains. CONVERSION OF JALAN BAHAR INTO DUAL CARRIAGEWAY 2. Mr Ho Kah Leong asked the Minister for Law and National Development when work will commence on the conversion of the reserved portion of Jalan Bahar in the Jurong Constituency into a dual carriageway. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development (National Development Division) (Mr Ho Cheng Choon) (for the Minister for Law and National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, the existing single 24 feet wide carriageway of Jalan Bahar is sufficient to cater for the present volume of vehicular traffic.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek the general assent of hon. Members to move a motion for Parliament to adjourn at five o'clock today?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I propose that Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng be elected as Deputy Speaker of this House.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this Parliament, pursuant to subsection (2) of section 29 of the Registration of Deeds Ordinance (Chapter 255), resolves that the Registration of Deeds (Amendment) Rules, 1968, published as Notification No. S 121 in the Gazette Subsidiary Legislation Supplement No. 35 of 10th May, 1968, as contained in Paper S.L. 25 of 1968, be approved. Sir, the present fees payable to the Registry of Deeds under the Registration of Deeds Rules, 1934, have remained static for the last 10 years. A review of the position shows that the administrative cost of operating the Registry exceeds the revenue derived. It is, therefore, necessary to revise the fees to cover the administrative cost of maintaining the necessary personnel and machinery for the purpose of benefiting landowners. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, pursuant to subsection (2) of section 29 of the Registration of Deeds Ordinance (Chapter 255), resolves that the Registration of Deeds (Amendment) Rules, 1968, published as Notification No. S 121 in the Gazette Subsidiary Legislation Supplement No. 35 of 10th May, 1968, as contained in Paper S.L. 25 of 1968, be approved. EMPLOYMENT BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.37 p.m.”
“You will appreciate, Sir, that in cases involving the award of substantial damages, the dependants could, therefore, suffer a considerable loss by the operation of these common law rules. The present Bill is, therefore, designed to remedy this state of affairs and to give statutory relief in the manner described in clause 2 to the dependants of deceased persons whose death is caused in the circumstances contemplated by section 12 of the Ordinance. The effect of the amending legislation will accordingly be that the court will be debarred from taking into account any pension, gratuity or other payment which may be payable on death when making an award under the above-mentioned section. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill does not introduce a novel principle into the law. Section 12 of the Ordinance already provides that the court, when making an award, shall not take into account any sum payable to dependants of the deceased under any insurance policy. In this context, there is little difference in principle between the payment of insurance monies and the payment of a pension or gratuity as a result of death. The Government, therefore, considers that as a measure of relief to dependants, pension monies payable as a result of death should be treated in the same way as insurance monies and not, therefore, be taken into account by the court when an award of damages is made under that section of the Civil Law Ordinance. 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 Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. TREASURY BILLS 3.33 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." As you know, Sir, section 12 of the Civil Law Ordinance (Chapter 24) provides for compensation to be paid to the family of a person for loss occasioned by his death caused by the wrongful act, neglect or default of another. Notwithstanding the death of the person injured, an action can be brought in court by his executor for the benefit of his wife, husband, parent and child, and in every such action the court may give such damages as it thinks fit proportionately to the loss resulting from such death to the dependants respectively for whom and for whose benefit such action was brought. In the present state of the law, however, any damages awarded by a court would be reduced by the amount of any pension or gratuity payable on the death of the deceased. The court in reducing an award follows well-established common law rules. Mr Speaker, Sir, the operation of these rules often gives rise to hardship. The dependants of the deceased who are entitled to receive the pension or gratuity on his death are, in fact, placed at a disadvantage compared to the dependants of a deceased who are not so entitled. This is not difficult to appreciate if one recalls that the person entitled to receive a pension normally earns a reduced salary during his working life to compensate for the pension element payable when lie ceases to work, and it is this reduced salary that the court uses as a basis for assessing damages for the loss of future earnings. The dependants are further penalised because the court deducts from the total amount of damages to be awarded the amount of pension that is to be paid to the dependants.”
“I have two, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek your consent and the general assent of hon. Members to move a motion to bring forward the moment of interruption to 5.15 p.m. and the time for the termination of the sitting to 5.45 p.m. at today's sitting?”
“They say that it is against their social conscience if these offenders are returned because, on conviction, they are liable to be hanged. Our argument is that the crime is committed here. And surely the punishment to be meted out should be in accordance with our laws, not theirs. I merely raise this matter because, as between country A and country B, there may be modifications to the scheme. Some countries may not choose to return offenders for certain offences. Hence the provision enabling the Minister to vary the Schedule. But I give the hon. Member my assurance that we will not vary the Schedule in respect of crimes that have already been committed in order to fix someone who has done it and is about to run away. 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 Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. MEDICINES (ADVERTISEMENT AND SALE) (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 6.26 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I did say in my opening speech that Part V of the Bill deals with extradition to and from Malaysia and provides a simple and expeditious procedure for the return of fugitive offenders from Singapore to Malaysia. As the Member for Bukit Panjang well knows, we were not very long ago a part of Malaysia. For historical reasons, we are more closely connected with Malaysia than with other countries. As far as foreign countries are concerned, it is not so easy to come to some extradition treaty. Hence the difference between the procedure for the extradition of fugitives from Singapore to Malaysia and those to and from Commonwealth and foreign countries. The procedure for extradition as between Commonwealth countries was agreed to at the London Law Conference which I mentioned. The procedure for extradition between Singapore and Malaysia has been agreed to between Singapore and Malaysia. As for the Schedule, the Minister has powers to vary it. But here again the list of offences that are specified as extraditable offences as far as the Commonwealth is concerned, was again agreed to after a long argument at the London Law Conference. It forms part of a common scheme which has been adopted by the Commonwealth countries subject to variations or modifications as each country chooses to adopt. There has been one difficulty, which is this. If you commit the offence of murder in Singapore, you are liable to be sentenced to be hanged. As Members well know, the United Kingdom have got rid of capital punishment perhaps to suit their own local social conditions. Our conditions are different. They want a discretion - a discretion not to return persons who commit murder in Singapore and run to the United Kingdom.”
“These provisions provide for Magistrates to issue or endorse warrants rather than the more complicated "requisition to Minister" procedure laid down for surrender of fugitives to foreign and other Commonwealth countries. They also extend to a wider range of offences than is the case with foreign and other Commonwealth countries. The Explanatory Statement to the Bill describes in some detail the nature of the various provisions in the Bill and I do not propose to elaborate on them. In closing, I would, for the information of Members, mention that enabling legislation giving effect to the common scheme has already been enacted in the United Kingdom, Australia and Malaysia - there may well be others. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 6.10 p.m.”
“The common scheme, which has been written into this Bill, is significant since it incorporates a revised list of agreed extraditable offences, which will have application not only with regard to extradition as between Singapore and other Commonwealth countries, but also (subject to treaty) as between Singapore and foreign states. For the sake of clarity, I should mention at this point that the distinction that is made in the United Kingdom Acts between the expression "extradition" as applying to surrender of fugitive criminals among independent states and the expression "fugitive offenders" as being restricted to cases of surrender as between different parts of the British Commonwealth, now disappears. Indeed, as the Bill makes clear, the provisions dealing with surrender to foreign states follow much the same pattern as those dealing with surrender to Commonwealth countries. Mr Speaker, Sir, Members will notice that the United Kingdom Acts to which I have referred are repealed by this proposed legislation. It will further be observed that the Malaysian Warrants and Summons (Special Provisions) Act, 1965, is also repealed. The reason for this is that the same ground is covered by Part V of the Bill dealing with extradition to and from Malaysia. This Part provides a simple and expeditious procedure for the return of fugitive offenders from Singapore to Malaysia. It is the sort of simplified procedure as between neighbouring countries that was envisaged in the common scheme. Malaysia in its Commonwealth Fugitive Criminals Act, 1967 (No. 54 of 1967) has included corresponding provisions.”
“Our Laws have been derived from two English Statutes - the Extradition Act, 1870, which applies to extradition to foreign countries and the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, which applies to extradition among Commonwealth countries. Both these Statutes have outlived their usefulness. Not only is their continued existence incompatible with the independent and sovereign status of Singapore but also, since they belong to another age, they fail to take into account modern concepts that have now become part of extradition laws in the Commonwealth. For example, they do not provide for a state to refuse extradition of a person who is to be charged with or surrendered for a political offence or for an offence of a political character. Apart from anything else, it is clearly right and proper that Singapore should now be able of its own accord to enter into extradition treaties with foreign states though the treaties already made by the United Kingdom and Malaysia on behalf of Singapore will continue to apply until such time as the Government decides that they should cease so to apply. With regard to Commonwealth countries there will be no necessity to enter into bilateral treaties, for a common scheme for extradition was agreed to at the Commonwealth Law Ministers Conference held in May 1966, in London at which I represented Singapore. It was agreed at that meeting that this common scheme should apply to all Commonwealth countries and is to be included in the legislation of each country; though this does not preclude modification of the general scheme in certain circumstances.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill seeks to provide for the extradition of fugitives - in other words, the surrender of a fugitive criminal by one state to another in which he is liable to be punished or has been convicted. It may be of interest to Members if, before moving on to the historical background of the law of extradition that is at present in force in Singapore, I say a few words on the theoretical basis of this law. In theory no state can be called upon to enforce through its tribunals the penal laws of other states, or to try a person for an offence alleged to have been committed beyond its frontiers, if a man commits a crime in China, you do not try him in Singapore, and vice versa. The principles of the independence and sovereignty of each country militate against any such obligation. It has, however, for a long time been recognised by various states that it is not in their interest to afford refuge to criminals from other countries. On the contrary, it is in their interests to return the fugitive criminal for trial and punishment to the state in which the offence was committed or in which the criminal was convicted. Involving, therefore, as it does the extension of the criminal jurisdiction of one state beyond its own territorial limits into those of another, extradition forms, at the present day, an important and integral part of Public International Law, and is as such, apart from international comity, generally regulated by mutual arrangement or treaty between the various states. Most states in the modern world have extradition laws in force. With these few remarks, I will now survey the historical background to the existing extradition laws in Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I must emphasise that it is not the purpose of this Bill to deprive any person of his rights under a patent. Its main aim is to secure that inventions whose exploitation would be of economic benefit to Singapore are commercially worked locally. 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 Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. EXTRADITION BILL Order for Second Reading read. 6.00 p.m.”
“The Registrar is empowered in clause 7 to revoke a patent under certain circumstances two years after he has granted a licence to manufacture in Singapore the invention to which the patent relates. These provisions are necessary to encourage the commercial working of recent inventions in Singapore and will benefit our industrialisation programme. The Minister will have power to add to the list in the said Schedule as and when required. In clause 10, the Registrar is empowered, where the patentee and the licensee are unable to agree on the amount of the royalty or compensation, to determine the amount of royalty or compensation payable to the patentee under a compulsory licence but such royalty or compensation shall not exceed ten per cent of the net ex-factory sale price in bulk of the patented article. The Bill also provides that the rights conferred by a patent shall not be deemed to be infringed by the making, importation or obtaining by or on behalf of the Government of any patented medicine or drug for distribution or use in any dispensary, hospital or other medical institution maintained by or on behalf of the Government or otherwise specified by the Minister by notification in the Gazette. The patentee shall be notified by the Government as soon as practicable of such making or user and in default of any agreement between the patentee and the Government, the Registrar may determine the amount of royalty or compensation payable to the patentee, but such royalty or compensation shall not exceed five per cent of the net ex-factory sale price in bulk of the patented article. An appeal lies against any decision of the Registrar to an Appeal Tribunal to be presided over by a Judge of the High Court.”
“A compulsory licence is an authorisation given by a competent authority to a person other than the owner of the patent to make, sell, use and exercise the patented product even though the beneficiary of the compulsory licence has no authorisation from the owner of the patent. Although the laws of many countries provide for compulsory licences, in actual fact, the number of cases in which these provisions have been invoked are relatively few. This is no indication that the system of compulsory licences has not attained the main objective for which it was created. This objective is to cause the working of the patented invention in the country. If the owner of a patent does not work his invention or hesitates to grant contractual licences on reasonable terms, the mere fact that the law empowers the granting of compulsory licences for the manufacture of his invention will usually induce him to grant licences by contract on reasonable terms. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill in clauses 3 and 5 empowers the Registrar of Patents to grant compulsory licences in respect of the making, using, exercising and vending of patented inventions concerned with food or medicine or a surgical or curative device and also on certain grounds - in respect of classes of inventions listed in the Schedule to the Bill. Clause 5 however provides that the Registrar shall not grant a licence in respect of a patented food, medicine or surgical or curative device if the patentee satisfies him that he has already established or is about to establish an industry in Singapore for the making of such food, medicine or surgical or curative device.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The law in force at present in Singapore relating to patents is contained in the Registration of United Kingdom Patents Ordinance (Cap. 181) which provides for the registration in Singapore of patents granted in the United Kingdom. Such registration confers privileges and rights relating to the invention similar in all respects to those conferred by the issue of the patent in the United Kingdom. There are, however, no provisions in our Ordinance to require patentees to work their inventions in Singapore. There are also no provisions empowering the Registrar of Patents in Singapore to grant compulsory licences for the making, using, exercising and vending of patented inventions in Singapore. The result is that owners of patents registered in Singapore have in most cases not bothered to work their inventions in Singapore. This is particularly evident in the field of patented medicines and drugs. The demand for patented medicines in Singapore, therefore, can only be met by importation which has caused a substantial loss in foreign exchange. An analysis of major patented pharmaceutical products purchased by private consumers shows that there would be a saving in foreign exchange of about $2 million per year if local manufacturers are permitted to manufacture patented drugs. Important drugs, which if manufactured in Singapore can be made available at lower costs, are being imported and sold to local consumers at higher prices. In order to make available such drugs to the public at reasonable prices and in order to develop our pharmaceutical industry, a system of compulsory licensing is urgently required.”
“Barker Mr Ho See Beng Mr Hwang Soo Jin Mr Lee Teck Him Mr Lim Soo Peng Mr Phua Bah Lee Mr P. Selvadurai." -[Mr Barker]. PATENTS (COMPULSORY LICENSING) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 5.49 p.m.”
“But this will vary not only from business to business but also from place to place. The Member for Joo Chiat wants to know why we do not declare the whole island a designated area. To do that would raise even a bigger howl. I think it would be best that we proceed cautiously and designate only certain areas as a start, probably the area within a mile of Raffles Place. I say, "for a start" and, then we go on. The areas to be designated will be designated by the Minister but, of course, on the recommendations of his planners and other urban renewal experts. When the Board first starts to sit, we do not want to flood it with so many applications. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Anson, who is not here, raised certain questions of law as to why sub-tenants who under the principal tenancy should not have gone into the premises are barred by this Ordinance from getting compensation; for even under the Control of Rent Ordinance, the landlord can recover possession of the premises from his principal tenant if under the principal contract of tenancy, subletting is prohibited and the principal tenant sublets. It is a contractual obligation which, if broken, gives the landlord certain remedies. If I let out my house to you on condition that you do not let it out to anyone else, and you do, well, you are looking for trouble. And so is that somebody else who takes it from you. Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think I need say much more except that I should put on the Select Committee Members of this House who have shown such great interest in the Bill. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time. Resolved, "That the Bill be committed to Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and seven Members as follows: Mr E. W.”
“It is only when a tenancy exists that the protection of the Control of Rent Ordinance comes into force. These are all rather complicated problems. And it is no use evicting only tenants and sub-tenants without getting an order against licensees and trespassers because then you will have to go to the High Court to evict trespassers and licensees. It will be a long time before you get judgment in your favour and there can be appeal after appeal. But the Member for Bukit Panjang, who is a lawyer himself and who understands these problems, has made many important points. He is worried about the order of the Board being a final order. He wants an appeal at least on a question of law. I would agree that, as far as the amount of compensation is concerned, there should be no appeal as in land acquisition cases. But when there is an issue as to whether a man is a tenant or a licensee or a trespasser, then the Board may slip up. But these are matters which the Select Committee can deal with. I am sure the legal profession itself will make representations, if not similar then somewhat on the same lines as have been made by the Member for Bukit Panjang. As for compensation, in my opening speech I said that the formula was not a perfect formula and I would be happy if any Member in this House could suggest or devise a perfect formula. Roughly, we work on the lines that reasonable compensation would be somewhat equivalent to the tea money which is being paid in Singapore for a transfer of the tenancy or for the surrender of possession. But, obviously, even the amount of tea money varies. You pay more tea money for business premises than for a residence. Hence eight years' rent for business and six years' rent for residential premises.”