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 35 of 44.
“The reason that has been put forward for flooding is a high tide accompanied by very heavy rain. But it is significant that in Singapore we do not have the floods that Malaysia has, unfortunately, to undergo. At present, there are floods in Kota Tinggi which were caused by heavy rain over a fortnight. In Singapore, we are inconvenienced more than anything else. But we have measures and schemes which are being put into operation. But I doubt very much whether we can reach the happy position where there will be no flooding in any street in Singapore. All you have to have is a high spring tide and you will have floods in Telok Ayer. After all, we are a small island and it is difficult to keep the tides out. When the high tide comes in and the rain pours, we are in trouble. But a major scheme is being undertaken along Bukit Timah Road where, as I have stated in the House before, we are cutting two canals - one to Ulu Pandan and the other to Kallang - to divert the flood waters from the Bukit Timah area into Ulu Pandan and Kallang, so that if the floods are not completely eliminated in the more seriously affected areas like the University area, at least the severity of the floods will be considerably reduced. Madam Chan Choy Siong(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the questions raised by me have not been answered directly by the Minister. If I put my amendment to the vote, I will not get anywhere. So I beg leave to withdraw. Mr Teong Eng Siong rose ---”
“I am afraid I am at a disadvantage, Sir, because I do not have my earphone and I do not understand Mandarin. 6.45 p.m. He refers to one case, Arab Street, from where he takes his taxi to Sembawang, and there is a demand for taxi-stands there. I assume he has been going to Arab Street for a long time. I am surprised that he has just had occasion to raise this complaint in Parliament. He praises me and my Ministry for the work done and at the same time he says that probably I have not got the time to deal with all these little matters. I can assure him that I have plenty of time to deal with every little matter which he wishes to put on my desk. I will certainly go into this. I am only sorry that it was not raised earlier. Hundreds of complaints and grouses come up to my Ministry and all are investigated. He has also suggested a supervisory committee in respect of the Urban and Rural Services Committee. We already have one committee, the U.R.S.C. We now have another committe called the Projects Committe to look into requests approved or disapproved by the U.R.S.C. There was an adjournment debate in this House running down the Projects Committee. "Two committees were too much." And now he wants a third committee called the Supervisory Committee to look after contractors and complaints. Complaints can always be sent to the U.R.S.C., whether in respect of contractors or otherwise. Sir, I will be brief in dealing with the Member for Jurong who, in my view, was out of order when he spoke on floods. Many questions have been asked in this House about floods and flooded areas and the schemes and measures we have to alleviate these floods. I do not propose to go into the details again.”
“If I have finished with the Member for Mountbatten on the question of pigs, I am prepared to give way for clarification. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 6.35 p.m. The Member for Mountbatten alleges that the Danish design of the abattoir does not suit local pigs. This I find it difficult to understand. I am sure the shape of the pigs here is the sanie as that in Denmark, and I am not sure that our pigs are bigger than the Danish pigs. I thought it was the other way round. I will now listen to the Member for Aljunied.”
“Yes, by manual slaughtering. And you give me the credit of knowing the difference between the ahattoir at French Road and the abattoir at Jurong. I am not conversant with the facts that both Members allege. In fact, as far as I am aware, before the swine fever epidemic. 3,000 pigs a day were being slaughtered. Assuming the Member for Aljunied's figures are correct, 100 pigs per hour working 24 hours = 2,400 pigs. This is still less than the number of pigs slaughtered before. But after the swine fever epidemic had started and after rumours about eating vaccinated pork went round Singapore, people were afraid to consume pork and the number of pigs slaughtered dropped from 3,000 to 100. No pigs were slaughtered, not because the abattoirs had not the means, hut because butchers could not sell their pork and farmers were not interested in having their pigs slaughtered.”
“Sir, if I can deal with the question of the abattoir', according to the Member for Aljunied, the number of pigs that can be slaughtered at the abattoir at French Road is 100 pigs an hour. An hon. Member: Manual slaughtering?”
“In removing standpipes, it does not mean that we are not putting up new ones. Many hawkers who sell food at their stalls require standpipes. And it is our policy, if possible, to have clean food. The Member for Changi knows the hawker situation in Singapore - all he has to do is to take a trip round the town at night and he will see hundreds of hawkers. Car parks used as car parks during the day are used by hawkers at night. These hawkers need standpipes, and certain kampongs do need standpipes, as they have no alter native sources of water supply. Hence, the same figure.”
“If any standpipe has been removed without a notice, or removed after a notice had been served and representations made, then the standpipe was removed by mistake. And all the M.P. has to do is to point out that mistake and the standpipe will be restored. It is quite easy to seal and then unseal a standpipe. Sir, before I end, the Member may he interested to know that I am not in charge of standpipes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Changi is well aware of the Government's policy, which is to cut down consumption of water at public standpipes. At the moment, it has been raining so heavily in Singapore and South Johore that we are in the happy position of having all our reservoirs in Johore full to the brim, and in Singapore, both MacRitchie and Peirce Reservoirs have about 90 per cent of water capacity. 6.00 p.m. But we have decided to cut down the number of standpipes - not to take water away from the population, but to remove the standpipes and instead supply water direct to houses. So that if in the future - this is a big "if" - we have to impose water rationing, there will be less confusion at stand-pipes and it will be easier to impose a fair method of water rationing. The Member is right when he says that 150 standpipes have been removed this year. In fact, the correct figure is 154. But before action is taken to remove public standpipes, circulars are issued by the Secretary of the Urban and Rural Services Committee informing Members of Parliament, and through them the Citizens' Consultative Committees of various constituencies, that certain standpipes will have to be removed. The circular points out that representations should be made to the ad hoc committee which is looking after this matter, that these representations will be considered, and that no stand-pipes will be removed until further notice is given to the effect that any representation has been accepted or rejected. But I can assure the hon. Member for Changi that the policy is to remove a standpipe only if it serves very few people or, if it serves many people, not to remove it until these people have alternative supplies of water.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I can assure the Member for Kampong Kernbangan that the slaughtering of cattle, cows, goats and sheep is carried out in accordance with Muslim rites for the benefit of the Muslim population. The Muslim Advisory Board was consulted on the operation of the Jurong Abattoir to ensure that Muslim requirements are complied with. In fact, one of the requirements is that workers carrying out the slaughtering of animals eaten by Muslims must be approved persons. The slaughtering of pigs is completely separated from that of cattle, cows, goats and sheep to satisfy religious requirements. In fact, the Muslim Advisory Board has been frequently consulted on various aspects of the slaughter-house. The principal objectives of the construction of the new abattoir are to improve the hygienic standard of slaughter and to promote the canning and processing of meat and meat products for export. The Member can rest assured that in the attainment of these objectives, we have not forgotten Muslim rites and wishes.”
“Perhaps I heard the translation wrongly, Sir. But the Member for Sembawang talked about certain areas being marked out as zoned areas under the Master Plan. It has still got nothing to do with the Land Office. I am merely saying that if you are interested in electricity, it is the P.U.B, who deals with it, and that if you are interested in house numbers, it is the Property Tax Department who handles this matter. These amendments should have been moved when the relevant Ministry was being discussed. But please do not think that I do not have the answers to the questions and that, therefore, I am shifting the blame on to another Minister. Madam Chan Choy Siong: I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $765,330 for Head 1105 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. Head 1107 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo - That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad at least that the Member has clarified this and made it clear that the Land Office does not demolish structures without adequate notices, in fact, many an application for extension is given provided the circumstances warrant it. But to plead ignorance on the part of rural dwellers is, I think, not the basic cause. Anyone who is a licensee of Government land is issued with a piece of paper called a "Temporary Occupation Licence" and on this licence are recorded the terms and conditions. Surely, however ignorant a licensee may be, he can enquire from the Land Office when he gets his licence as to what these conditions mean, or he can enquire from the Member for Jurong as to what these terms mean. But it is usual in Singapore for anyone who breaches the law to plead ignorance. So many pieces of land are let out on T.O.L.s. So many unauthorised houses are built. The usual answer is ignorance. The sending out of land officers to educate the rural folks is not, in my view, the answer. If I may deal with the Member for Sembawang, he made a rather general statement that the Land Office should realise that Singapore is developing. I can assure him that we do realise that Singapore is developing. He talked about electricity and house numbers. Electricity is a matter for the P.U.B. and the allocation of house numbers is a matter for the Property Tax Department. It is not my habit to hide under the skirt of another Minister --- Mr Teong Eng Siong rose - Mr Barker resumed his seat.”
“He referred not only to the rebuilding of houses but repairs of buildings and 1 assume, as we are discussing Head 1105 - Land Office - that he refers to structures on State land; otherwise he would be out of order. When State land is occupied, it is usually occupied on what is called a temporary occupation licence for which a fee is payable and for which certain conditions are laid down. If the licensee desires to repair his house or to extend it, then he has to get the pernhission of the owner, the Land Office. We are not against poor tenants or poor licensees rebuilding or repairing their houses. But licensees are usually compensated when they are ejected, and the bigger the house, the greater the compensation. It is for this reason that these conditions are imposed so that the Land Office knows what is happening to the particular piece of land which is let out on licence. 5.45 p.m. A more serious allegation by the Member for Jurong is that no notices are given when officers of the Land Office move in to demolish buildings and that there is a lack of courtesy on the part of land officers.”
“First, may I deal with the Member for Delta? Somehow I have a feeling that she did not really have much to say. She was merely moving an amendment in her name to give other Back-benchers an opportunity to say what they wanted to. She said that we were acquiring vacant pieces of land and yet there were many pieces of land not occupied in Singapore which belong to the Government. This must be as it is. Certain lands are reserved for future development, and on some, development is not even allowed, maybe because it is agricultural land or a green belt. We cannot have buildings on every acre of land in Singapore. If I may come to the Member for Jurong. He referred to an honest P.A.P. Government and said that there were many cases pending. I do not know what cases he is referring to. But he mentioned one in particular about a resident who desired to exchange his piece of land with Crown land. Well, it is not the usual practice of Government to exchange Crown land for private pieces of land. But we sometimes do this to accommodate the private owner. He said that this particular case has been pending for two years, and he thought that delay might mean corruption. Mr Speaker, Sir, I said many a time in this House that making general allegations of corruption in this House gets us nowhere. If you have a specific complaint, make it and the C.P.I.B. will investigate. He also referred to many other cases of owners wishing to rebuild their houses and referred to delay. According to him, this delay was purposely imposed so that perhaps the staff of the Land Office could get some benefit. Here again if he has any specific instances, let my Ministry know. We can investigate.”
“So perhaps the Ministers set the level above which no one can go very far. But when we tell the labourer in the street that we cannot increase his salary, certainly hon. Members will agree that we cannot increase our own. As for the commercial court -the point raised by the Member for Bukit Panjang I will just say a few words, Sir. There already exist in the Rules of the Supreme Court special rules and regulations that have been devised solely to accommodate the commercial community in Singapore. Indeed a commercial court can be said to be already in existence. But, unfortunately, those practising at the Bar have not seen fit to invoke the use of these Rules which will in turn establish the commercial practice at the Bar. While it is conceded that there may be a need for a commercial court charged with the adjudication of commercial matters, it would appear, from the use made of the Commercial Code Rules or rather the lack of such use, that the time is not ripe for the appointment of Judges solely with the object of establishing a commercial court. 3.30 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, everyone wants a rise in salary, but one increase leads to another. The Member says, Increase the Judges' salaries, because the practitioners outside get more money." I agree that because of our present scales of salary, it is very difficult for anyone at the Bar to give up his practice to become even the Chief Justice. The amount of income tax any leading lawyer pays exceeds the salary of any of the Judges. But if you up the Judges' salaries, how far do you go? A Minister gets $2,500 a month. An hon. Member: Good enough!”
“On the first point of the appointment of magistrates straight from the university -to put it that way -I agree with both Members. There is much merit in what they say. I myself have had similar experience at the Bar when appearing before magistrates who had no experience on the Bench. My clients therefore suffered and we had to take the matter up to High Court. But I think both Members know -and I need not repeat at length what I have said just now -that these are matters for the Legal Service Commission which is certainly not under my control. The only person I can speak to is the Attorney-General. I will present the Members' views to him and ask him to present them to the Commission. As for the composition of the Legal Service Commission, I also agree with the Member for Bukit Panjang that, as far as legal appointments are concerned, there should be more men on that Commission with legal experience than the position as it is today -three men from the Public Service Commission, the Chief Justice, a Judge and the Attorney-General. If there is a split in the votes, the Chief Justice will have a casting vote, but I am sure he will not be very happy if he has to cast his extra vote. I assure the Member for Bukit Panjang that these are matters which will be considered seriously by the Government when the new Constitution is finally drafted. In fact, it has been drafted and will be circulated amongst the Ministers and Ministries for their comments, and this is a point that we will consider when the new Constitution is finally put before this House.”
“But shortly, Sir, it is the Legal Service Commission which is responsible for the transfers, appointments as well as confirmation of all legal officers. These officers are not my men, and the members of the Commission will know the reasons why a certain officer is kept either in the Courts or in the Chambers or transferred from one Court to another. I am afraid I have no jurisdiction over the matter.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the matters raised by the Member for Choa Chu Kang are wholly within the province, as it were, of the Legal Service Commission. This Commission is, by the provisions of the Constitution, independent of the Government. But there are six members of the Legal Service Commission. 3.15 p.m. It consists of the Chief Justice as Chairman, a Judge, the Chairman of the Public Service Commission and two other members of the Public Service Commission, together with the Attorney-General. I can only speak on behalf of one member, and that is the Attorney-General. He assures me that law graduates fresh from the University who are appointed to the Bench straightaway are normally given an opportunity to broaden their field of experience long before their period of probation expires, so that by the time they come up for confirmation or entry into the legal service proper, they would, in the majority of cases, have held appointments in his Chambers as well as in the Courts. The Chairman: Mr Barker, I am afraid you must shorten your remarks.”
“I have already said just now that my sympathies are with the Member for Kampong Kembangan. Just as you want more money for Kampong Kembangan, I want more money for Tanglin. The Member for Choa Chu Kang wants more money for Choa Chu Kang and the Member for Punggol wants more money for Punggol. But I think you know what has happened this year. For Kampong Kembangan, the funds have been utilised but we did approve certain projects over and above the limited funds available. Funds that have not been used in other constituencies have been used in several constituencies. I think the Member for Kampong Kembangan made the point that now I know all the requirements in Kampong Kembangan. I am afraid I do not. I know some of the requirements of the other constituencies, and I am continually reminded about them when I make a courtesy visit to any of the constituencies - to open a community centre or join with Members in the celebration of some anniversary. I am always met with requests for water mains, electricity and roads. Frankly, I will be happy to give Members all they ask, but I am afraid I cannot because the funds available are limited and the Minister for Finance is the big boss.”
“Most of the expenditure under subhead 202 was of an unforeseen nature and had to be incurred to meet actual requirements in the rural areas during the course of the year. Funds had to be expended to upgrade certain rural roads and tracks, and to improve or divert existing drainage systems as and when necessary. There was also the provision for new roads and drains, public utility services such as electricity, water and sewers for major development areas in Pasir Laba, Bukit Timah, Ulu Pandan and Bedok; unfortunately not in Kampong Kembangan. The Member for Kampong Kembangan always rises in this House to ask for more funds for his constituency to build and improve the existing roads or build new roads. I remember visiting his constituency at a celebration in connection with a community centre and I was asked when the road that led to the centre would be improved. That has been done. May I state openly to the Member for Kampong Kembangan that my sympathies are completely with him, but the man behind the purse is the Hon. Minister for Finance. Though I can support his representations to get more money for every constituency, I am afraid I also have to convince the Minister for Finance who, I am sure, has the interest of Singapore at heart - An hon. Member: Hear, hear! Mr Barker: And knows how much money he can spend on rural projects.”
“Others are the Registry of Companies, the Immigration Department depots, Moulmein Road X-Ray Centre, the United Kingdom Bases Run-down Unit, and, what happens to be in the public eye these days, the conversion of the school at Chestnut Drive into a court house. Lastly, major renovations were done to some buildings to keep them in good repair or to convert them to serve new purposes. These include the weigh-bridge at Tampines dumping grounds, the National Library garages and a sewage pumping house in Ulu Pandan.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as my colleague, the Minister for Finance, has pointed out, it is sometimes difficult to anticipate this expenditure, and as he has also pointed out, we have only come back to Parliament once, not twice or three times. To deal with the specific subhead 102, which is "Major Construction and Renovation to Government Buildings", the additional funds are in fact required to meet expenditure for the maintenance, renovation and redecoration of many Government buildings as part of an overall plan of expansion of the services and additions of responsibilities of various Ministries and departments. Unfortunately, many of these items could not have been foreseen in 1966, but nevertheless had to be implemented on a rather urgent basis in 1967. Examples of these are as follows. First, certain funds had to be made available to convert and renovate some premises for the Public Health Transport Centre to enable the emergency cleansing scheme to operate properly. This should meet the approval of Members. Second, many of our public office buildings had to be given major reconstruction and renovation and these include such big buildings as the City Hall, the Fullerton Building, the C.I.D. building and a few others. Several new offices were set up and major alterations and renovations had to be effected to make them suitable to serve the purposes intended. Hon. Members will have read Press reports to the effect that we are making efforts to promote tourism and we have started a school for waiters. One of the buildings is the Hotel and Catering Institute.”
“Many acquisitions have been delayed because we preferred to wait for the new Act to come into force before starting acquisition proceedings. The Court itself has had several sittings this year and made certain awards which, of course, had cost the Government a little money. A break-down of the expenditure already incurred and which is to be incurred under the Board this year is as follows: Amount expended: (a) For general development $2,284,354.49 (b) For other projects $1,945,188.40 ------------- Total $4,229,542.89 ============= The approximate amount required to complete five acquisitions is $1,219,025. These two figures added give a sum of $5,448,567.89. If one subtracts the sum of $4 million from the sum I have just mentioned, the balance will be $1,448,567.89, approximately $1½ million. Sir, I have already bothered the learned Member with figures. I could give him further figures, but I think I will be merely wasting his time.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Development Estimates for 1967 provide the Land Office with a provision of $4 million under the title "Land Acquisition for General Development". This vote is intended to meet expenditure incurred under the following headings: (a) Acquisition or purchase of land for general development, for example, fire sites, urban renewal, parcels of land which may be offered for sale to the State although not needed immediately for a public purpose but whose purchase is deemed desirable for long-term development, for example, the old Admiralty House in Grange Road purchased from the United Kingdom Government in 1963: land in Ulu Pandan purchased in 1967 to allow for the enlargement of a site adjacent thereto; and (b) supplementary awards arising from appeals to the Appeals Board or from settlement out of court; (c) supplementary awards resulting from surveyings completed after the acquisition indicating that more land has been taken than originally stated and thereby necessitating additional compensation to the owner from whom the land was taken. Although an amount of $4 million was provided for, an additional sum of about $1½ million, approximately $1,448,567.89, further particulars of which I will give later, is now required as a result of increases in the awards made by the Appeals Board and in order to complete acquisitions approved this year. This additional sum will enable acquisition proceedings to be finalised in a number of cases this year. Hon. Members will remember that the Land Acquisition Act, which was long delayed partly because we were in Malaysia, was finally approved sometime last year and made enforceable sometime this year.”
“"Any person" means what it says. It will include any lawyer. But this Bill covers offences not committed, as it were, in the face of the court. A lawyer could misbehave in the face of the court or in the precincts of a court house, and the fact that he is a lawyer will not give him any protection. If he is handling the case in court, then, of course, it is up to the magistrate to deal with him if he misbehaves, under the powers of contempt of court for contempt committed in the face of the court, which powers the magistrate has. Even before the recent amendments to these Ordinances, any lawyer misbehaving in court could be convicted for contempt of court by the magistrate or the judge hearing the case. 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. ADJOURNMENT TO A DATE TO BE FIXED Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." -[Mr Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Thirteen minutes past Five o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed. APPENDIX TO ORAL ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.9 (Cols. 372-4) (Cols 0401-0402)”
“The present Bill can be said to go hand in hand with the amendment to section 368 of the Criminal Procedure Code in increasing penalties for those convicted of offences committed with the sole purpose of expressing their contempt and disrespect for the law. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“In order that a sufficient deterrent may be imposed for such transgressions of the law, it has been thought appropriate that there should be corresponding increases in the penalties that may be imposed for such offences as for those where the misbehaviour is in the face of the court itself. Accordingly, therefore, it is now provided in this Bill to increase the penalties, in the case of a first conviction for riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour in the places specified in the Bill, to a fine not exceeding $250. The alternative punishment of imprisonment has also been correspondingly enhanced to a term not exceeding one month, and in the case of a second or subsequent conviction, the maximum fine is increased to a sum not exceeding $500 and imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months. Section 21 as it now stands combines the offence of drunkenness and disorderly behaviour as a result of inebriety with disorderly behaviour that is intentional and calculated to bring about disrespect and contempt for the administration of the law. And the amendment that is to be brought about to the law accordingly seeks to separate these acts from the remainder of the provisions in the present section 21 of the Minor Offences Ordinance, and it is only where the riotous, disorderly and indecent behaviour takes place in any public road or in any public place or place of public amusement or resort, or in the immediate vicinity of or in any court or public office, police station or place of worship, that the offence would attract such enhanced punishment contemplated by this Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Bill now before the House seeks to amend section 21 of the Minor Offences Ordinance. The amendment has been rendered necessary by reason of the inadequacy of the present penalties contained in the Minor Offences Ordinance for such offences as riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour within the precincts of a court house. Hon. Members will remember that a few months ago section 368 of the Criminal Procedure Code was amended enhancing penalties which may be imposed for contempt of court where such contempt is committed in the face of the court. The very same reasons that had rendered necessary the amendment of section 368 of the Criminal Procedure Code also made it necessary for Government to seek an amendment to section 21 of the Minor Offences Ordinance. This section, as it now stands, would make it an offence punishable with a mere $20 at the most in the first instance for such riotous behaviour in court that is not committed in the presence of a magistrate and would accordingly escape the provisions of section 368 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Technically speaking, therefore, as the law now stands, riotous behaviour even in court before the magistrate comes on the Bench can only be punished under section 2] of the Minor Offences Ordinance which carries a fine not exceeding $20. This, as hon. Members will agree, is wholly out of proportion to the seriousness of such an offence. Indeed, the inadequacy of the penalty in this respect has been somewhat underlined in the recent disturbances in the magistrates' courts where the accused and their friends and their supporters have caused riotous and disorderly behaviour within the compound of the courts.”
“So on that note, Sir, may I end? 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. INCOME TAX (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.20 p.m.”
“Sir, may I thank the Members of the House who have spoken on the Bill for their views and their support? [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 4.13 p.m. In particular, I would like to thank the Member for Southern Islands who, though naturally sorry that his Islands will find no seat for him, has supported the Bill without any reservations. As to the Member who would rather have Kampong Ubi called Geylang Bahru or Geylang Maju, I do not see anything wrong in the name. There have been, in fact, some objections to the English names, for example, Alexandra and Macpherson, but these new constituencies have been named Alexandra and Macpherson for so long that all you have to do when you take a taxi is to say, "Alexandra" and the taxi- driver will bring you there. So these place names have grown up with the town and though they may be foreign names, we are certainly not ashamed to use them. As far as the Bill in general is concerned, I have only one more point to say and that is this: there have been criticisms that the purpose of this Bill is to "fix" the next election for the People's Action Party. Sir, whether the next election is for 51 seats or 58 seats will make no difference. I am confident that it will be a walk-over for the People's Action Party.”
“These Islands would have a better chance of achieving a quicker rate of development after merger with the more developed constituencies of Jurong, Pasir Panjang and Telok Blangah, as in the case of the islands of Pulau Tekong and Pulau Ubin in the constituency of Changi. The number of electoral divisions will be increased from the present 51 to 58. The Singapore Parliament Elections Ordinance (Cap. 53) provides that each electoral division shall return one Member to serve in Parliament. The Constitution of Singapore stipulates a Parliamentary membership of 51 until other provision is made by law. Accordingly, it is necessary for a Bill to be passed to provide for an increase in the number of elected Members to Parliament. The Parliamentary Membership Bill provides that so much of clause (1) of Article 23 of the Constitution of Singapore as prescribes a limit of 51 on the number of elected Members shall cease to have effect, and that as from the time of the election of Members to serve in Parliament at the next general election, and hereafter until such time as other provision is made by law, Parliament shall consist of 58 elected Members. This Bill also provides that, for the purposes of the next general election, power is given for all things to be done under the Singapore Parliament Elections Ordinance as if Parliament already consisted of 58 elected Members. This would enable various matters to be carried out for the purposes of the next general elections; for example, the naming and delineation of the boundaries of electoral divisions by notification in the Gazette under section 8 of the Singapore Parliament Elections Ordinance, and the exhibition of the 1967 registers of electors for public inspection under section 10 of the same Ordinance. Sir, I beg to move.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." At the sitting of Parliament on the 31st October, Government announced in a White Paper (Cmd. 22 of 1967) the acceptance of the recommendations of the Electoral Boundaries Delineation Committee with regard to the subdivision of 10 large constituencies and the creation of 8 new constituencies with consequential adjustments to 3 constituencies, and the decision to merge the electoral division of Southern Islands with the electoral divisions of Jurong, Pasir Panjang and Telok Blangah. The reasons for Government's acceptance of the recommendations of the said Committee were explained in the White Paper. The boundaries of the present 51 electoral divisions were demarcated in 1957 and have remained unchanged for the last 10 years. Due to major housing developments and urban renewal and large population shifts, the population ratios in the 51 constituencies have become quite disproportionate, and to ensure that there is more equal representation throughout all constituencies in the Republic, the 10 largest constituencies, with an electorate of more than 18,000 electors each, have been subdivided, resulting in the creation of 8 new constituencies. In deciding to merge Southern Islands with the mainland electoral divisions of Jurong, Pasir Panjang and Telok Blangah, the Government had in mind the desirability of eliminating the tendency for the Islands to develop into an isolated constituency. This division has a very low electorate, namely, 4,273 electors, and this number is likely to dwindle when more people shift to the city.”
“The phrase includes the meaning "in his presence". It is for the Courts to construe the meaning, and if they construe "view" to mean "opinion" and we are wrong, we will come back. Question put, and agreed to. Clause 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 10 and 11 ordered to stand part of the Bill. The Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. PARLIAMENTARY MEMBERSHIP BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.32 p.m.”
“What is it that the Member wants me to clarify? He has asked me a question and I have answered it.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not prepared at this stage to change "view" to "presence". The Ordinance has been drafted by the law officers of the Attorney-General's Department. Should the Member be correct in his submission, I will come back to Parliament and move the amendment. But I think he is well aware that though I am moving this Bill, it is a Bill that has been looked after by the Deputy Prime Minister. It has obtained his blessing and I am not prepared at this stage, as I have said, to move the amendment. Mr Tang See Chim: But can the Minister clarify?”
“I have nothing further to add except to assure the Member for Bukit Panjang that we will consider his proposal. But for the moment, I intend to take the Bill through as presented in Parliament. 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. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.24 p.m. Clauses 1 to 8 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 9 - Question proposed, "That clause 9 stand part of the Bill."”
“At present such dissuasion is an offence only if it takes place on Polling Day. The amendment provides the same penalty for the offence as that provided in the Singapore Parliament Elections Ordinance for canvassing on Polling Day. Power is given to police officers to enter and search any premises or place in which they believe that the offence is being committed, and to arrest without warrant any person committing the offence in their presence. Mr Speaker, Sir, during the Bukit Merah by-election in January 1966, members of a certain political Party went from house to house in the constituency between Nomination Day and Polling Day attempting to persuade the electorate to cast blank or spoilt votes. Similar attempts were made in the subsequent Thomson by-election. Similar attempts will no doubt be made by subversive elements in future elections. It is, therefore, necessary that provision should be made to ensure that every citizen is given the opportunity of casting his vote without fear or interference. With the repeal of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1955, and its substitution by the National Registration Act, 1965, the Bill seeks to amend all references in the Singapore Parliament Elections Ordinance relating to the Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1955, to that of the National Registration Act, 1965, and to make certain amendments connected with the identity cards issued under the National Registration Act of 1965. The opportunity has been taken to revise some of the forms in, and to make certain other amendments to, the Singapore Parliament Elections Ordinance with a view to achieving greater clarity and explicitness in the expressions used in the Ordinance and thus providing for better administration of the provisions of the Ordinance.”
“This would mean that those persons whose names had been expunged from the registers since 1959 under the provisions relating to compulsory voting, other than those who are now dead or have left the country, will have their names restored in the new registers, as they will be in possession of new citizen's identity cards. It is hoped that with the restoration of their names to the registers of voters without penalty, these citizens will exercise their civic duty of voting in the elections in future. However, the provision remains in the Ordinance to expunge the names of electors who fail to vote at any election, and to restore their names to the registers of electors only after payment of a fine of $5. If this measure proves inadequate, Government will consider amendments to the Ordinance to remove certain privileges of citizenship. For example, it may be provided that anybody seeking a Housing Board flat or social welfare relief or a place in school for their children, may in future have to show that they have performed their civic duty of voting in the elections and keeping their names alive in the electoral registers. The Bill also provides for the revision of the registers in each year following the year 1967 to be completed before the 31st day of December in that year. Past experience has shown that the deadline of 15th September for the completion of the annual revision of the electoral registers is impracticable. The proposed amendment will obviate the necessity for reference to be made to the Minister each year for permission to certify the registers on or before the 31st December of that year. This Bill will also make it an offence for any person to dissuade electors from voting between Nomination Day and Polling Day at any elections.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill seeks to amend the Singapore Parliament Elections Ordinance, Chapter 53, to provide for the preparation of the first registers of electors from the register maintained by the Commissioner of National Registration and to include in such electoral registers the names of all entitled persons who were on the first day of July 1967 citizens of Singapore and to whom identity cards were issued. The present registers of electors were first compiled nine years ago in 1958. In the past, any person who possessed an identity card showing his place of birth as Singapore, and who was ordinarily resident in Singapore on the first day of February in any year and was not less than 21 years of age on the first day of July of that year, was automatically included in the registers of electors. In the recent re-registration of persons, it was discovered that a number of identity cards had been forged. Further, a number of persons with identity cards showing their place of birth as Singapore were not given citizen's identity cards due to insufficient proof of Singapore citizenship. For these reasons, fresh registers of electors have to be compiled. The fresh registers will be compiled from the records of citizens maintained by the Commissioner of National Registration and will include only those entitled persons who on the first day of July 1967 were citizens of Singapore and to whom identity cards were issued.”
“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 Fong Sip Chee]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. SINGAPORE PARLIAMENT ELECTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.06 p.m.”
“Sir, it has also been found that although the Ordinance puts the onus on the publisher to submit printed publications or books to the National Library, there is in the existing law no definition of the term "publisher". This omission has now been rectified by providing a definition of "publisher" in clause 2 of the Bill. With the new definition of "book" to include all publications, and in consideration of the publisher who may sometimes publish a limited number of copies of a particular work, clause 3 of the Bill reduces to five the number of copies of a publication to be deposited, as there is no longer a need to send a copy of such publication to the British Museum as has hitherto been done. To enable quicker registration of publications and subsequent listing in the national bibliography, clause 5 of the Bill amends section 6 of the principal Ordinance so that the publisher will furnish details of publications deposited within two weeks of deposit, instead of one month as under the existing law. Consequent on clause 4 of the Bill reducing the number of copies of every book or publication to be deposited under the Ordinance to five, clause 6 of the Bill amends section 7 to delete the requirement of sending catalogues of books to the Secretary of State and to the Trustees of the British Museum, a. practice dating back to old colonial times but which is no longer necessary with our new status as an independent nation. Finally, Sir, to encourage greater speed on the part of publishers in depositing their publications in the National Library and to provide details of publications deposited within two weeks of deposit instead of one month, clause 7 of the Bill raises the penalty for non-compliance with the provisions of the Ordinance from $500 to $1,000.”
“With the law as it stands, Mr Speaker, Sir, many publications are excluded from being deposited in the National Library. Such materials include Government publications which, although not exempt from deposit under the Ordinance, have sometimes not been sent to the National Library when they are published by agencies other than the Government Printer. Similarly, under the existing definition of "book", annuals and other reports, whether Government or otherwise, are not required to be deposited in the National Library. As such annuals and other reports are important sources of information which the National Library should have as a primary source to satisfy the informational needs of the citizens of Singapore as well as of outside researchers and scholars, the new definition of "book" has now been enlarged to include reports besides Government publications, graphic art forms, etc. Sir, the amendment of the definition of "book", thereby making the deposit of publications with the National Library as complete as possible, will also enable the compilation by the National Library of the catalogues of books published in Singapore to be comprehensive. And if the compilation of a national bibliography, as provided in section 6 of the Ordinance, is extended to all works printed or published in Singapore, it will not only facilitate information on current publications in Singapore, but will also provide welcome assistance to booksellers, publishers, printers, authors, and librarians both in Singapore and other countries which have a growing interest in acquiring Singapore publications.”
“I disagree with the Member. In my view, the incentives are more than sufficient to attract investment and, in fact, the incentives that we offer are the best in South-East Asia. BILLS INTRODUCED 2.56 p.m. ECONOMIC EXPANSION INCENTIVES (RELIEF FROM INCOME TAX) BILL "to amend and consolidate the laws relating to incentives for the establishment of pioneer industries and for economic expansion generally, by way of providing relief from income tax and to repeal the Pioneer Industries (Relief from Income Tax) Ordinance, 1959 (No. 1 of 1959) and the Industrial Expansion (Relief from Income Tax) Ordinance, 1959 (No. 2 of 1959)", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Finance (Dr Goh Keng Swee); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. INSURANCE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Insurance Act, 1966 (No. 46 of 1966)", presented by the Minister for Finance (Dr Goh Keng Swee); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PRINTERS AND PUBLISHERS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 2.57 p.m. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture (Mr Fong Sip Chee) (for the Minister for Culture and Social Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The object of the proposed amendment of the Printers and Publishers Ordinance (Cap. 196) is to enlarge the definition of "book" so that the main purpose of the Ordinance, which is to preserve all books and other publications printed or published in Singapore as part of the national literature by the National Library, will be better fulfilled.”
“I see no contradiction in the policy, Sir. One is reclamation, and the other is an entirely different project. When you reclaim the sea, you get valuable land. And if these sites along the Golden Mile are not taken up after the reclamation, we will probably have better sites along the sea coast. As I have pointed out the other day to a Member here, reclamation does not mean that the sea coast disappears.”
“The Member for Joo Chiat has something in what he says. I have said just now that the main reason, we think, for the lack of tenders for the Golden Mile projects is the huge capital required. But another reason is the one put forward by the Member for Joo Chiat. We have a scheme to reclaim the sea off the Esplanade, and perhaps this scheme is frightening away some investors who would not like to put up hotels and then find that the sea has gone back by 500 to 600 feet.”
“In all, there were 14 sites which attracted 14 tenders altogether. The 14 tenders were only for 8 sites. In respect of the other 6 sites, not even one tender was received. Shortly, for the 8 sites which were tendered for, a few received just one tender, a few others two tenders, and a few others three tenders.”
“Sir, some of these projects, for example, the three projects along the Golden Mile, attracted no tenders. We think the main reason is that these projects require capital in the region of $10 million to $15 million. Our plans for some of these projects are to get a group of - if I may call them - small investors together so that they can combine and perhaps take up some of these projects. I would add that the Government itself would be happy to share and take part with any group of investors who may be prepared to group together to undertake these projects.”
“Members will see from the table which has been circulated that the total land premium offered is in the region of $8,728,000. The expected total investment in these seven projects will be in the region of $31½million, and the projected employment of persons, when these projects are completed, is expected to be in the region of 3,650 persons. Mr Speaker, Sir, our first exercise to promote private participation in urban renewal has met with an encouraging response and success. More important, the results have shown that investors have confidence and faith in the stability of the economy of our island Republic.”
“I have not finished, Sir, but I will be referring to this table shortly. Mr Speaker: In that case, I will ask the Clerk to hand copies of the table to Members. [Copies of the table distributed to hon. Members.]”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in keeping with Government's policy of encouraging private participation in urban renewal, 14 sites with designated projects were offered to the public from the 15th June this year. Tenders for the leases of these sites closed on the 16th October this year. The tenders received were processed by a Tenders Sub-Committee comprising officials concerned with the technical and financial aspects of these projects. The Sub-Committee's recommendations were considered by a Ministerial committee of three who decided to accept seven tenders, particulars of which are set out in a table* (* Appendix, cols. 401-2.) which I propose, with your permission, Sir, to distribute to Members of the House. [Copies of the table handed in to the Clerk] APPENDIX TO ORAL ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.9 (Cols. 372-4) (Cols 0401-0402)”