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 4 of 44.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I propose that Mr Hwang Soo Jin, the hon. Member for Jalan Kayu, be elected Deputy Speaker of this House.”
“Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Tekong Besar containing a total area of approximately 510 hectares as shown coloured pink on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO, 1/81". which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to Friday, 6th March, 1981." - [Mr E.W. Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Five minutes to Six o'clock p.m. to Friday, 6th March, 1981.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the Motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. *The Motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Tekong Besar containing a total area of approximately 510 hectares as shown coloured pink on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/81", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. Our limited land resources make it imperative that we reclaim areas of foreshore and seabed wherever it is economical to do so. The Tekong Reclamation Project involves the reclamation of about 510 hectares of the shallower foreshore and seabed on the southern part of Pulau Tekong Besar as shown coloured pink on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/81". A copy of this plan is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members. On completion of the reclamation, the reclaimed land will be held in reserve for future industrial use. In the meantime, the land will be used as a training area by the Singapore Armed Forces. The Port of Singapore Authority, as agents of the Government, will undertake the reclamation works which are expected to be completed in about 3 1/2 years' time, at an estimated cost of $310 million. Fill for the reclamation will be imported mainly from Indonesia to supplement that which can be obtained from the Changi foreshore areas. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this Parliament, in accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 95, appoints the following as members of the Committee of Selection:- Mr E.W. Barker Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon Mr Goh Chok Tong Mr Ho See Beng Mr Ng Kah Ting Mr Sia Kah Hui Encik Sidek bin Saniff. Sir, Members of the Selection Committee must be appointed soon in order that the Committee can appoint members of the other Committees of this House. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 95, appoints the following as members of the Committee of Selection: - Mr E.W. Barker Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon Mr Goh Chok Tong Mr Ho See Beng Mr Ng Kah Ting Mr Sia Kah Hui Encik Sidek bin Saniff. PULAU TEKONG BESAR (Reclamation) 5.53 p.m.”
“Although the radioactive material was not found, it did not pose a serious health hazard as the radioactive level was low and only had a short life span of 74 days. For the Member's information, besides licensing, the RPI conducts regular inspections on premises where radioactive substances are used. RPI also provides a badge monitoring service where dosage of radioactivity received by all operators is monitored monthly. 4.29 p.m.”
“A gauge containing radioactive source Caesium 137 was discovered lost in Western Australia and somehow found its way into a consignment of scrap metal shipped to the National Iron & Steel Mill in early December 1978. The Western Australian Health Authority informed Singapore of the loss. The Radiation Protection Inspectorate (RPI) subsequently traced it to one of the furnaces in the steel mill. RPI immediately took action to decontaminate the furnace and the radioactive waste in the sludge is now safely installed in steel drums kept in an isolated corner of the steel mill. The radioactivity is very low, about 30 millicurrie, and does not pose any serious health hazard. As there is no suitable site in Singapore for the disposal of the radioactive waste, RPI approached Australia, Britain and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for assistance in the disposal of the waste. I am afraid these efforts have not been successful. Recently, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken up the matter with the Australian Government, hoping to send the waste back to Australia. We are still waiting for a reply. The Member also wanted to know whether there are other similar cases. There is one other case of the loss of radioactive source in Singapore. This occurred in 1978. In this incident, the radioactive source which was contained in a small steel capsule was Iridium 192 used in industrial radiography, The loss was reported by an ex-worker and the source was suspected to have found its way to the refuse dumping ground in Tampines. The company responsible for the radioactive source was prosecuted and fined in court for not reporting the loss immediately.”
“It was a difficult piece of legislation. The Bill was referred to a Select Committee and only enforced in 1976. Meanwhile, policies had changed. By the time that Bill became law, minds had changed, the thinking had changed. It was even suggested that we should not enforce the Bill. But we had been administering the Bill for more than three years and it was impossible to unscramble. So the Bill became law but we did not enforce all its provisions strictly. Before the Bill became law, we had announced that "If developers have a condominium or a building over six-storeys, foreigners could buy." The Member for Whampoa now says, "Think about it again." We certainly will. But I must point out that legislative changes should be carefully considered. Drastic changes made every now and then may have undesirable effects. Members can be assured that any remedial action to safeguard the interests of our citizens and which is in our economic interest will be implemented as and when necessary, That having been said, I shall now reply to the Member for Thomson who spoke on the Department of Scientific Services. The Department was set up mainly to serve the various ministries in their regulatory functions. It could lead to conflict of interest if the Member's suggestion is accepted that the Department performs the same services for the private sector. In any case, I understand the private sector is adequately served by SISIR, the Applied Research Corporation (ARC) and other commercial laboratories. Then the Member expressed concern about radioactive waste. Let me tell him what happened.”
“" I told him that it was impossible to stop a boom. He said, "Put the brakes on it." So we put the brakes on it. You cannot quarrel with the Minister for Finance. He gives you money, whether you work in the Ministry of National Development or Law. You cannot do a thing without him. I hope he forgives me for saying this. If you are an officer in the Ministry of Finance, whether in the civil service or in politics, you get recognition and fast promotion. But let me come back to my subject. I have figures here from my colleague. We have had eight urban renewal sales so far, and the prices have jumped. 1979, for commercial properties $310 per square foot or over $3,300 per square metre. 1980, for commercial properties $616 per square foot or $6,629 per square metre. At our first sale, no one wanted any of the properties along the Golden Mile. Had someone offered a dollar a square foot we would have sold. Today prices have jumped to $600 a square foot. And I believe, in the last sale, prices have gone up even further. To come back to the Member for Whampoa, we did take steps in 1973. The problem he raises is not a new one. In 1973 it surfaced, leading to the issue of a Government statement that foreigners could not buy land. This was on the 10th September 1973. We announced that legislation would be introduced with retrospective effect from 11th September 1973, to the effect that only citizens of Singapore could purchase residential property without any restriction. All others would require written approval of Government. Approval would depend on their economic contribution to Singapore and on the condition that these properties were intended as dwelling houses for personal use and not for rental or other purposes. This Bill took a long time.”
“Sir, I rise not to support the Minister for National Development. He does not need my support. Nor have I come here to quarrel with the Member for Whampoa. Perhaps the House will allow me to relate some of my experiences when I was in the Minister's job. I take Members back to the year 1966 when we had just separated from Malaysia and there was no confidence in this town. I was then accused by the then Minister for Finance of merely wanting to build public housing and not encouraging the private sector. So we did. We gave them incentives. If somebody wanted to turn an office building into a hotel, we allowed him to do so. Re-zoning was easy. On paying $2 a square foot, residential land became commercial land. We gave other incentives too. There were no development charges for exceeding the maximum density. But the critical point was that of property tax. So I asked the Minister in charge to reduce the property tax to 12%, and told him that 3 x 12 is 36; 36 x 0 is 0. He agreed, and we had our first Urban Renewal Sale. We offered 14 sites, but even then the public had no confidence. Only seven sites were taken up. The average price was about $20 a square foot. All those hotels along the Singapore River - Miramar, Apollo and King's. Today, of course, King's Hotel is $12 for a share. But this is just to tell Members that conditions then were different. But our first sale succeeded to some extent. We had a second sale. Prices had gone up - $50 a square foot. We had a third sale. It went up to $90 a square foot, all those high-rise properties you see along Shenton Way. But then labour was getting short, the price of cement had gone up: the price of steel had gone up, and I was asked to do a turn-back. The same Minister called me up and said, "Stop it.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it has been an interesting day. May I have your consent and the general assent of all Members present, to move the Adjournment now?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, under Standing Order No. 4, I beg to move, "That the proceedings at this day's sitting be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 and that this sitting be suspended until 8.30 p.m." Sir, Standing Order No. 1 provides that every sitting of this House shall begin at 2.30 p.m. and end at 8.00 p.m., "the moment of interruption." His Excellency the President will be making his Address in this House at 8.30 p.m. Hence the necessity for my motion which is made under Standing Order No. 4. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, "That the proceedings at this day's sitting be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 and that this sitting be suspended until 8.30 p.m." - [Mr E.W. Barker].”
“It is on that note that I have now great pleasure in welcoming our 18 new Members to this enlarged Chamber of 75. Allow me, Sir, to remind them that the country and the Party are looking forward to their contributions within and will be closely watching, if not monitoring, their performances outside this House. A bit of advice from an old hand should not hurt. No Member will stray from the straight and narrow path if he always lets his conscience be his guide. Thank you, Sir.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I, on behalf of all Members of this House, extend to you our congratulations on your re-election as Speaker. This is the fourth time that you have been elected to this high office and your twelfth year in the Chair. You, Sir, have served longer than any of your predecessors, all of whom had the advantage of training in the law. Many of the functions and a great deal of the ritual associated with your office have a judicial flavour. But you have shown that the lack of legal training has been of no disadvantage and that impartiality, even if it has to be judicial, is not a monopoly of the legal profession. In paying tribute to you, Sir, I must not forget your staff. The Clerk, Mr Lopez, has done yeoman's service ever since 1954. He is our last word on the Standing Orders. Your Translators are good. They have to be good in order to translate some of the speeches in this House simultaneously. Your Reporters are accurate. Mr Speaker, Sir, our Fifth Parliament begins today. A voice louder and stronger than mine has warned that the years, if not months, ahead may be grim. Should dark clouds gather in our sky, I would prefer to look for a silver lining. We have survived more than one crisis before and after we gained independence. During our trials and tribulations the Singaporean has proved to be resolute, resilient and resourceful. It will take more than an earthquake to bring this town to rack and ruin. Sir, I seek your indulgence if I appear to be too confident. But like many other Honourable Members in this House, I do not relish the thought of spending my old age on my bended knees. Hence our relentless but not desperate search for fresh talent.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn. Question proposed. ANTI-INFLATION, ANTI-PROFITEERING AND ANTI-CARTEL PRACTICES IN SINGAPORE 4.20 p.m.”
“The new section 11 will empower the President to accept the surrender of any title to any land for any purposes whatsoever and to re-issue new titles in lieu thereof subject to any terms and conditions which the President may impose for accepting the surrender of the titles. Under the existing section 11, the President has no authority to impose a condition that he will issue a title for a shorter term for the title surrendered to him. The other clauses provide for minor amendments, and deletion of sections which have become obsolete. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. ACCOUNTANTS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.29 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill seeks to make a number of amendments to the State Lands Act (Chapter 285) which are considered necessary for more effective land administration in present-day circumstances. I shall deal only with the major amendments. Clause 3 enacts a new section 4A to empower the Registrar of Titles to amend a certificate of title issued in the name of a deceased person by inserting the names of his personal representatives in the certificate of title, when a grant or lease under the Act, or a certificate under section 8, 8A or 8B of the Land Titles Act, has been issued to such person who, unknown to the Collector of Land Revenue, was not alive at the date of such issue. This will remove the necessity of issuing a new certificate of title in the names of the personal representatives. Sir, in an appeal arising out of the Government's acquisition of Pulau Tekong Kechil, the Privy Council held that an assignee of a State grant who did not have constructive notice of the provisions of an original Crown grant of 1860 is not bound by a covenant contained in the grant. That decision, if allowed to stand, will prevent the Government from enforcing covenants contained in State grants or leases except in those cases where the owner has actual or constructive notice. Clause 4 therefore seeks to enact a new section 6A to make it explicit that an assignee of a State grant or lease shall be bound by such exceptions, reservations or covenants contained in the grant or lease regardless of whether he has notice (actual or constructive) of such exceptions, reservations or covenants. Clause 7 seeks to repeal and re-enact section 11 of the Act.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Section 33(c) of the Hire-Purchase Act permits finance companies to charge a rate of interest of 12% per annum on overdue instalments under a hire-purchase agreement, or such lesser rate as the Minister may prescribe. The Minister has no power to raise the rate beyond 12%. It has become necessary to allow an increase of the rate of interest on overdue instalments beyond 12% per annum because finance companies are today paying more than 12% interest per annum on their loans. This Bill deletes the reference to the 12% maximum rate of interest and provides for the Minister to fix, by notification in the Government Gazette, the maximum rate of interest on overdue instalments, in keeping with prevailing commercial rates of interest payable by finance companies on their loans. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and possed. NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.08 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." At the last sitting of this House on 25th June, 1980, a White Paper on the Report of the Electoral Boundaries Delineation Committee was presented to Parliament. I had on that occasion made a statement on the acceptance by the Government of the Com- mittee's recommendations, which involved the creation of nine new constituencies and the elimination of three existing ones, resulting in a net increase of six constituencies and bringing the total number of constituencies to 75. Under section 22 of the Parliamentary Elections Act (Chapter 50), each constituency is to return one Member to serve in Parliament. Article 39(1) of the Constitution provides that Parliament consists of such number of elected members as the Legislature may by law provide. In 1976, the Legislature had by law increased the number of Parliamentary seats from 65 to 69. The Bill before this House now seeks to increase the number of Members of Parliament to be elected at the next general elections to 75. 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 E W Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. HIRE-PURCHASE (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.05 p.m.”
“Now, Sir. I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." Question put "That the Bill be now read a Third time." Division taken: Ayes, 56; Noes, Nil; Abstentions, Nil; Absent, 12. AYES A. Rahim Ishak Ahmad Mattar Ang Kok Peng Ang Nam Piau Barker, E.W. Chai Chong Yii Chan Chee Seng Chen, Bernard Cheong Yuen Chee, Eric Chin Harn Tong Ch'ng Jit Koon Chor Yeok Eng Chua Sian Chin Dhanabalan, S. Fong Sip Chee Ho Cheng Choon Ho See Beng Hon Sui Sen Howe Yoon Chong Hwang Soo Jin Koh Lip Lin Lai Tha Chai Lau Teik Soon Lee Chiaw Meng Lee Khoon Choy Lim Chee Onn Lim Kim San Mansor Haji Sukaimi Nair, C.V. Devan Ng Kah Ting Ngeow Pack Hua Ong Leong Boon Ong Pang Boon Ong Teng Cheong Ow Chin Hock Phua Bah Lee Rahmat bin Kenap Rohan bin Kamis Seah Mui Kok Selvadurai, P. Sha'ari bin Tadin Sia Kah Hui Sia Khoon Seong Sidek bin Saniff Tan Cheng San Tan, Augustine H.H. Tan Keng Yam, Tony Tan Soo Khoon Tang See Chim Teh Cheang Wan AYES (contd) Teo Chong Tee Toh Chin Chye Yap Giau Cheng, Eugene Yeo Choo Kok Yeo Toon Chia Yeoh Ghim Seng NOES Nil ABSTENTIONS Nil ABSENT Chiang Hai Ding Conceicao, J.F. Goh Chok Tong Goh Keng Swee Ho Kah Leong Jek Yeun Thong Lee Kuan Yew Lee Yiok Seng Othman bin Wok Rajaratnam, S. Tan Eng Liang Ya'acob bin Mohamed”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Our Constitution, as it now stands, allows a citizen of 21 years of age to stand for election to this House. Insofar as residence is concerned, all he has to show is that at the date of his nomination for election he is resident in Singapore. Accordingly, a citizen who has spent a greater part of his life abroad and who may have resided in Singapore for only a brief period in his youth can stand as a candidate for election to Parliament. This is not in the national interest. A person who has spent a greater part of his life outside Singapore is likely to have his interest and sympathies elsewhere. Such a person would not be capable of truly sharing and reflecting the feelings and desires of our people and having their interests at heart. Furthermore, he would not have acquired sufficient experience of local conditions and problems if he has not actually resided here for a considerable period. Accordingly, this Bill introduces a minimum residential qualification of 10 years for candidates for Parliamentary election. I would like to point out to hon. Members that the Bill does not require the residential period of 10 years to be continuous. Further, the Bill does not require this residential period to be a period "immediately preceding" the date of nomination for Parliamentary election. All that the Bill requires is that a candidate must have been resident in Singapore for periods amounting, in the aggregate, to not less than 10 years before he can stand for election to Parliament. It is hoped that with this requirement we would be more in a position to ensure that only those citizens with a genuine interest for and a sense of commitment to Singapore will stand for election to Parliament.”
“PARLIAMENTARY MEMBERSHIP BILL "to vary the number of elected Members of Parliament", recommendation of President signified; presented by Mr E.W. Barker; read the First time: to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. HIRE-PURCHASE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Hire- Purchase Act (Chapter 192 of the Revised Edition)", presented by Mr E.W. Barker; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY (NO. 2) BILL "for making Supplementary Provision for the public services for the financial year 1st April, 1980 to 31st March, 1981", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Finance (Mr Hon Sui Sen): read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE BILL "to give effect to the merger of the University of Singapore and the Nanyang University by the establishment and incorporation of the National University of Singapore and for matters connected therewith", presented by the Minister of Education (Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. FIRST SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1980 TO 31ST MARCH, 1981 (Paper Cmd. 6 of 1980) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.01 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a White Paper on the Report of the Electoral Boundaries Delineation Committee has been presented to Parliament as Command 8 of 1980. The Government has decided to accept all the recommendations of the Committee. The Committee recommended, inter alia, that the boundaries of 22 constituencies be re-defined so as to have a more equal representation of electors for all constituencies. The redelineation will result in the elimination of three constituencies, namely: 1 Farrer Park 2 Geylang East 3 Upper Serangoon, but not necessarily the elimination of the Members of Parliament concerned! The electorates of these three constituencies will be absorbed by the adjacent electoral divisions. As the total electorate for the next General Elections is expected to increase by about 228,000 electors, the Committee recommended the creation of nine new constituencies, namely: 1 Ayer Rajah 2 Cheng San 3 Chong Boon 4 Clementi 5 Kaki Bukit 6 Kebun Baru 7 Tanah Merah 8 West Coast 9 Yio Chu Kang. The acceptance of the Committee's recommendations will increase the number of electoral divisions from 69 to 75. This increase will come into effect as from the next general elections. It is, therefore, necessary to introduce the Parliamentary Membership Bill, 1980, to provide for the increase in the number of members to 75. 2.57 p.m. BILLS INTRODUCED CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore", presented by the Minister for Law and Science and Technology (Mr E.W. Barker); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.”
“Sir, once again, may I on behalf of Members of this House thank you for listening to each and every one of us with so much patience during the last ten days or so. On that note, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed. Adjourned accordingly at Two minutes past Six o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed.”
“ANNUAL BUDGET STATEMENT Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [5th march 1980], "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year lot April, 1980 to 31st March, 1981.". - [Mr Goh Chok Tong, Minister for Trade and Industry]. Question again proposed. 2.45 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name, as it appears on the Order Paper. *The motion reads as follows: That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, -- (1) an additional day, namely, Monday, 17th March, 1980, be allotted for the debate on the motion for approval of the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1980/81 moved by the Minister for Trade and Industry on 5th March, 1980; and (2) the allotted days named by the Minister for Trade and Industry for discussion of the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1980/81 in Committee of Supply be, as a consequence, altered to 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, 24th, 25th and 26th March, 1980. Sir, only one day is provided under Standing Order 84 (3) for the debate on the motion for approval of the financial policy of the Government for the financial year. It appears that more than 20 Members desire to speak on the debate on the Budget. In order to give every Member an opportunity to be heard, this motion will extend the debate by one day. Sir, I think we can look forward to a little longer debate this year, perhaps a more interesting one. Sir, on that note, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, - (1) an additional day, namely, Monday, 17th March, 1980, be allotted for the debate on the motion for approval of the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1980/81 moved by the Minister for Trade and Industry on 5th March, 1980: and (2) the allotted days named by the Minister for Trade and Industry for discussion of the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1980/81 in Commines of Supply be, as a consequence, altered to 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, 24th, 25th and 26th March, 1980.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Honourable Members are aware that since 1971 the Metrication Board has been directing and implementing the Government policy on metrication. Significant progress has been made. The public and the industrial sectors have been almost completely metricated. The conversion of the retail trade sector has also been progressing satisfactorily. However, in order to prevent any reversion to the use of non-metric units, it is necessary to support the metrication exercise with the necessary legislation. The Weights and Measures Act, in its present form, does not permit Orders to be introduced to prohibit the use of non-metric units for goods sold in loose quantities. The Bill seeks to amend section 16 of the Act so as to confer upon the Minister the power to make it mandatory that goods be sold in metric units, and at a price based on convenient metric quantities such as 1 kilogramme, 100 grammes, etc. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Clause I -”
“Clause 4 amends subsection (3) of section 13 of the Act to give to a broadcasting station, which is authorized by law to provide broadcasting services for general reception, the defences which are presently available to a defendant in a libel action in respect of reports and matters published in newspapers. The present subsection (3) of section 13 gives such defences to licensed broadcasting stations only. The Singapore Broadcasting Corporation which was established by the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation Act, 1979, is exempted from obtaining such a licence. The amendments made to section 13 will make these defences available to the Corporation in a libel action in respect of reports and matters broadcast by the Corporation. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Clause 1 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this is not the time or the place for me to deliver a lecture on the law of defamation. But I think it would be appropriate for me to point out to Members what is libel and what is slander under the law. Simply put, libel is defamation in a permanent form, for example, in writing or in print. Slander is defamation not in a permanent form; the best example being defamation by way of spoken words. The question arises: is broadcasting libel or slander? This moot point has been settled by statute elsewhere and here. Section 3 of the Defamation Act provides that for the purpose of the law of libel and slander, the broadcasting of words by means of radiocommunication shall be treated as publication in a permanent form. The term "broadcasting by means of radiocommunication" is defined in the existing section 2 of the Act to mean publication for general reception by means of a telecommunication within the meaning of the Telecommunications Act, 1965. This definition has to be up-dated because the Telecommunications Act, 1965, has been repealed and new systems have also been invented for the transmission of signals. Clause 2 of the Bill seeks to repeal the existing definition and to insert new definitions which will take into account new developments in the field of telecommunications. Clause 3 makes a consequential amendment to section 3 of the Act arising out of the insertion of the new definitions in section 2.”
“KAMPONG KEMBANGAN CONSTITUENCY (State of crime) 7. Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi asked the Minister for Home Affairs what is the state of crime in the Kampong Kembangan Constituency, and what measures will be taken to reduce the crime rate in the Constituency.”
“The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Chua Sian Chin): Mr Speaker, Sir, as I promised in June 1978 (Hansard, 14th June 1978, Vol. 37 cols. 1563-4), the Traffic Police have continued to deploy policemen at the Guillemard Circus and roads leading to the National Stadium to direct traffic whenever major matches and other functions are held at the Stadium. Since then, a concrete pedestrian overhead bridge across Nicoll Highway, in front of the People's Association, and another pedestrian overhead bridge at Mountbatten Road, in front of the School for the Deaf, have been built. The spectators at the National Stadium are reminded to use these facilities through messages flashed on the scoreboard in the Stadium. Traffic policemen are also deployed to ensure that the pedestrians do use these facilities. The new pedestrian bridges, the deployment of Traffic policemen at strategic places and the reversal of normal traffic flow along the central carriageway of Nicoll Highway have all helped to improve the traffic flow. However, there will still be congestion whenever there are major events at the National Stadium because of the sheer volume of traffic going through Guillemard Circus. When the East Coast Parkway is completed by the end of 1981, it will significantly reduce the congestion at Guillemard Circus by relieving it of through-traffic between the City and the Mountbatten/Katong area. Many of the spectators who go to the National Stadium in cars arrive just a few minutes before the event begins. As a result, car park attendants are unable to cope and this aggravates the congestion outside the National Stadium car park. The National Sports Council is looking into the feasibility of selling car park labels to spectators in advance.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not the usual practice for the Public Prosecutor to ask for the surrender of an accused person's passport as one of the conditions of his being afforded bail. Depending on the circumstances of each case, at the Public Prosecutor's request, the Court may make it a condition for affording bail that the accused must surrender his passport, for example, where there is a probability that the accused would probably flee rather than face the charges in Court. When bail was granted to the Member for Boon Teck, the Deputy Public Prosecutor did not apply to the Court for the surrender of his passport because there was no evidence to show that he was about to leave the country or even had the intention to do so. The DPP, like the Director of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau, did not expect the Member to jump bail. As it turned out, the DPP and the Director, CPIB, were both wrong. NICOLL HIGHWAY (Improvement to traffic flow) 6. Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether he is aware that there still are traffic jams along the Guillemard Circus end of Nicoll Highway before football matches, despite the reversal of normal traffic flow along the central carriageway of the Highway since April, 1974, and the assurance by the then Minister for Home Affairs and Education that "the traffic police will continue to monitor traffic conditions and direct traffic flow along Nicoll Highway when there are big matches at the National Stadium", and if the traffic police have further plans to improve the traffic flow along Nicoll Highway, particularly at the bottleneck immediately outside the National Stadium car park.”
“It is to be noted that since section 5 of our Civil Law Act provides that the law of England is to be applied in all questions or issues which arise or which have to be decided in Singapore with respect to commercial matters, it is possible that the United Kingdom State Immunity Act can be held to apply to Singapore. As there are certain provisions in the United Kingdom Act which are not appropriate to Singapore, particularly those concerning the European Convention on State Immunity, it is preferable to enact our own legislation so as to preclude the application of the United Kingdom Act to Singapore. This Bill is based on the United Kingdom State Immunity Act, 1978, but has been modified to suit our needs and circumstances. Members will note that the Explanatory Statement to the Bill sets out clearly and fully the cases and circumstances in which foreign states or state agencies will not be able to plead immunity before our courts and tribunals. Lastly, I would draw attention to the fact that this Bill is not concerned with diplomatic immunities and privileges or immunity from criminal jurisdiction. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. MONEY-CHANGING AND REMITTANCE BUSINESSES BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill deals with a highly complex and technical area of law important to international trade and finance. It codifies the law on sovereign immunity whereby foreign States can claim immunity from the jurisdiction of civil courts and tribunals in Singapore. At present, the matter is governed by common law, where under the doctrine of absolute immunity, a foreign state or any of its agencies is immune from virtually all legal proceedings before our courts. This doctrine has been the subject of a great deal of criticism in the courts in the United Kingdom as well as the Privy Council. These courts have shown a tendency to modify the doctrine to prevent injustice and to bring the common law more in accord with present-day conditions. Many states and agencies of state are nowadays engaged in commercial or trading activities and there is little justification to preclude persons dealing with these states or state agencies in such activities from any legal redress. Both the United States and the United Kingdom have enacted legislation to replace the common law rules of sovereign immunity in application to foreign states or state agencies when engaged in commercial or trading activities. It is considered desirable, not only as a measure of law reform but also to promote Singapore as a financial and commercial centre, that the law on the subject, so far as it concerns commercial or trading activities by states or state agencies, should be clearly established by legislation.”
“This will continue to be governed by the unrepealed provisions of the United Kingdom Evidence by Commission Act, 1885, so far as Commonwealth countries are concerned, and by section 43 of the Extradition Act in respect of non-Commonwealth countries. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.25 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "Thai"the Bill be now read a Second time." This is a short Bill which deals with the taking of evidence in Singapore for use in civil or commercial proceedings abroad. At present, the law governing this matter is contained in certain United Kingdom Acts of Parliament of the last century - the Foreign Tribunals Evidence Act of 1856 and the Evidence by Commission Acts of 1859 and 1885. It is desirable to replace these old statutes with our own legislation and at the same time modernise the law. In the United Kingdom itself the old statutes have been replaced by the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act, 1975. Another reason for this Bill is to enable us to give effect to Singapore's recent accession to the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters of 1968. The main objective of this Convention is to facilitate the taking of evidence in member countries for use in civil or commercial matters. The Convention enables evidence to be taken in one member country for use in another member country. The Bill will empower our High Court to take evidence of witnesses present in Singapore for use in civil proceedings pending or contemplated in a foreign country. "Civil proceedings" is defined in clause 2 of the Bill to mean proceedings in any civil or commercial matter but the definition specifically excludes proceedings arising out of any fiscal, monetary or revenue law or measure. The exclusion is to ensure that our courts will not be obliged to render assistance in the enforcement of the customs, foreign exchange, taxation and other fiscal or monetary measures of other countries. The Bill does not deal with the taking of evidence for use in criminal proceedings.”
“Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and sea-bed at Sentosa containing a total area of about 30 hectares as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/79" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." - [Mr E.W. Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Two minutes past Four o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed. Appendix I QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER STOOD OVER TO NEXT AVAILABLE SITTING OF PARLIAMENT 26.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. *The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and sea-bed at Sentosa containing a total area of about 30 hectares as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/79" which is deposited in the land Office, Singapore. Sir, the major recreational facility on Sentosa is the 18-hole golf course. This golf course has reached its optimum playing capacity because of the large number of tourists playing on it. The opening of a first-class resort hotel on the island in July, 1978, and the possible development of more hotels on the island in the near future necessitate the addition of another 18-hole golf course. Sir, the Sentosa Development Corporation (SDC) therefore proposes to reclaim the foreshore and sea-bed east of the current reclamation at Kuchin Creek Estuary, which was approved by this House at its sitting on the 31st of January, 1978. The reclamation is shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/79". A copy of this plan, which I have just handed to you, Sir, is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members. The Port of Singapore Authority, as agents of the Corporation, will undertake the reclamation works which are expected to be completed in about 15 months' time and cost about $9.4 million. The fill for the reclamation will be obtained from Beting Kapal, Sisters' Shoal and Mount Serapong. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. *The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, pursuant to subsection (2) of section 29 of the Registration of Deeds Act (Chapter 281), resolves that the Registration of Deeds Rules, 1979, published as Notification Nos. S 31 and S 49 in the Gazette Subsidiary Legislation Supplement Nos. 7 and 8 of 16th and 23rd February, 1979, as contained in Paper S.L. 7 of 1979, be approved. Sir, the Registration of Deeds Rules which was first promulgated in 1934 and last amended in 1968 needs revision. Hence, the present Registration of Deeds Rules of this year which has been presented to Parliament for approval pursuant to statute. In the revision, opportunity has been taken to adjust the fees payable in respect of two items, items 5 and 9, shown in the First Schedule to the Rules. The fee under item 5 has been revised from $3 to $5 and that under item 9 from $2 to $5. These are considered fair as the existing fees are low and not commensurate with the work involved. 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 Act (Chapter 281), resolves that the Registration of Deeds Rules, 1979, published as Notification Nos. S 31 and S 49 in the Gazette Subsidiary Legislation Supplement Nos. 7 and 8 of 16th and 23rd February, 1979, as contained in Paper S,L. 7 of 1979, be approved. RECLAMATION AT SENTOSA”
“Sir, we have come to the end of a long session. On behalf of Members of the House, I would like to thank you, Sir, and Mr Speaker for the patience and kindness you have shown to us throughout this whole month. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear! ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." - [Mr E W Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Eighteen minutes past Seven o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed.”
“Sir, I beg to move, In page 7, line 18, after "any", to insert "other". Sir, this amendment is necessary for purposes of clarity. Clause 15, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 16 to 22 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read a Third time and passed. PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENTS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read, 6.15 p.m.”
“Sir, maybe the hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary does not depend on his MP's allowances for a living, but some other Members do. I am grateful to him for pointing out that when a solicitor gets into trouble, a disciplinary committee is appointed, and the hearing is public. If there is a case against him, he is prosecuted in court. One lawyer prosecutes and another lawyer defends and everything comes out in public, whereas in the case of a doctor, the Medical Council hears the case. What goes on inside we do not know. But the case can, on appeal, go up to the High Court and it is only there that it is heard and made public, but the original hearing is within closed doors. [Mr Fong Sip Chee left the Chamber] 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 E W Barker]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Clauses 1 to 14 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 15 -”
“Sir, I did not know that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour was also an expert on the law. As for bankruptcy, if he thinks that the provision is unfair, let me remind him and other Members of this House that if they should go bankrupt, they will also lose their seats. So what is wrong with putting this provision on lawyers who deal with millions of dollars of their clients' money?”
“On receipt of the report from the Inquiry Committee, the Council too will, under the amendment contained in clause 17, be obliged to act expeditiously within one month of the receipt of the report. It is hoped, Sir, that as a result of these changes the procedure of disciplinary control over solicitors will be streamlined, and be made more effective. To sum up, Sir, the amendments contained in this Bill are designed to give better protection to the public in their dealings with and reliance upon solicitors. This piece of legislation should be welcomed not only by members of the public but by those lawyers who would like to see the maintenance of the highest ethical standards in the profession. After all said and done, Sir, not all lawyers are crooks even if they take to politics. Otherwise, Sir, the administration of justice in the Republic will collapse. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 6.00 p.m.”
“Accordingly, a solicitor will be disqualified from applying for a practising certificate if he is an undischarged bankrupt, or he has entered into a composition with his creditors, or he has one or more outstanding judgments against him amounting in the aggregate to $100,000 or more which he is unable to satisfy within six months from the date of the judgment. Clause 12 read in conjunction with clause 22 will extend the powers of the Council of the Law Society so as to enable the Council to intervene effectively in a solicitor's practice in the circumstances enumerated in paragraph 1 of the new Schedule to be inserted in the Act. At present an Inquiry Committee must inquire into any complaint against a solicitor and report the matter to the Council before the Council can apply to the Chief Justice to appoint a Disciplinary Committee. This has led to considerable delays. To expedite disciplinary proceedings, clause 15 makes it mandatory for the Council to apply to the Chief Justice to appoint a Disciplinary Committee, without having to refer the matter first to the Inquiry Committee, in any case where a solicitor has been convicted of the offence of criminal breach of trust or of any other offence involving fraud and dishonesty. Sir, there have been some recent cases where solicitors have been convicted in court, have gone to jail, have served their sentence and yet the Inquiry Committee has not completed its investigations and findings. Moreover, where a case is referred to the Inquiry Committee, clause 16 requires the Inquiry Committee to commence inquiry and present its report within certain time limits so as to preclude the possibility of undue delay.”
“In the interests of both the profession and the public, the main provisions of the Bill seek to - (a) reconstitute the Council and vest it with adequate powers to intervene in a solicitor's practice when circumstances so warrant; (b) secure tighter control over solicitors by quicker and more effective disciplinary procedure. Clause 7 provides that the Minister may nominate not more than three advocates and solicitors to sit on the Council of the Law Society. Though this is new, it should not affect the independence of the profession or its self-regulatory character. The great majority of Council members will still be elected by those members of the profession who are in practice, but it is hoped that the Minister's nominees will spur the Council into action. Clause 8 deals with elected members of the Council who will consist of - (a) six practitioner members of not less than 12 years' standing; (b) five practitioner members of under 12 years' but not less than seven years' standing; and (c) four practitioner members of under seven years' standing. Clause 9 makes it compulsory for an advocate and solicitor to vote for the election of members of the Council. If he fails to do so without good excuse, he must pay a penalty of $500, which will be credited to the Solicitors' Compensation Fund maintained by the Law Society, before he can apply for a practising certificate. Clause 6 is designed as a preventive measure to safeguard the public from dealing with solicitors who are financially embarrassed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill seeks to bring about necessary and desirable changes to the Legal Profession Act in the light of present day conditions. These changes have been contemplated for some time and have been rendered all the more urgent as a result of the recent spate of cases involving lawyers who have failed to live up to the high ethical standards required of their profession. The work of a practising solicitor involves handling large sums of money on behalf of his clients. On any day a solicitor may have a few million dollars in his Clients' Account. So this demands a high standard of reliability and honesty. This may be said to be true of all professional men, but with regard to solicitors these requirements are a sine qua non to practice. The law itself recognises that the relationship between a solicitor and his client must always be one of uberrimae fidei, a Latin expression that presupposes the existence of the utmost good faith on the part of the solicitor towards his client. The Act confers on advocates and solicitors the exclusive right to legal practice in Singapore. In effect, it creates a monopoly. It is of utmost importance that this exclusive right is not abused, if public confidence in the profession is to be maintained. Needless to say, the respect for the professional code of conduct and its strict adherence is the responsibility of the governing body of the profession - the Council of the Law Society. It follows that the law has to ensure that the Council can and will effectively discharge its duties and obligations as guardian of those in practice so that the public standing of the profession will be maintained if not enhanced.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Kuo Chuan asks why it is necessary to appoint Judicial Commissioners when we can appoint more Judges of the High Court. The answer is this. As in England where Judicial Commissioners are appointed just to hear divorce cases, a situation might arise in Singapore where we have so many claims with regard to personal injuries or deaths caused by accidents on the road - we have a spate of cases - and in order to help the High Court get rid of this backlog of cases, a Judicial Commissioner is appointed just to deal with accident cases. As for the permanent Court of Appeal, this is a matter which we will give consideration to. But I must remind the Member again that the appointment of Judges is a matter for the Prime Minister to consider after hearing the recommendations of the Chief Justice. As for the High Court itself the Government does not interfere with the independence of the Judiciary. 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 E W Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. INCOME TAX (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 5.37 p.m.”
“It deals with the reprint of the Constitution, and it merely provides the Attorney-General with the necessary powers to print and publish the consolidated reprint of the Constitution. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 5.31 p.m.”
“Once this renunciation is registered with the Government, the act of renunciation is complete. Together with this, the citizen not only loses all his citizenship rights, but he is also free from any obligations (for example that of national service) which he may still owe to the State. It is solely for the purpose of dealing with such-minded citizens that clause 6 has been drafted. Under clause 6(2) the Government may withhold the registration of a declaration under this article: (a) if the declaration is made during any war in which Singapore is engaged: or (b) if the declaration is made by a person subject to the Enlistment Act unless he has - (i) discharged his liability for a full-time service, or (ii) rendered at least three years of reserve service in lieu of such full-time service; or (iii) complied with such conditions as may be determined by the Government. Our Constitution, as I said, was first enacted as the Constitution of the State within a larger federation. Accordingly, in dealing with the qualifications for eligibility for election as Head of State, the Constitution requires that such a person should be born "in Malaya". Now that Singapore is an independent sovereign nation, it would seem incongruous to have a provision stipulating that a person cannot be President of Singapore without his having been born in Malaya. Accordingly, the Bill seeks to amend Article 2 by deleting the words "born in Malaya" therein. As a result, a citizen will qualify to be President notwithstanding where he was born. Sir, I have spoken about the main amendments. There is another amendment which I have not referred to.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill will make several amendments to our Constitution. The principal amendment will restore the two-thirds majority rule in regard to future amendments to the Constitution. This was the position before December 1965 when the Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1965 (No. 8 of 1965) was enacted after the Separation. The amendment was required because of the constitutional changes that took place, firstly, in Singapore when we gained independence through federation with Malaysia, and later when we separated. Sir, 14 years have gone by since. All consequential amendments that have been necessitated by our constitutional advancement have now been enacted. The Government has therefore decided that the time has come to restore the position before December 1965, so that after this Bill goes through, all future amendments to our Constitution will require a two-thirds majority of the total number of Members of the House. This provision is set out in clause 7. Clause 3 seeks to amend the Constitution in so far as it will allow the appointment of extra Judges of the Supreme Court who will be known as Judicial Commissioners and will be appointed for limited periods of time and with such limited jurisdiction as may be deemed to be appropriate in order that they may help out in the disposal of cases in the High Court. Similar provisions for the appointment of temporary Judges to deal with any backlog of cases that may arise are commonly found in the laws of many countries of the Commonwealth. Another change relates to our citizenship laws. As the law now stands, renunciation of citizenship can be made by any citizen.”