Fong Sip Chee
Singapore
“These include the flyovers at Paya Lebar Way, Aljunied Road, and various pedestrian overhead bridges. Their design and erection procedures were all found to be safe. The PWD will in future require all contractors to adopt erection procedures with two or more independent safety systems.”
“Sir, the Museum has been out of the fishy business for quite some time already. Since the establishment of the Science Centre, I believe that all the natural history exhibits have been transferred to the Science Centre in Jurong where they are properly displayed in a better environment. The role of the Museum has changed.”
“Mr Ho See Beng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, with reference to his recent speech regarding increase in water consumption and the possible increase in water rates, whether there is no way of reducing water consumption without raising water charges, and whether he is aware that, as the Public Utilities Board has not ruled out t…”
“The Member for Thomson is absolutely right in his call for the insurance companies to be more active in the area of workers' protection rather than be the most passive party by writing out insurance policies. The Government does the legislation and enforcement. The insurance companies just write out policies.”
“We have also conducted a three-month health education programme, between November 1980 and January 1981, for deep-sea fishermen to educate them on the hazards of using compressed air and the precautions to take. A total of 352 fishermen have undergone this programme. The Ministry will continue to monitor the situation.”
“Sir, the proposed functions of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health are training, consultancy and research in industrial safety and health. A study of how such functions are discharged in some developed and developing countries started in April 1980.”
The complete record
Every one of 433 lines we hold for Fong Sip Chee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 9.
“It is, in fact, taking steps to seek the assistance of the Ministry of Health to draw up guidelines for doctors to follow on the same basis as those listed on the First Schedule of the Act. As to whether or not we should constitute a board or panel. I think the objective is the same. Rather than set up another administrative barrier, which may cause delay to compensation being awarded, I think the main objective is to ensure uniformity. I will bear in mind the Member's suggestion, which is a good one. We will look into that. In the case of an injured workman who refuses treatment, the Workmen's Compensation Act provides for suspension of his right to compensation until he offers himself for a medical examination. The hon. Member has mentioned that there are a few cases where the injured worker, having submitted himself for treatment, subsequently stopped medication and sought the treatment of physicians of traditional methods who are registered medical. practitioners. I must say that this is a dangerous practice and the injury may be aggravated, and if confirmed by the doctor treating him, might result in legal complication and the objection by the insurance company on the quantum of the final compensation. I would appreciate that if such cases do occur the doctor treating the worker should refer the case to us. So far, there are very, very few such cases, fortunately. With regard to the other irregularity mentioned by the Member about the differences in the sensitivity to pain experienced by different workers, with different cultural backgrounds, some workers cannot bear to see the sight of an injection needle, it must be pointed out that workmen's compensation, unlike the common law, does not take into consideration such factors.”
“So we are launching on a more practical approach to this problem rather than throw the problem out of its proportion. I just want to give the hon. Member some statistics on the number of cases of industrial dermatitis and also the amount of compensation paid. They are as follows:- Temporary Permanent Amount of Year incapacity incapacity Compensation No. of No. of cases cases 1975 6 Nil $ 210.59 1976 109 1 $5,400.97 1977 Up to 12th March 22 - $ 360.13 -------------------------------------------- Total 137 1 $5,971.69 -------------------------------------------- May I now deal with the hon. Member for Kim Seng. The Workmen's Compensation Act provides sufficient basis and guidelines for the award of loss of earning capacity in respect of permanent incapacity suffered by our workmen as a result of injuries while at work. The First Schedule to the Act specifies the percentage to be awarded for the loss of use of the various members of the body. The listing in the Schedule is very comprehensive and covers even the loss of parts of a member, that is, for example, the loss of phalanx. There is therefore no difficulty for the doctor to make an award for such injuries. However, I agree with the Member that there are certain types of injuries, such as those involving fractures or internal injury which cannot be quite easily determined as to the loss of capacity. It may be possible to have differing medical assessments on the loss of use of the part concerned. Where such differences of opinion occur, although very rarely, it is the practice of the Ministry to refer the injured workman for a final assessment by a specialist. The Ministry is aware of the need for uniformity in medical assessment for these types of injuries.”
“The majority of these cases were in the early stages and only a small number of 42 cases were severe enough to attract workmen's compensation. The Ministry has developed a hearing conservation programme as a preventive measure to control noise-induced deafness. The main emphasis of this hearing conservation programme, which has been widely publicised, is to educate and persuade workers to put on hearing protectors while at work. Noise control is carried out only when it is considered technically and economically feasible by the factories. Pamphlets on noise-induced deafness in three languages. Chinese. English and Malay, and also a booklet on the hearing conservation programme have been published and distributed free of charge to those industries with the risk of hearing loss. About 3,000 of the pamphlets have been distributed to noisy factories, such as shipyards, textiles, metal and other manufacturing establishments. Over 600 copies of the hearing conservation programme booklets have been distributed to shipyards, metal can manufacturing. woodworking, textile and other factories. At this stage. I might wish to draw a line that the hearing conservation programme is distinct from noise pollution control. In the United States, there were arguments as to whether 90 decibels should be the accepted norm instead of 85 decibels. So there was a research trying to reduce 90 decibels down to 85 decibels and they discovered that for every point reduced from 90 to 85 decibels it would cost the industry somewhere around US$2 billion. I do not think Singapore has reached that stage to mount that noise pollution control which is quite distinct from the hearing conservation programme.”
“2% A programme of prevention has been developed and the main task of this programme was the education of workers to minimise skin contact with the irritating and allergic substances through the use of proper protective covering, such as protective clothings, aprons, gloves, face shields and other barrier cream which the Member for Potong Pasir mentioned earlier. To launch this programme the Ministry printed and distributed 3,500 copies of a pamphlet on industrial skin diseases in two languages, namely, Chinese and English, and 1,800 copies of this pamphlet have been distributed to the various industries with known risks of industrial skin diseases, such as the electronic factories, woodworking where they deal with a certain kind of adhesive gum, cement, paint and other factories. Members are probably aware that industrial skin diseases are by and large a transient kind of disease. They are temporary in the sense that the condition may last for only a few days to a few weeks and very rarely result in residual disability. Once the worker is detected and is removed from the contact of the offending substance or is isolated from the environment, his condition invariably improves. The question of the great increase of 912 cases of noise-induced deafness reported was largely due to the introduction of the mobile audiometric screening programme for the noisy industries. It was started in May 1977. The screening programme covered a total of 1,731 employees from 33 shipyards and 942 employees from 20 other noisy industries, such as the bottling, cement and concrete pipe-manufacturing factories, etc. By the end of 1976, a total of 912 noise-induced deafness cases were detected.”
“Sir, may I first deal with the points raised by the hon. Member for Potong Pasir. Briefly, the Member is concerned with two matters, that is, industrial dermatitis and noise-induced deafness. For the benefit of Members of the House, industrial dermatitis simply means a skin disease. So I prefer to use this term from now on instead of using the technical term. Industrial dermatitis and noise-induced deafness were added to the list of compensable occupational diseases under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1975. It came into operation on the 1st October of that year. 2.45 p.m. On skin diseases, the Ministry has not conducted any survey recently but the figures of notification for the past two years for these two diseases are available, and for the information of Members they are as follows. There were 9 cases of skin diseases in 1975 and 187 in 1976. For noise-induced deafness, no case was registered in 1975 and 912 cases were detected in 1976. Hon. Members should not be alarmed by this figure as I will explain further on this. 870 of these were early cases and only 42 cases were what we regard as proper cases. So do not be alarmed with the high figure. The reason for the increase in the number of skin diseases confirmed in 1976 was due to the compulsory reporting of these cases by medical practitioners under the law. Prior to that, there was no requirement. So there might be cases that did not come to the attention of the Ministry of Labour. Most of these skin diseases were due to the handling of engineering oil or some raw materials, about 56.7% of them resulted from the handling of engineering oil; 10.7% from handling of resins; 8.6% due to solvents; another 8.6% due to handling of fibreglass; 2.1% on cement; 2.1% on paint; and the others about 11.”
“Sir, is not the Minister therefore implying that those who can afford to go overseas at the age of 18 and before 21 will stand the chance later to deliberately fail to subscribe to the oath of allegiance so as to evade national service? That means those who cannot afford to go overseas have no chance even to say, "I do not want to subscribe to the oath." Is there not a disparity? Would the Minister consider withdrawing this part of his reply?”
“Sir, would the Minister consider withdrawing that part of his reply where he said that those people failed to subscribe to the oath of allegiance for reasons of evasion of national service? Would the Minister consider withdrawing this part of the reply, because there is an apparent contradiction? That is the first question. The second question: Is the Minister not aware that the age for national service is set at the age of 18 and that the subscription to the oath of allegiance is at the age of 21? This leads me to the third question. At the age of 21, he would have served national service. So there is an apparent contradiction there. Would the Minister then consider withdrawing his entire reply in the circumstances?”
“Sir, may I just seek clarification from the hon. Minister, as my name was mentioned again yesterday. In what category would the Minister classify a programme which I am going to quote now? On Sunday night, there was a programme on TV where a young couple was asked to come up to the microphone. The compere asked him whether he was married, and he said he was "How many children have you got?" "I have two." "What about having more?" He said, "No, stop at two, Two is enough" The compere then said, "Yes, stop at two Two is enough. Use your hands." In what category would the Minister classify this programme? This programme was telecast live into the living rooms of all the homes in Singapore. Would not the Minister care to comment on this?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think I should have the right to clarify this point. I am not taking on the Minister on a debate on that point He got that impression Now he is hearing it from me. There was no question of me playing hero. That was not my intention It was a simple question asked. If the Minister chooses to believe the kind of impression which somebody else has, or he agrees to that impression, I have no control over his mental capacity. Sir.”
“I am not disputing what the Minister has said. He is quite free to say what he thought fit. What I want to clarify is that before the forum, we had a discussion in order to crystallise certain points to be raised. Otherwise. if everyone were to raise a point, the PUB team would not be able to emerge from the forum after midnight. So certain questions were crystallised and I had the honour to mention just one of them. It happened that that particular question was a bit pungent. The PUB team found the explanation rather difficult.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have forgotten one point. It is unfair for the Minister to accuse me of playing hero at the forum.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to clarify a few points. The first point is that I hope the House will note that I allowed myself to be interrupted twice by a Senior Minister and I was not allowed to clarify my position with one Minister So the standard is clear for all of us to assess and watch. If that is gentlemanly etiquette which the Minister expected, perhaps this is an example of what he meant by gentlemanly etiquette. Now, just a few points, Sir, When I referred to the one-room unit. I was referring to the emergency type one-room unit and not the improved type that the Minister has mentioned. That is the first point. The next point is with regard to my reputation or whatever fame the Minister has bestowed on me as a rat catcher. I did not ask for it. I would not have been a rat catcher if the Hon. Minister or some other Member had stood in that constituency, when somebody else would have been the tat catcher. The third point, Sir, If the PUB claims to have done so much for the people, I just want to know the cost of the construction of the PUB swimming pool. the saline content of that swimming pool and whether we, the consumers, since we pay PUB charges, are also entitled to take advantage of that pool which is right at the roof-top of the new PUB building.”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. The comparison does not seem to be quite correct, because in Changi there are very few hawkers whereas in Kreta Ayer constituency there are so many. Therefore, the use of such a comparison is not quite appropriate. It would seem that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary stands suspect of misleading the House.”
“- for maintenance of aged parents was regarded as mercenary because it is the filial responsibility of the young to look after the old. Asian society values again, Sir,I would have been quite satisfied with the former Minister for Finance.Unfortunately, our present Minister for Finance has found the formula. Asian values and filial piety can now be quantified; first, by $500 and now by $750. So this is our responsibility to look after the aged. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I say how much I appreciate your patience in allowing me to take the Floor. To you, Sir, I render my respect, not so much for the authority of the Chair, to which I always submit, but for your age and wisdom in your person that commands your position. 3.19 p.m.”
“In the slums. Would you be able to accommodate them? I know where to send animals to now - to community centres. But I do not know where to send the old people to, I know I can send animals to the Telok Blangah community centre if it has a menagerie. But old people are not animals. They are human beings. They are senior citizens and here they have to fend for themselves in the streets. Even if this poor old man or woman has a son, who unfortunately is not staying with him or with her for one reason or another, but keeps on discharging his filial responsibility of maintaining his father's or mother's livelihood, the old fellow is not allowed to bring in his son or daughter to form a family unit for rehousing, but he must necessarily seek to put up with a total stranger, if he finds one, that is. So much for our double-standard show or care and sympathy for our senior citizens. May I, Sir, just quote one last example? Many years ago, in reply, to a question by the hon. Member for Punggol, the former Minister for Finance said that claiming income tax relief for aged parents -”
“After all, the HDB requires them to quit, otherwise they are quite contented with the status quo, and pose no burden on the HDB, knowing that they do not qualify for HDB accommodation which I understand about 95 to 100 thousand of citizen families are on the waiting list. May I conclude, Mr Speaker, Sir, with a grand example of how hypocritical one can be. Here, may I call to mention the recent good deeds of our MPs, so publicised in the newspapers, notably our Ministers, going round their constituencies offering gifts to the old folks so that it has been so gallantly claimed that the less fortunate people may also enjoy the forthcoming new year. This is an annual affair and I salute those who do so much and so consistently over all these years. In resettlement action, however, being old and worse still, alone, is a sin and consequently an obstruction as far as the HDB is concerned. A single, old aged citizen, I emphasize old aged citizen, will not be able to secure an alternative accommodation on his own. He is compelled to go round the affected neighbourhood to look for another equally unfortunately, lonely, old soul so that if they both agree, they may jointly be allocated a one-room unit. But if he happens to be the only such outcast, (the term is what I suspect the HDB regards him as such. It is not my term, Sir) then he is left to fend for his twilight years in the streets.”
“Through their mutual assistance, such as scholarship for their members' children, they have been able to partially, maybe negligibly, relieve the State of the heavy burden on education and social services. It is only too unfortunate that nobody thought it useful or necessary to make fuller studies into the more positive aspects of their works. The Resettlement Department is the most controversial unit in this glamorous HDB outfit. This Department is even more hard-pressed to perform the dual functions of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. A not very helpful Dr Jekyll but certainly a monstrous Mr Hyde. I will tell you why. The Dr Jekyll role is portrayed through the hypocritical claim of help given to those affected by redevelopment. The common claim is that those affected and entitled to resettlement benefits, are reminded that they enjoy concessionary rents, etc. Let me say that these concessions are no concessions at all. They are entitlements. These people are entitled to these so-called goodies because they have been uprooted from their steady livelihood, having to plunge into uncertainties in the new environment and to re-establish themselves once again. It is only over and above all these `concessions' that the HDB can then justifiably claim to offer concessions. Mr Hyde's role is understandably less humane. Permanent residents are not entitled to rehousing nor business premises. I agree that permanent residents should not be entertained when applying for HDB accommodation under the normal public application, but in the case of resettlement, it is highly immoral that they be deprived of alternative housing or place of business.”
“It may be worthwhile for HDB to take note of Members' views, if they accept that Parliament, not their drawing office, is the supreme body in this Republic. I must state that in this matter, we shall not succumb to their whims and fancies. There is no need for us to look far for inspirations to this conversion programme. These one-room units can easily be retained and converted for a variety of uses, to name only a few: (1) Homes for the Aged - The design of these units is ideal for conversion into dormitories for the aged so that they can live as part of the community in a HDB estate, without having to suffer the feeling of being treated as castaways in some remote homes. In all probability, some of these units might actually be so converted, because I have great confidence, very rare confidence though, in the HDB's ability in quickly responding to the recent calls for the care of the aged made by so many Ministers. One up for the HDB on this. (2) A less rewarding proposition for the HDB. For areas urgently in need of community centres and lacking in suitable sites a conversion may be the most expeditious solution, although the superstructure may present some technical problems but these are not insurmountable. (3) Conversion of some of these units to provide for alternative accommodations for civic organisations affected by development schemes or urban renewal protects. One must not forget that our civic organisations, whilst handicapped by old fashioned management methods, have proved themselves to be useful and effective in serving the community in the past. I have no doubt that given help, they will continue to be so in the future.”
“Many years ago, I cautioned in this House that the one-room units would degenerate into slums over a short period of time. No heed was paid to Parliamentary discussion. To the HDB, we appear to them as nothing more than a debating society. Let me remind whoever lives under that illusion that we in this House survive because of his or their works, will certainly be very grossly mistaken. Again, Sir,I cautioned about the high plot ratio commercial development at the city centre, which inevitably must generate a high volume of traffic, particularly the Shenton Way and the Golden Shoe area. Today, we have the CBD restriction and the Area Licensing as our jackpot. It would have been a different matter if public applicants from the traditional slum areas were to apply for HDB accommodation, but the one-roomers are, hon. Members will agree, if I were to describe this short-sighted design of first generation flats as Government Planned Modernised Slum. Has not the HDB an obligation to do something for these poor folks? Despite repeated appeals by Members of Parliament, the HDB has been completely oblivious to the problem. From recent statements, we have been assured that action will be taken to resettle these one-roomers into larger units, but the whole process would take three to four years. Is this not an admission that the HDB has not been responding to appeals by MPs until recently? Various proposals were offered. One involved the conversion of these one-room units into larger two-room units by combining them; another was to demolish a number of blocks to make way for green areas and playing fields - this is a deficiency in planning now requiring rectification.”
“In this series, simple questions were asked of the participants and invariably, astounding, if not outraging answers were promptly proffered. Blessed is the poor goondu who finds the right answer to the question on how many Ministers for Education there were in the last 17 years! The mischiefs of WOGs unfortunately, are only one of the shots in a double barrel gun. The Housing and Development Board rightfully claims the right to trigger off the second shot. This time it is not WOG, but Santa Claus is at fault. Building decent houses for the people is the responsibility of the Board and it was for this need that the Board was established in 1960. Whilst it is true that the Board has done much in what its Chief Executive is paid for, success has carried them away to the extent that they, and only they, are the saviours of Singapore. The Board is the philanthropist for whom hon. Members in this House must labour in return for its kindness! Hon. Members are not capable to advise the Board, still less influence its policy. We have been assigned a task only to explain its actions and, worse still, to justify its misdoing. Sir, we stand on the platform. They do not. So we have to justify their misdoings. This, I am sure, Mr Speaker, Sir, is not a complaint only personal to myself. The hon. Member for Changi spoke on his part of the woes in this House yesterday, and I am sure other Members will also certainly have their share of woes too. No mention is made in the Ministry of National Development Addendum under the subject on "Housing and Public Projects" as to how the HDB proposes to alleviate the plight of the one-roomers. Other housing estates may not be that bad, but if you go to Manila Street you will find that you have communal kitchens. Then you will know what it is.”
“Again, the Ministry of Education takes great pains in including in its curricula subjects such as music appreciation, even resuscitate Civics under the cover of Education for Living, and finally the annual gigantic Youth Festival. But the TV holds steadfast to their ground. TV programmes have been equally successful in forcing down our throat poorly produced so called local cultural shows, stuffed with crazy, frequently `electrifying' dances. Electrifying indeed they are - if only we can find out why those healthy and able-bodied young men and women struggle in agony resembling electric shocks or anything but what the Education Ministry thinks of cultural dances. Sir, we now come to the interesting part. Refusing to be sidelined in this cancelling-out ingenuity, the Ministry of Education also shoots into its own goal. To encourage thrift, for example again, they change text books even more frequently than they change their Ministers. In its zeal to recover its tarnished image, the Ministry of Education boldly stated in its Addendum: `The education system has been revised to improve its effectiveness. Consequently the enormous wastage II underline) in terms of pupils not benefiting from the system and having to leave school prematurely will be drastically reduced' Is this an ideal, or is it not, as it sounded in the addendum, a statement amounting to an indictment of all the previous efforts of the so many Ministers for Education? Enormous wastage will be drastically reduced. That means in the past there must have been enormous wastage. The success of our education can best be reflected in what one hon. Member described to me as the `Goondu' TV shows, at which generous prizes were given away to hide embarrassment.”
“' I hope that this is genuinely the case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing, because if indeed one hand knows exactly what the other hand does, then this mutually cancelling-out exercise must give rise to doubts as to the seriousness and sincerity of the Government in our cultural policy. Let us now take a look at a few more scores in this game that has been going on for too long a time. The schools encourage our young to be thrifty and this is challenged by the television which advises them to buy, or pester their parents to buy what they or their parents do not need. The school says you must save money and open a POSB account, and the same TV teases you and the parents by suggesting why wait for such a long time to get so little money, buy Toto and your problems will be solved. The school reminds our children that there is no substitute for hard work, do not try to get rich quick. But the TV says, "Decidedly wrong! The Big Sweep is the alternative". In fact, the advertisements for Toto and the Big Sweep sounded so convincing that few people regard it foolish not to throw away a good portion of their salary so as not to be left out as non-starters. The Ministry of Education regards Western life styles and values as alien and pernicious to Singapore. The TV, however, offers effective anti-thesis to this proposition, one of which is through the sometimes less than tasteful advertisement for new jeans. They say new generation jeans but they do not tell you the period between two generations. Is it six months or one year? So you buy new jeans.”
“The conclusion is: discourage all traditional operas, or wayangs as they are known, at least make it difficult for their stagings, because this will be the best way to `encourage' one aspect of cultural heritage which our people are endowed with - by killing it. The Ministry of Culture, of course, pledged: `to organise a wide range of activities to promote a better appreciation of our cultural heritage. This will provide our young with the necessary cultural ballast against the erosion of traditional norms and values.' Just what are these norms and how wide is this wide range of activities? Music, or Art for Everyone, lyrics competitions? How are these activities able to provide the cultural ballast? An answer, if possible, would be welcome. If not, then may I venture to provide one: All these utterances have been repeated year after year in this House. The result: rampant drug abuse, still no cultural ballast in sight. To define the meaning of "traditional", the Ministry preceded by stating that: `It is Government policy to develop Singapore's rich cultural heritage derived from the Malay, Chinese, Indian and western civilisations' So, Western civilisation enjoys the confidence of the Ministry of Culture and becomes acceptable as part of our tradition. Interestingly, the Ministry of Education has different ideas. It stated in its Addendum: '...they will be taught not to adopt the life styles and values of the West that are alien and pernicious to Singapore society.”
“I am sorry. Sir, the hon. Minister missed the boat, as I' have mentioned it earlier. Lest he gets anxious, those remarks were complimentary. I think I should know better, Sir, if you know what I mean. Allow me to go on, Sir. As I was saying, if this rather stupid game does not stop, I fear that the more successful the Ministries of Education and Culture in their efforts to "imbibe the tried and tested Asian cultural and moral values", the more they are successful, the more resentment we will have to face. There will be more antiestablishment sentiments, not so much due to the lack of understanding of our national problems on the part of the people, but due to our own default in not understanding them. Really, Sir, the questions that we should ask ourselves are: Just what are these values and traditions that are so vital to our survival as a nation? And how are we going to achieve these great objectives set out for us? No attempt has been made in the Addenda to list out what those values, culture and traditions are. Even if the Ministries did try, there must be so many contradictions rendering the exercise a wholly frustrating one. This might well be a case of the 10, in this game two blind men trying to decide what an elephant looked like. So, Mr Speaker, Sir, their handicap left us with nothing but disorientated compasses with which we are to take part in this cultural treasure-hunt. The most profitable approach in this confusion, I presume, is by taking stock of what has been going on and take a count on the scoreboards of these two players. Perhaps we should begin with a conclusion already at hand. This approach certainly appears odd, rather unprofessional, even unenlightened and unorthodox to begin studying a problem.”
“Sir, I left the Ministry of Culture about five years ago. When I left the Ministry, it was in a happier state, Sir, I am quite confident in saying that at that time the cancelling-out exercise was never mooted and it was a very much happier Ministry. After I left, I cannot vouch whether this Ministry is indeed the same as before. Apparently it is not, Sin, because now the cancelling-out exercise is so blatant and I shall relate more later, I had expected the hon. Minister for Health to take me on family planning. I was caught.”
“Accordingly, whatever the Ministry of Education does, the Ministry of Culture promptly cancels out with an equally, and sometimes more effective counter-action. This process is then repeated with the procedure reversed. Let me first weigh the stake which we stand to lose so that we can watch the game with more vested interests. If this rather stupid game does not stop, I fear that the more successful the Ministries of Education and Culture in their efforts to -”
“Sir, in fact, last evening, we were trying to extend the time up to 6 o'clock and I was thinking that we ought to be home for dinner at not to forget, that would be after two hours of recreation. Sir, that was a suggestion with the hope that it would not upset everybody or confusing the geographers or the pilots. I received the suggestion with some reservation, as I am conscious of my official position in the Ministry of Labour, under which portfolio the question of working hours sometimes constitutes a rather unpleasant subject in negotiations. I will therefore leave it to this kind Gentleman on the other side of the House to muster sufficient courage to appease the hon. Member for Telok Blangah with that proposal. But to be fair to that Member, Sir, I did caution him that in the event he decides to risk his reputation in offering this counter proposal seriously, his arguments had better be of such high standard so that he may not, at the end of the exchange of the conversation, emerge as being one who is bemoaned of lacking in eloquence and found wanting in wisdom. Sir, I must apologise to the House for wasting your time by dwelling too lengthily and ironically on the question of saving time by wasting your time. Allow me now to acquaint you with a game which I shall call `cancelling-out' for the time being until we find a better name. The players in this game involve two parties, namely, the Ministry of Education and of course, its worthy opponent - the Ministry of Culture. [Laughter] Let us not laugh and dismiss this game too lightly, because in the end, we, the spectators, will turn out to be the real losers. Briefly, the game is very simple. The principle is: Whatever you can do, I can cancel.”
“There are equally convincing axioms in Asian teachings and philosophies to get our people around to adopt family planning without resorting to threats and name-calling. Here again is what I suspect to be another WOG thinking. Recent examples of WOGs at work in Government policies are abundant, but it may be a relief for our Ministers in the Front Bench to note that they are not alone in the pursuit of this title. In fact, only yesterday, they were mirrored in the appeal by one such latest exponent. This time, however, the title award must go to none other than the hon. Member for Telok Blangah, who so seriously advocated, of course, with detectable traces here and there of imperfect imitation of the Dale Carnegie style, for the implementation of Daylight Saving Time. Sir, I am no geographer, neither am I a pilot. But I do know that Singapore is approximately situated at Lat. 1 degree 21 minutes from the equator, and if it pleases the hon. Member for Telok Blangah. I might add that we are north of the equator, where the sun rises every morning at about 6 am, and sets every evening around 6.45 to 7.00 p.m. Daylight saving certainly is useful to countries further to the north of the equator, such as the United Kingdom. (The hon. Member for Telok Blangah might even tell us that he knows exactly the latitude of London.) I was a poor geography student and I did not quite get myself round to the coordinates of longitudes and latitudes. Sir, the episode does not end here. A colleague in this House, who happens to be on the other side of the House, suggested to me out of kindness that an alternative might well be to advance the working hours by one hour.”
“Eventually, as a result of a nasty accident, a total ban was slammed. The nett result of that short-lived concession was a 100% disagreement from the populace. For those who favoured total banning, the frightening sound of crackers could still be heard; and for those who refused to warm up the designated places, they were utterly frustrated. So much for one example of Government understanding of our culture and tradition. Mr Speaker, Sir, I speak without inhibition now, and as the Minister for Health is not here, it is not my intention to dispute the success of family planning in Singapore. On the contrary, I am confident that we will achieve our target even more effectively, now that the programme has been reinforced, I hope, with new vigor and approach by the present Minister for Health. There was a time, Members will remember, when there was great hullabaloo in this House on the subject. Hon. Members will recall the day when the House was entertained to some very amusing definitions as to what an ideal family should be. Briefly, we were told that a one-child family would be too lonely for the poor child; two would of course be most ideal; three would be a luxury; four would be unpardonably anti social, and five, God forbid, criminal. The population problem, in Singapore's context, is a problem not unrelated to Asian values. If a Western solution is the only feasible solution to this Asian problem, so be it. It has got to be done, and so it must be done. I do not think that our people would quarrel with the concept, or even with the incentives or disincentives. But the explanation, propaganda, publicity and exhortations must necessarily be Asian.”
“Some years ago, as a result of complaints of noise pollution, the Government imposed a partial ban on cracker-firing. The letting off of fire crackers was made an offence except in places designated as permitted areas, such as State-owned - I emphasise State-owned - open land and community centre compounds. Many Members are aware in my discussions with them, in the Members' Room, that I was quite vocal against this kind of a half-line action. I then held the view, and I still hold the view now, that the partial ban was doomed to failure. If the firing of crackers was regarded as obnoxious - indeed it proved to be unconducive to our well-being, apart from being an annual money-wasting folly, then the ban should have been total. This "half-way-house" policy succeeded only to expose the Government's ignorance in our culture and its complete lack of understanding of the meaning and significance of cracker firing. It was, and still is, believed - total ban now notwithstanding, that the ear-shattering explosions promise a whole host of things, from scaring away evil spirits to bringing good luck and fortune to the family and the household, not to forget that noise-making has been part and parcel of the local mode of celebrations. In fact, Sir, in funerals we happen to make the most noise. No one, therefore, would spend money to bring good luck to Government-owned designated places. Fortunately, these superstitious exercises remained as superstition, for otherwise, those who took advantage of that `leeway' would have succeeded in bringing good fortune to the designated places, perhaps even raised the land value which, of course, must consequently be put up for tender under the Urban Renewal Schemes. So this `leeway' proved to be neither here nor there.”
“express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the First Session of this Parliament, but regret to note the absence of any mention on the deficiency of the Government in the understanding of the problems of the people in the process of implementing its policies' Seriously speaking, Mr Speaker, Sir, few can dispute the high ideals expressed in the Addenda, some of which are so colourfully dressed with so many jargons, except to marvel a little in disbelief in some of the many intangibles and inadequacies so innocently confessed through the statements in both the Addenda to the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Culture. Sir, I recall that some years ago, the Deputy Prime Minister, in a speech that typified his in-depth knowledge in the potentials and prejudices of our people, went to great lengths to define the characteristics of what he called "Westernised Oriental Gentlemen", or WOGs as the Deputy Prime Minister endeared these people with that abbreviation. That speech was both enriching and invigorating. Indeed, it provoked serious mind-searching. I would have been quite satisfied with my comprehension of that speech if I had stopped just there. However, in giving his observations a little further probing, I discovered that the Government is not totally free from the symptoms of such decried qualities. Allow me to recapture just two previous instances which, I hope, will suffice to demonstrate the lack of understanding on the part of the Government in both the culture and traditions, which values the Ministries of Education and Culture so doggedly promised in the Addenda to inculcate in our young.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I had originally intended to take advantage of the Standing Orders to table an amendment to the Motion standing in the name of the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan in expressing our thanks to the President for his speech. Several Members have, in fact, indicated that they expected another diabolical manifestation of what other Members might describe as the negative part of my nature. Notwithstanding the lifting of the Whip, and the assurance given by the Leader of the House, I am still inhibited by the fear that being a Member on the Government Bench, an amendment might well be regarded as a gesture of disrespect to the President. Further, having listened to the gentlemanly and eloquent delivery of the speech by the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan, I have come to the conclusion that any amendment to the Motion will certainly be repugnant. I decided, therefore, that the Motion should remain as it is, at least for the sake of etiquette, and I shall try, though not without involuntary restraint, to be less pungent in my remarks at this Sitting. Without formally moving the amendment, I think that the Motion should more appropriately read as follows: `We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore.”
“The principals have a free hand on policy. Is this true or not?”
“Two questions, Sir. First, whatever you call it, whether it is the restructured education system or ill-structured education system, it is no longer of interest to us now as the whole thing has been dropped. But since the six- or seven-year system has been dropped, why are teachers still required to attend so-called evaluation courses? I have got a letter from a group of primary school teachers in the Stamford Constituency saying that they are still attending evaluation courses. Why is this going on? On the second question, the Minister has given a free hand to principals to adopt or to do away with the PPP. Will this free hand be given to principals on other policy matters too?”
“God help us as to what is going on in the Ministry of Education! They have been playing with guinea pigs long enough. We do not want to continue to be guinea pigs.”
“If it is a mistake, let us acknowledge that it is a mistake, Let us be brave or bold enough to declare that we will discontinue with the PPP, But no, that was not to be the case. So in the end, if all the principals were to decide to drop the PPP, there would not be any more PPP classes in Singapore. And then quietly the Ministry will say, "There you are. There are no more PPP classes." The Ministry can thus achieve its objective without having to admit in this House that it was a failure. I want to hear from the Minister whether or not the PPP was a failure, and whether or not the Ministry is going to discontinue with the scheme. May I refer the Minister to Hansard. Vol. 34, No. 18, col. 1317, dated 20th November, 1975 where at that sitting of Parliament the Senior Minister of State committed himself that the PPP would be incorporated into the education system. I would like to know from the Minister since when this change of heart took place, that is, between November 1975 when he gave the answer to a question from the Member for Serangoon Gardens and now. He made a firm commitment that he would incorporate the PPP into our education system, And yet today the principals are given a free hand. I can assure you, Sir, that this is one free hand which the principals would not want. There is another question on the six or seven-year primary education in the restructured education system which many Members have raised. We have not heard from the Minister up till now whether this system is on or off. My understanding is that the restructured education system, as has been pointed out by the Member for Telok Blangah, is still-born. I have also stated in the debate on the Budget that it is still-born. Yet the teachers are still required to attend the evaluation courses.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I was expecting the reply of the Senior Minister of State for Education to be more elucidating and encouraging. However, I must say that his reply has been most pathetic. It was nothing more than a pathetic mitigation. Parliament is the last place for us to plead for mitigation. What the Hon. Members wanted are firm commitments as to what the Minister would direct the Ministry to do. What we heard from the Minister of State was a mere restating of the various policies. He gave us a very good lecture on the contents of the various subjects. These are not what we want. We want a firm commitment from the Minister in categorical terms as to what line of action he would take to correct all these mistakes that have been plaguing the principals, teachers, parents and students. 5.30 p.m. I do not know how many sinecures there are in the Ministry of Education, perhaps the Minister can tell the House. He told us that as a result of reorganisation some senior officers have been removed. But he did not tell us why these senior officers were removed. The most unsatisfactory reply I have heard is that on the PPP. This is only one of the minor problems. In fact, there were many other problems mentioned by Members. In areas where teachers and principals should be given some free hand to decide, they were not given. But in the matter of "tried failure", as I have said in my speech in the debate on the Budget statement, the Minister suddenly became so generous that he said. "We will leave it to the principals and the teachers to decide whether or not to adopt the PPP." Why this sudden generosity? This is not the way to cover up a mistake.”
“Whatever he calls it, he says it is $6,000 a year. So multiplying $6,000 by 10, he came to the figure of $600,000 for 10 years. I do not know how he came to that figure. It should be $60,000 However, he succeeded in misleading the Minister into replying, but both based on wrong arithmetic. I cannot blame the Ministry of Education this time for the bad performance in the numeracy. Mr Ho See Bong: Thank you for pointing it out.”
“Sir, if I may just make an observation. I am not contributing to this debate. The Member for Bras Basah quoted the income per capita of S6,000 a year.”
“When that is done, probably the job of training, education campaign and consultation can be taken out of the Factory Inspectorate so as to allow them more time to do enforcement. Until that is done. I am afraid that the Factory Inspectorate has got to take on more than they can chew. On the suggestion of the Member for Potong Pasir that the minutes of meetings of safety committees in factories should be checked, may I inform him that the last minutes I read was on Vosper Thornycroft. If he is interested. I can give him some time to read them. I have just finished reading.”
“Thank you very much for taking the words out of my mouth, I am caught in a dilemma: if I do not reply I would create the impression that I am not knowledgeable: and if I should reply, in the process I may have to expose the ignorance of the two Members opposite. As the Member for Moulmein has said, these workers are not unionised. I accept the suggestion of the Member for Potong Pasir. He spoke on behalf of the unionised workers who work under regular factory environment where the hazards can be identified easily and are regular. In the construction sector, the workers are not organised, and what I have said still holds true. The Member for Boon Teck is still very persistent on the question of pay. As I said earlier there is no difficulty in getting a job in the construction industry. I know for a fact that employers did pay them quietly for fear that they might run away. There is no fear that the workers would suffer. What I do know is that they were actually paid. I do not expect the Member for Kim Seng to agree with the rest. One brick-bat in exchange for a few bouquets, I think, is more than a fair deal for me. I think what I have said earlier should be able to satisfy him. Most of the workers were, in fact, paid because the employers were afraid that the workers would just walk away. It is so difficult to find workers. One of the functions of the Ministry is training: in fact what is going on at the moment is that we are providing training for one NTUC personnel. We have got one trainee, if I am not wrong. Lastly, may I say that the I LO expert will be asked to make a feasibility study on the establishment of an Institute of Occupational Health and Safety.”
“Well, Hokkien is not a written language. Hokkien can be romanised but it might become a Frankenstein of a language.”
“There was no complaint on my part of illiteracy or the poor standard of literacy. On one occasion I did propose in jest to the former Minister for Education (I cannot remember which Minister because there have been so many changes) that they should call themselves the "Ministry of Literacy" and let the Ministry of Culture undertake the educational aspect. But the Ministry of Culture appears to be equally unacceptable to me to play this role. There is no question of the workers being unable to read the pamphlets which have been written in the simplest form. I do not think we can simplify it any further.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is very unfortunate that in more than half of the industrial accident cases the workers themselves were responsible. It is very difficult for our enforcement officers to lay hands on them. I must also take this opportunity to caution the workers that the Ministry would not hesitate to take whatever action necessary to bring them in line with our requirements. Most of the time we managed to catch hold of the employers because we could locate them but not the workers. If the NTUC can do their part by exhorting the workers to be more safety conscious, there would be no further need for any stoppage of work at all. There are three aspects to safety. First, there is legislation. Second, the physical environment, that is. the provision of safety appliances and supervision which are the responsibility of the employers, and third, which is the most important, the behavioral aspect. If the employers are not keen to supervise their workers, the workers would not be keen to comply with the safety requirements. So in the end stoppage of work will not save the workers at all. As I have said, more than half of the accidents were actually due to the carelessness and even blatant defiance of safety rules on the part of the workers. They should consider themselves lucky that we have not brought them to court. More of them should be.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid my answer will disappoint the Member for Boon Teck. Our philosophy is not to pay a person for no work done. There is a shortage of construction workers. The employers normally plead with the Ministry to allow their workers to resume work, otherwise they will run away to other worksites or even adjacent worksites. I do not think the workers really suffer because there is a shortage of construction workers. It is not the policy of the Ministry to pay workers for no work done.”
“I look forward to a more solid support from the NTUC, and I take this opportunity to thank them for the help given to the Ministry of Labour all these years.”
“I agree with the Member for Anson that regular inspections of factories, industrial establishments, and worksites would certainly help to check accidents. In fact, in 1 975 the Factory Inspectors made a total of 7,118 inspections, and follow-up visits to the factories and work-places. As a result of these inspections. 5,538 cases of noncompliance with the Factories Act were detected and the employers were required to rectify the safety hazards. In addition, normal punitive action was taken against offending employers in court. Regular safety campaigns, as proposed by the Member for Anson, have also been conducted. For instance, the Member might know of the "Shipbuilding", "Construction" and "Safety and Health" Campaigns were launched in 1974. There were also other campaigns launched by the Ministry for a particular industry to highlight the problems peculiar to that industry. They were not general campaigns which the people concerned would find very little interest. The Ministry of Labour has also published a number of pamphlets and guides. Pamphlets such as the "Do you know" series to educate the workers on various hazards like explosion, fire, and health pamphlets to prevent noise-induced deafness and silicosis were distributed. The Ministry also sent out safety circulars to all the construction sites informing contractors of the latest discovery in safety hazards which some contractors may not have any knowledge of. We have also sent out safety guides, set up committees to look after peculiar problems of certain industries. I hope that with the cooperation of the employers, and I really appeal to them to be more positive, we should be able to do very much more to promote industrial health and safety.”
“The present staff strength of the Inspectorate is adequate only to carry out enforcement if we are to do only enforcement. But I do not believe at all that any unimaginative and strait-jacket enforcement is going to help the situation. Members are aware that the Factory Inspectorate is also involved in other aspects of work. It not only updates factory legislation, it is also involved in training. education, safety programmes, campaigns and providing consultation service. So you can see, Sir, if the Factory Inspectorate staff, as I said earlier, were to confine themselves to enforcement, I think they ought to be adequate. But since they have to take on the additional responsibility that I have just mentioned, they have to stretch their staff very thin. In fact, I must compliment them in that in spite of the great volume of work they have done exceptionally well. 3.00 p.m. The Member for Anson has also mentioned that many accidents were not reported. May I explain here that not all accidents are reported, or reportable, to the Chief Inspector of Factories. Only an accident which incapacitates a worker for more than three days is classified as a reportable accident under the Factories Act. Some accidents might have come to the knowledge of the Member for Anson. But I am afraid there is no legal requirement for employers to report all accidents to the Factory Inspectorate. Of course, they are still entitled to workmen's compensation. But not all accidents are reported. In the last two years we have improved our system of reporting. There is now a more effective system of monitoring accidents. I would say that most of the accidents which occurred are within the knowledge of the Factory Inspectorate.”
“Members can see the vast difference between the two figures and the total loss to the economy as a whole. Of course, the individual factory suffering one accident may not see the pinch of this loss but we cannot afford, as a whole, to lose nearly - million man-days per year simply because of industrial accidents. We have been doing very well in the industrial accidents front and for this my Ministry has been activated to have some work-plans for this year. The work-plans have been set out to work to a certain target, but I am afraid we do have our handicaps, in terms of staffing, for example. I will handle this point when I reply to the Member for Anson. As I have said earlier on, the Member for Anson is probably aware that the two most accident prone industrial areas happen to be the shipbuilding and repair and the construction industries. It is because of all the experience that we have had in the past that we have set up a special unit to look after the construction industry. This unit has been in operation for several years now and it also has its own set of regulations. Regarding the increase of 10 posts to establish the new Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section. in fact, the bodies are already there though not in full establishment. They have been there for the last one year by Establishment Warrant and the Estimates only reflect the action of the Ministry in requesting for the staff. We have assigned them to look after the Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section. The present establishment in the Factory Inspectorate comprises 52 posts of factory inspectors and other technical staff and field officers. Of these, 16 of them are in the Building and Construction Section, and 11 in the Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section.”
“But what the Member has said is completely true: that a human being is not given the value that some employers would give to their dogs. The contractors have no excuse at all for failing to provide the various paraphernalia for industrial safety, because the cost of all these items are included in their tender quotations: these are what is known as the "Preliminaries" item. It is also augmented by another item - "prime cost" - a sum of money set for the provision of industrial safety appliances and equipment. Most employers, as the Member has pointed out, regard the provision of money spent on safety measures as non-productive expenses rather than as a kind of long-term investment for better returns. The Member for Moulmein touched on the question of loss of productivity, the loss involved in compensation and the loss of production time and cost. This is a very real problem but unfortunately most employers do not appreciate this point. Let me give a few figures to illustrate what the Member for Moulmein was trying to impress upon this House. Some figures were quoted by my Minister of State earlier on but may I repeat them for purposes of comparison. In 1973 the number of man-days lost due to industrial action was 2.295. During the same year the number of man-days lost in industrial accidents was 549,499. The following year. 1974, the number of man-days lost due to industrial stoppages was 5.380. For the same period, the number of man-days lost due to industrial accidents was 6 16.559. In 1975, the number of man-days lost due to industrial stoppages was 4.853. The number of man-days lost due to industrial accidents in 1975 is not available but I can safely put it at plus/minus 700,000. So Hon.”