Goh Keng Swee
Singapore
“Sir, since that was not a supplementary question, may I be allowed to comment briefly on that. When we form a Committee of the House to inquire into an activity of the Government, the assumption must be that there has been something improper. In this instance, where is the impropriety?”
“The career of Brig-Gen Lee is well-known to the public. It has been published in the newspapers. Why then does he come out with all this drivel, other than to impute improper motives? Mr Jeyaretnam: Sir, I object to the term "drivel" as spelt out by the First Deputy Prime Minister. He should know better as a Member of this House.”
“Sir, this is getting most tiresome. So I will just say this - that Brig-Gen Lee Hsien Loong has proved himself in so many ways, both inside the Army and outside the Army, to be a person of outstanding quality. When the Member for Anson says the public are worried, he is again talking nonsense.”
“Sir, I rise to clarify. Actually, the limits are not set by me. I do not have a heavy hand. I regard the MAS as the implementing agency of Government, and in this respect I have to listen to the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Trade and Industry.”
“How you set them, how restrictive or how liberal, would determine two things: (1) the degree of imported inflation from abroad via goods and services from abroad, and (2), the degree of capital inflow from abroad which will affect our money supply in Singapore.”
“Sir, if the land could be more profitably used, say, for commercial or residential purposes and if the Minister for National Development requires such land, then, of course, the land will be acquired and the generous terms will apply.”
The complete record
Every one of 833 lines we hold for Goh Keng Swee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 17 of 17.
“But he went on to say that the Singapore Government had agreed to the Malaysian Government stationing their troops in Singapore under the separation agreement. He also stated that under the separation agreement Singapore had agreed that Malaysia shall be responsible for the defence of Singapore. Sir, it is important that the two Governments should be in no doubt as to what the separation agreement provides for and what it does not provide for. Nowhere does the separation agreement state that Singapore has agreed that Malaysia shall be responsible for the defence of Singapore. If the Malaysian Parliamentary Secretary had consulted his own Attorney-General, he would never have made a statement like this. The second point is that the agreement in respect of bases and facilities in Singapore, as we have repeatedly pointed out, is limited to those bases and facilities used by the Malaysians on the island at the time of separation. The right of the Government of Malaysia is the right to continue to maintain these bases and to make such use of these bases as they may consider necessary for the purpose of Malaysia's external defence. It does not extend to the right to occupy new bases with new troops. Here again, if the Malaysian Government disagrees with our interpretation, the matter can quite easily be resolved by reference to an independent international tribunal, whose decision should be accepted as binding on both Governments. Sir, let me, for a moment, move away from the constitutional and legal aspects of this matter. There are two points to which attention may be drawn. The first is the obvious one that the Second Battalion of the S.I.R.”
“Second, when such a defence treaty is agreed and signed, it will provide, in accordance with paragraph (3) of Article V, that "the Government of Singapore will afford to the Government of Malaysia the right to continue to maintain the bases and other facilities used by its military forces within Singapore and will permit the Government of Malaysia to make such use of these bases and facilities as the Government of Malaysia may consider necessary for the purpose of external defence". The operative words are "right to continue" bases and facilities "used" by Malaysia's military forces. Camp Temasek was not "used" by Malaysia's military forces on the date of the separation agreement - 7th August, 1965, or the date of separation, 9th August, 1965. By section 9 of the Constitution of Malaysia (Singapore Amendment) Act, 1965, passed by the Parliament of Malaysia, all property which before Malaysia belonged to Singapore reverted to Singapore once again. We offered to submit the issue to arbitration by an independent Commonwealth or international tribunal as a means of resolving the disagreement as to the interpretation of the Agreement. Up to now, this offer has not been accepted by the Government of Malaysia. In the meantime, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence, Malaysia, issued a public statement on 21st February, 1966. In one respect, the statement was re-assuring in that the Parliamentary Secretary stated that his Government accepted the fact that Singapore is an independent and sovereign State. He also stated that the Malaysian Government had never maintained the right to station troops in Singapore without regard to the agreement and without the consent of the Singapore Government. So far so good.”
“I replied on the 9th February stating that the question of the continued presence of a Malaysian infantry battalion in Singapore was something that should be discussed as a separate issue. In the meantime, it was urgent that the Malaysian battalion vacates Camp Temasek to allow units of the Second Battalion of the Singapore Infantry Regiment to return to their camp since they had been living in very difficult conditions in the jungles of Borneo for the past six months. Since the Tengku's statement, there has been public controversy as to the respective rights of the two Governments under the separation of Singapore agreement in respect of stationing of troops. The Ministry of Defence, Malaysia, claimed that "it is obligatory on the part of the Singapore Government to allow Malaysian troops to stay in the present bases or, if they require these bases for their own troops, to provide suitable alternative accommodation." Article V (3) of the Independence of Singapore Agreement, 1965, was invoked in support of this claim. The Singapore Government had made it clear in a statement on 18th February that it does not accept this interpretation of the agreement on two grounds. First, Article V stipulates that the two Governments will enter into a treaty of external defence and mutual assistance to provide for matters set out in four separate sections. The two Governments have not as yet entered into any such treaty.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to inform the House of the latest position in regard to the continued presence of a Malaysian infantry battalion in Singapore. The issue was first brought to public attention by a public statement made by the Prime Minister of Malaysia on 17th February, when he described how he was taken aback by what he termed the sudden demand by the Singapore Government that the Malaysian battalion should vacate the camp that they had been occupying. This came, in the words of the Tengku, as a bolt from the blue. In fact, quite some time before the Tengku's public statement, events had already been set in motion. The first step was taken by the Malaysian Ministry of Defence. In a letter dated 4th February, 1966, i.e, nearly two weeks before the Tengku's public statement, the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia and Minister of Defence wrote to me proposing that a Malaysian infantry battalion remains stationed in the island. This particular battalion had been in occupation of Camp Temasek, following upon the posting of the 2nd Battalion, Singapore Infantry Regiment, to defence duties in Sabah. In February the battalion had completed its tour of duty and was scheduled to return to its own camp by stages. Advance parties of the battalion had already arrived in Singapore and were in occupation of Camp Temasek to prepare for the arrival of the rest of the battalion. At the same time, the Malaysian battalion in Camp Temasek was scheduled to move to another battalion camp in Tapah and, in like manner, advance parties of this battalion had moved to Tapah. The request of the Malaysian Defence Minister was therefore an unexpected move not in conformity with the schedule of rotation of troops previously laid down. It constituted an obvious departure from policy.”
“I think we have not reached the stage where we are to discuss the merits or demerits of the proposed amendment. We are considering whether the Member should, after having been given a very long notice, specifically as Chairman of the N.T.U.C., spring an amendment at the last minute in this House. If the Member says that it is a very vital matter, then it should have been attended to long ago. In principle, I think it is bad to introduce amendments without notice, where Members of the House would not have been given every opportunity to consider them, and I will oppose the introduction of any amendment to this clause.”
“Mr Speaker, on a point of order. Should not the hon. Member seek the general assent of the House to introduce this amendment if he wants to move an amendment without giving notice?”
“During a state of war, the President may direct that members of the Force may be attached to the Singapore Armed Forces or the armed forces of any Commonwealth country. Part VI of the Bill provides for a University Training Corps and a Cadet Corps, and any such Corps may, with the concurrence of the President, be attached to the Singapore Armed Forces. The President is empowered to commission members of the University Training Corps and of the Cadet Corps. Clause 60 provides for the establishment of the "People's Defence Force Benevolent Fund" which, as the name implies, will be administered for the benefit of members of the Force by a person appointed by the Minister. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Dr Goh Keng Swee]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. ADMINISTRATION OF MUSLIM LAW BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.01 p.m.”
“Provision is also made in Part II of this Bill for the President to commission officers of the Force. Part III deals with Colour Training Service of members of the Force. No member of the Force shall be required to attend at weekly parades for a total of more than 20 hours in one month or at continuous training for more than 16 days in any one year. Every member of the Force shall be required to perform Colour Training for a period of three years. The Bill also includes provision for members of the Force performing Colour Training and their dependants to be entitled to receive pensions and gratuities in respect of injury or death resulting from such Colour Training Service. A member of the Force performing Colour Training Service may be released from the Force on his giving three months' notice of his desire to do so. Certain offences are provided for in clause 25 to which a member of the Force is subject when he is not attached to any unit of the Singapore Armed Forces. Part IV of the Bill provides for a Reserve composed of Volunteers and National Servicemen. The President is empowered to recall by Proclamation all or any part of the Reserve to Colour Training Service at any time. Members of the Reserve may also be called up for mobilised service. Service in the Reserve shall be limited to a minimum period of seven years after which a person can resign on giving three months' notice. Under Part V, the President is empowered to call out all or any part of the Force for mobilised service. Members of the Force who are called up for mobilised service and their dependants are eligible for pensions and gratuities for injury or death resulting from such service. Members of the Force, when mobilised, will be subject to the provisions of the Army Act with regard to discipline.”
“Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." On 23rd December this year I introduced the Army Bill which provides for the establishment of a full-time armed force for the State of Singapore. I then mentioned the additional need to have a part-time fighting force which would be an essential part of our Armed Forces. This Bill provides for the establishment and maintenance of a volunteer force to be known as the "People's Defence Force". Sir, we are a small nation and our financial resources are limited. We therefore cannot afford to raise and maintain large defence forces on a permanent basis. The regular army will have to be complemented by a volunteer force. The People's Defence Force will call upon our young men and women to serve their country and undergo military training without seriously interfering with their normal lives. The training they receive will not only prepare them for the part that they will take beside our regular Army but also provide them with the necessary disciplines and skills required in the task of nation-building. Sir, to come now to the specific provisions of the Bill. Part II provides for the raising and maintenance of the People's Defence Force. The Force will be divided into corps, regiments, services and departments. Provision is also made for the disbandment or amalgamation of one or more such units. The enlistment into the Force is open to Singapore citizens of 18 years of age and above who are medically fit. Boys between the ages of 14 and 17 years may be enlisted as drummer boys and band boys in the Force. With regard to discipline, the provisions of Parts IV, VII and VIII of the Army Act will apply to members of the People's Defence Force.”
“Sir, I have briefly indicated some of the main developments of the Association during the last two years, a reflection of the changing dimensions of the task that has to be performed by the Association. The last two years saw major steps and concerted efforts to strengthen the organisation of the Association. It is necessary now to amend the objects of the People's Association as provided in section 10 of the People's Association Ordinance, 1960, so as to enable the Association to engage in tasks that were not foreseen when it was formed in 1960. 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. -[Dr Goh Keng Swee]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. 3.00 p.m. ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR 1966 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [1st Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.01 p.m.”
“To date, there are 129 kindergarten classes carried out in community centres mainly those in the rural areas. The number of children attending them is in the region of 3,800. In order to make more effective the services provided by the community centres, it is an advantage to enlist the support and active participation of local community leaders in community centre activities. Experience has shown that such support and participation are essential to the success of a centre in organising a wide range of activities to meet the varied needs of the community. The People's Association has formed Management Committees consisting of local community leadership so that their support and guidance for the benefit of the community could be placed on a regular basis. However, the local leaders forming the Management Committees are people who are residents in the neighbourhood of the respective community centres and they are not members of the Corporation within the meaning of section 10 (2) (b) of the People's Association Ordinance, 1960. In considering the great number of centres involved and the number of members for each Management Committee, ranging from seven to fourteen, it would not be possible, in practice, to appoint only members of the Corporation to be members of Management Committees, as provided under that section. Amendment to the Ordinance is accordingly necessary. I may mention, in passing, that a Conference of Management Committees will be held on 8th January to 10th January at the Conference Hall in Shenton Way, when all aspects of community centre management will be discussed.”
“It has been found that anti-national elements in the Communist United Front have been making use of various kindergarten classes organised by them, especially in rural areas, as a convenient instrument for carrying out their subversive activities and furthering their nefarious political ends. It may puzzle those innocent of the villainy of which pro-Communist agents are capable, how such innocuous institutions such as kindergartens can be used as a channel of subversion. Sir, this is done in two ways. The first is to teach infants and toddlers to sing anti-government jingles. In ancient China, the chanting of anti-government jingles by children usually heralds popular uprising against the imperial dynasty. Our modern Marxist-Leninists do not despise this well-tried and ancient method. The second way of subversion is provided by access to parents of the children in their kindergarten classes. In the countryside, where the population is lacking in sophistication, parents believe that their children are being educated in these kindergartens and are accordingly grateful to the teachers. These teachers are, of course, Communist United Front operators who never fail to cash in on such gratitude by propagating the party line. The Communist United Front kindergartens are completely illegal and are conducted by untrained and unlicensed teachers. However, summarily to close them down without providing replacements would play into the pro-Communists' hands, as this would only direct towards the Government the wrath of irate parents whose children have been deprived of kindergartens. Therefore, it has become necessary to organise kindergarten classes in community centres. Action to organise such classes along proper lines was taken at the beginning of last year.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the record of the People's Association during the past five years, since its incorporation in July 1960 under the People's Association Ordinance, 1960, was one of rapid expansion of its activities throughout Singapore. Before the P.A.P. Government assumed office in 1959, there were only 28 community centres and 3 holiday camps. Today it has, under its control, a network of 180 community centres and 7 holiday camps spread throughout the island. It has also set up a million-dollar National Youth Leadership Training Institute at South Buona Vista Road. More than 60 per cent of our population is below 21 years of age. The question of channelling the abundant energies of youths towards constructive ends in national building and leadership poses a major problem that needs to be urgently tackled. The Government has, therefore, established this Training Institute at South Buona Vista Road and this has marked a new phase in the concerted long-term efforts of the Government to solve the problem of youths in Singapore. However, youth is not the only problem that needs to be tackled through organised activities at community centres. Through experience, it has become evident that there is a need for organised social, cultural, educational .and athletic activities in the community centres to meet the varied demands of the other age groups. One outstanding example is the need to set up kindergarten classes and children's clubs for children, particularly in the rural areas of Singapore.”
“Sir, I beg to move, In page 3, line 36, to leave out "Singapore Volunteer" and insert "People's Defence". It has been decided that the Singapore Volunteer Force be renamed the People's Defence Force. I think the nomenclature that we are proposing to use is more appropriate in the present circumstances. This amendment is as a result of this decision. Amendment agreed to. Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 3 to 158 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported, with an amendment; read a Third time and passed. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn." - [Dr Goh Keng Swee]. Adjourned accordingly at Twelve minutes to Seven o'clock p.m. ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE OF SINGAPORE FOR THE YEAR 1966 (PAPER CMD. 25 0F 1965)(Cols 0551-0554)”
“The qualifications of persons for enlistment and conditions of discharge and transfer to the reserves are included in Part VI of the Bill. In brief, a person for enlistment must, among other things, satisfy the qualification of Singapore citizenship. The enlistment or commissioning of others on the recommendation of the Army Board is also provided for in clause 97. A soldier may be discharged on sentence by court-martial or by order from the President. Part VII includes general provisions like summoning of witnesses for courts-martial and the rules of evidence. The conduct of proceedings at courts-martial and the admission or rejection of evidence shall be subject to laws made by Parliament. Rules of evidence as adopted at proceedings at courts-martial are the same as those followed in civil courts in Singapore. Other provisions included in Part VII are of a routine nature. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“Provision is also included for the convening of courts-martial and the appointment of a Judge Advocate - General. Part IV is applicable not only to the Army but also to the other Services, such as the Navy and the Air Force, if and when they are formed. Now the offences of mutiny and sedition in the Armed Forces are punishable with the maximum sentence of death. Those falsifying statements and documents shall receive a sentence of two years' imprisonment. In order that the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts will not be interfered with, provision is included that a person who is subject to military law shall not ordinarily be tried by court-martial for offences such as treason and murder, unless the offender was at that time on active military service. Although a court-martial may try person subject to military law for any offence, provision is contained in clause 63, subclause (2) that the President shall have power to mitigate or remit any sentence passed by a court-martial. Clause 64 provides for the appointment by the President of a person in the legal or judicial service with not less than five years' service, or a person qualified under the Advocates and Solicitors' Ordinance with not less than five years' experience, as a Judge Advocate-General. The duties of a Judge Advocate-General shall include the appointment of a Judge Advocate at court-martial, and the tendering of advice to the Army Board on the validity of the findings and sentences of courts martial. Provision is included in Part V of the Bill for the commissioning and promotion of offices by the President, who is also empowered to cancel commissions. Provision is also included in this Part for the President to grant honourary commissions to suitable persons.”
“The Barisan Sosialis hope that when this happens, they would be "top dogs", or rather I should say "top running dogs". So they hoped before 30th September this year! British military protection today has made quite a number of our citizens complacent about the need to conduct our own defence preparations. These people assume that this protection will be permanent. I regard it as the height of folly to plan our future on this assumption. And if there is any basis on which we, as an independent country, can plan our future, it will be on the opposite assumption, that is, the removal of the British military preserve at some time in the future. Nobody - neither we nor the British - can say when this will be. It may be 5, 10 or 15 years - maybe longer, maybe shorter. Whatever the time maybe, it will be useless then to think of building up our defence forces. The time to do so is now, and the Bill before the House provides for the establishment and maintenance of the Singapore Army. Sir, coming to the main provisions of the Bill. Part II provides for the establishment of the Army and its Reserve. Part III provides for the establishment of an Army Board, the Chairman and Members of which will be appointed by the Minister. The Board will be responsible for the overall administration and discipline of the Army. It is empowered, subject to appeal to the President, to vary the conditions of service to permit a soldier to extend the term of his commitment or be placed in the Reserve. It may also, with the approval of the President, vary the basis of persons to be enlisted in the Army. Part IV of the Bill deals with discipline and provides for punishable offences and due execution of the sentences imposed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." There is a common saying among the Chinese masses which goes as follows: [The Minister read the quotation in Mandarin which he then translated into English as follows]: `Good men do not become soldiers; good iron does not go into making nails.' This popular Chinese saying originated among the Chinese folk. The reason for it is not far to seek. China's long history is interspersed with years of violence. Then, as the fortunes of imperial dynasties declined, ambitious men rose to contend for mastery over the empire. And it was the fate of the ordinary people to provide or to be press-ganged into military service for one or the other of the contending parties. It is not surprising, therefore, that military service is not popular when a soldier risks his life not for his country or for his people, but for the advantage of one contending group or another. Whoever wins, he loses. The position we are facing in Singapore today is completely different from that of dynastic struggles of former imperial China. Accordingly, the Chinese saying I have quoted becomes dangerous folly. Our army is to be engaged in the defence of our country and people against external aggression. Today we are unable to do this task by ourselves. It is no use pretending that without the British military forces in Singapore today, the island cannot be easily overrun within a matter of hours by any neighbouring country within a radius of 1,000 miles, if any of these countries care to do so. Everybody - and this includes the Barisan Sosialis - can see that at least one of our neighbouring countries does care to do so.”
“Several Members have mentioned that there has been no implementation of the agreement. I was the Finance Minister at that time, and I say that that agreement has been fully implemented in so far as the revision of wages is concerned. There have been wage adjustments in several categories of the daily-rated workers in accordance with the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. But the union, for some reason quite unknown to me, was of the opinion and apparently is still of the opinion that everyone should have an increase. There was no such recommendation by the Commission of Inquiry. That being the case, the union has no case whatsoever for asking for increases in pay, and therefore the question of back-pay does not arise.”
“On a point of clarification, Mr Speaker, Sir. Mr Speaker: If the Member will give way. Mr Ho See Beng resumed his seat.”
“TRADE UNIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Trade Unions Ordinance (Chapter 154 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Labour (Mr Jek Yeun Thong); read the First time, to be read a Second Time on the first available sitting day after Wednesday, 5th January, 1966, and to be printed. DEBATE ON ANNUAL BUDGET STATEMENT Order read for resumption of debate on Question [13th December, 1965], "That the Assembly approves the financial policy of the Government for the year 1966.".-[The Minister for Finance]. Question again proposed. 2.48 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has no plans to construct a community centre in the new MacPherson Housing Estate in the foreseeable future. There are already in the Aljunied Constituency one standard type and one rural type community centres. In nearby Paya Lebar there are one standard type and five rural type community centres. If the residents of the MacPherson Housing Estate urgently want a community centre, they should club together and rent suitable premises from the Housing Board for this purpose. Now that we are an independent nation, social initiatives of this kind are to be encouraged. The attitude of expecting Government to be the universal provider is much to be deplored. It is a legacy of our colonial past. My suggestion to the residents of MacPherson Housing Estate is far from fanciful. In fact, a community initiative of this kind took place in Tanah Merah Kechil, Changi, where the residents clubbed together, built a community centre, and donated it to the People's Association. The residents of Changi are a sturdy breed. When the sea curfew imposed hardships on their fishermen, they did not sit on their haunches and wait for dole-outs by the Social Welfare Department. They organised a whip-round, bought food and provisions and gave these to the families of the fishermen. Their scale of donations is much more generous than the Government ration scale. It is sturdy self-reliance of this kind that I commend to the residents of Aljunied, who surely cannot be in any respect less worthy than those of Changi. BILL INTRODUCED 2.47 p.m.”
“Sir, if a taxi driver is driving so badly that he receives three summonses in a day, he should try to seek a more suitable occupation than driving taxis.”
“If hon. Members of the Opposition show a complete disinterest in the proceedings of this Assembly, are the Ministers obliged to circulate written answers or give them written answers? It does seem to me in the circumstances improper.”
“The hon. Member will be pleased to know that her constituency ranks very high in the building programme of community centres. Her constituency, as well as Anson and Cairnhill, is the only constituency without a single community centre. They have priority over other constituencies. The trouble, of course, is to get land. If the hon. Member can help the People's Association in finding suitable land which is available at a reasonable price, she will be performing a service to everybody. ADMISSION TO PRIMARY ONE IN 1966 (Statistics) The following Question stood in the name of - 6. To ask the Minister for Education how many children have been registered for admission to Primary One in 1966, giving figures separately for the four language streams and for Government and Government-aided schools.”
“I am not aware of such a regulation. I think what the hon. Member is referring to was a statement of intention made sometime I think after the referendum - 1962 is it? - when the Government made a statement saying that if there are more than 200 families living in a village, we will try to build a rural type community centre. Preference, of course, will be given to the Barisan areas where their influence is strong, so that the population may be instructed in the correct way in order that falsehood may be confronted with truth. For this reason, during 1962 and 1963, there was quite an active programme of building rural community centres, and we laid down as the minimum criterion that unless there are at least 200 families, then we would not consider building a community centre. This does not mean, of course, that there must be a community centre for every 200 families. If, in fact, we take this literally, then we will have in Singapore something like 200,000 community centres. COMMUNITY CENTRE IN MOULMEIN 5. Mrs Devan Nair asked the Minister of Defence when a community centre can be provided for the residents of the Moulmein Constituency.”
“Mr Speaker, the Government has no plan to construct a community centre in the place mentioned by the hon. Member, as a community centre already exists some 500 yards away. There are already eight community centres in the hon. Member's constituency. He is, therefore, comparatively well off in this respect.”
“Sir, there is one community centre. As I said, this is in a rather ancient building of wooden structure. The owner of the building is now staying, I am told, in Indonesia. The landlord is somewhere else. Obviously it is a risky thing to effect improvements to this particular place. Geylang Serai, of course, is fortunate in having at least one community centre. There are three other constituencies which have none whatsoever, and the Member is therefore comparatively fortunate. After 1966, as I said, we can look forward to having another one. He must, in the meantime, contain his soul in patience. COMMUNITY CENTRE AT JALAN SEMBAWANG KECHIL 4. Mr Teong Eng Siong asked the Minister of Defence whether the Government has any plan to construct a community centre at Jalan Sembawang Kechil (formerly known as Ulu Sembawang, Indian Village, 12 m.s.) and when such plan will be implemented.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the community centre at Jalan Penggaga is housed in a building which is rented from one person who is not in Singapore, and the land belongs to another party. Therefore, it is not advisable to spend money on structural improvement in these circumstances. Improvement of all community centres in other respects is continually attempted by way of recruitment of better qualified staff, training of staff and appointment of management committees. The Assemblyman of the area is usually invited to be the adviser of the management committee and it is his responsibility, as much as that of the Government, to improve the amenities and activities of community centres. In reply to the second part of the question, the Government plans to build another standard type community centre at Geylang Serai. In fact, it has already acquired a site. But we do not have enough money for the construction of this centre until sometime after 1966.”
“The first available sitting day after the 23rd December, 1965. ADJOURNMENT MOTION (Business Motion)”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have the recommendation of His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara to introduce this Bill. Sir, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to provide for the establishment and maintenance of a people's defence force and for purposes connected therewith." Bill read the First time. Second Reading”
“The first available sitting day after 20th December. 2.47 p.m. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS (Business Motion) Resolved, "That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the Motion of Thanks to the Yang di-Pertuan Negara* which has been set down for today be deferred to the 14th December, 1965."-[Dr Toh Chin Chye]. *The Motion reads as follows: "That the following Address in reply to the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara be agreed to:- We, the Legislative Assembly of Singapore, express our thanks to the Yang di-Pertuan Negara for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the present Session of this Assembly." SALARY OF SPEAKER”
“Sir, I have the recommendation of His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara to introduce this Bill. Sir, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to provide for the establishment, administration and discipline of an Army, the establishment of an Army Board and for purposes connected therewith." Bill read the First time. Second Reading”