Ho See Beng
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State whether he is aware that each time re- settlement takes place, the business houses or firms suffer a terrible loss. Although the HDB could provide them with alternative shop premises, they have to rent them from the HDB.”
“Sir, I want to ask a supplementary question with vested interest. This concerns a teacher who upgraded himself or herself and got admitted into the University, but the teacher has got to forgo his or her salary. In the case of an SAF officer, if he is sent to the University, he does not have to sacrifice his salary.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask whether the Minister will consider giving incentives to consumers who read their own meters?. I ask this question because it will save PUB a substantial amount of money by way of salaries for meter readers, if the PUB succeeds in teaching consumers how to read their own meters.”
“But before I could explain the relevancy, I was interrupted by the Member for Anson, who stood up and denied that he had ever said anything about supplying me with such a list.”
“Sir, as I have said, I intend to appeal to the Minister for National Development whether he will consider giving priority allocation of flats to the Blair Plain residents who will be resettled by PSA soon.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, when the House adjourned at 8.00 pm last night, I was reminding the Member for Anson that I have yet to receive his list of Blair Plain residents whom he claimed to have attended his meeting and approached him for assistance on the matter pertaining to resettlement.”
The complete record
Every one of 839 lines we hold for Ho See Beng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 17 of 17.
“Benham has nowhere stated that the Government as an employer can always toy with the idea of going back on an agreement which it agreed to implement. No economist, as a matter of fact, no human being with an iota of common sense and fair play, would support a breach of contract. Today, the Minister has gone to the extent of suggesting that at no time would the Government be prepared to revise the emoluments of its employees in such a manner that it would involve additional commitments in the form of back pay. I quite appreciate the Minister's capacity and capability in side-tracking the issue with regard to the Government's agreement with the P.D.R.E.U. He conveniently forgot to inform the House that when an agreement was signed in 1961 with the P.D.R.E.U. it was `current pay' and not `back pay'. But the terms of this agreement were not implemented by the Government up to now. Hence today in 1965 it has become `back pay'. If the Government had implemented it after the agreement signed in 1961, then there would be no back pay. But the agreement was not implemented by the Government up to now. Why should the workers -”
“Otherwise, the Government should necessarily make use of these men of science in an efficient and effective manner so that their assistance will be available for our industrialisation programme. Our education policy should necessarily be tailored to meet requirements for industrialisation. We should make sure that the manpower available is utilised in a manner where they can give their best. There should be more co-ordination not only in policy matters but also in their implementation. Otherwise we will be faced with a situation where doctors and engineers will be attached to the Ministry of Law, scientists in the People's Association and Ministry of Culture, lawyers in charge of boiler plants, and philosophers at the helm of the Economic Development Board. It is high time our Ministers woke up from their slumbers and do the needful. A casual glance at the funds allocated to the Ministries for 1966 does indeed convince me that the expenditure in the public sector is quite substantial and that, as far as possible, no undue and unnecessary commitments should be taken up during the course of the coming year. But it need not necessarily mean that the Government should not honour its pledge to its employees and treat them with contempt the agreement solemnly entered into with its employees who are members of the Public Daily Rated Employees' Federation. I understand from the Budget speech and the provisions made for different categories under the Ministries and the Honourable Minister's reply to the Member for Telok Blangah that the Government has no intention to honour an agreement which was entered into the year 1961. Our Minister for Finance has also quoted F. C. Benham. But F. C.”
“Our higher institutes of learning, like the University of Singapore, the Singapore Polytechnic and Nanyang University, have to provide the necessary manpower to make our industrialisation programme a success. In this connection, our Prime Minister has repeatedly stated that Singapore should produce more men of science and technocrats. But I am afraid that when, on the one hand, the Prime Minister frequently stresses the necessity to produce more scientists and technicians, his Government officials (I heard the Minister for Culture talk about his expansion programme just now) on the other hand do not know how to make full use of our Science graduates from the Universities. Thus you have a sad and sorry spectacle of an Honours graduate, who has specialised in Nuclear physics, being attached to the Ministry of Culture. I do not think the Ministry of Culture has any intention of manufacturing atomic bombs even though it is a pleasure to see that the message carried by the Mirror, the official organ of the Ministry, continues to radiate its powerful message throughout Singapore and Malaysia. I understand that there are two more Science Honours graduates, one specialising in Chemistry and the other in nuclear physics, attached to the People's Association! If I am not mistaken, the investment in a Science graduate is approximately three times that of an Arts graduate. And if we cannot tap their talents and are only in a position to assign them jobs which any Arts graduate can do, then I think it would be more economic to close down the Science Departments and concentrate on Arts graduates!”
“It appears to me that wage restraint is a meaningless empty slogan which is very often used and abused to make one class in the economy alone shoulder heavy burdens, inconsistent with a welfare State. Low wages need not necessarily mean low wage cost per unit of production. In other words, keeping the wages low need not necessarily reduce the cost of production or help in any other objective of our industrialisation programme. High technical efficiency coupled with skilled managerial personnel would more effectively lower the cost of production than cheap labour. The United States products, for instance, are successfully able to compete in the continental markets even though the wages of an average U.S. labourer is much higher than that of the labourer on the continent. Thus proper training for skilled labour and specialisation would more surely canalise our industrialisation in the right direction than exploitation of labour. Further, below standard wages would adversely affect the morale and efficiency of industrial labour especially when there is a set pattern in Singapore due to the efficient and effective role of the trade union movement. Hence we cannot and we refuse to accept any suggestion that cheap labour is essential to promote industrialisation in our country. Let this Socialist Government think more in terms of reducing wage cost per unit of production through promotion of skill, specialisation and other economies of production instead of repeating the slogans that prevailed in a Gladstonian economy. Sir, it is heartening to note that the Government intends to spend on education $129.2 million for the year 1966. It is quite true that we should not consider any investment in human capital a wastage.”
“While reserving my comments with regard to this policy, I wonder whether the Honourable Minister has at any time or moment considered the measures essential to see that the huge profits are not drained off from the economy. If the return to capital is diverted to foreign countries, there will he no reinvestment on expansion of industries. For the sake of industrial expansion, the excess of profits should be siphoned off and ploughed back into the economy in the form of additional investment. Even though the Finance Minister stressed his plans to create a climate for initial investment, it looks as though he has not given much credence or thought to the idea of the second round of expansion. It would he interesting to know whether the Government has anything up its sleeve to make sure that after laying golden eggs, the hen does not carry them back overseas. Since the Government does not supply us with relevant figures for Singapore, I can safely assume, as in the case of Malaysia, that the amount of profits that has been remitted overseas during the past five years from Singapore has far exceeded foreign investments in this country. If that is the case, I am afraid the industrialisation programme might not receive an enthusiastic and unqualified support from the population. I also understand that wage restraint is the corner-stone of the Government's industrialisation programme. The workers will be only too pleased to make any legitimate sacrifices provided it would put our economy on a sound footing. Further, the working class should be assured that they are not exploited in order to fatten the coffers of a handful of unscrupulous entrepreneurs.”
“The expansion of our pioneer industries essentially depends on a proportionate expansion of our markets abroad. Hence, if these overseas nations who might be willing at this juncture to render us a helping hand by allowing or permitting us to gain access to their markets at the initial stage refuse to allow us to make further inroads into their market, the expansion of industries in Singapore would become a remote possibility, resulting in a stagnation in our economy. Thus our industrialisation programme and a solution to our growing unemployed would not become possible in the long run if we geared our economic policies to temporary solutions, without taking into account the possible impact in the long run. Further, a change in the political situation in South-East Asia and in the strategy of these nations in this part of the globe might necessitate a re-orientation in their economic policies towards Singapore, which in turn might not be very conducive to our industrialisation programme. Thus I do not think the Finance Minister's statement with regard to our economic emancipation is likely to be of much practical value to this nation, unless he is prepared to think in terms of the shortcomings, the obstacles, which might crop up now and again. In order to attract foreign entrepreneurs and foreign capital, and with a view to creating a climate for foreign capital, the Government has not only provided tax free holidays or pioneer status to industries but also promised to write oil the capital in a matter of few years through the provision for heavy depreciation.”
“I wonder whether he has been fully briefed on the difficulties to be encountered while gearing our industrialisation projects to these overseas markets. I am not for a moment being pessimistic or cynical, but I will be failing in my duty if at this juncture I do not pin-point for the Government the drawbacks and the pitfalls. First of all, we have to make sure that these industrialised nations would be prepared to provide us with a share of their local markets. Further, even if for argument's sake we agree that we are assured of a certain percentage of their markets, the Minister should remember that it introduces a new economic variable, The fluctuations in the markets of these countries are bound to have repercussions in our industrialisation programme, and hence the ups and downs in the foreign markets would create jolts and jerks in our economy. Since these industrialised nations might, or might not, provide us with an expanded market in the long run, it would be advisable for our officials in the Economic Development Board to study the markets in these countries, the fluctuations, the prospects for Singapore to enter these markets, the short-run and the long-run effects, the type of products which could successfully compete with others in the long run etc., etc. Diversification in markets as well as products has to be made instead of having all eggs in one basket. Unless a proper study is made, all our dreams of our economic prosperity and a solution of our unemployment problem are bound to remain in Utopia. An assurance of a certain percentage of the markets of industrialised countries is unlikely to provide a long-term solution to our industrialisation programme.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I expect our new Finance Minister to present to this House a deficit budget instead of a surplus budget, for a surplus budget indicates a pedantic luxury. However, the Finance Minister's Budget speech does reflect the Government's determination to put our economy on a sound footing. I am pleased to note that the Finance Minister has not let us down. The nation has full confidence in his ability, and the allotment to development programme as well as housing and social services indicates his appreciation of the gravity of the situation and also the immediate necessity to raise the standard of living of the people by adding more positive points to the economy. But my appreciation need not necessarily mean that I fully subscribe to the ideas contained in every aspect of this budget, as well as the policy behind it. It is extremely difficult and physically not possible to go through the entire budget with a tooth-comb and offer constructive criticisms and suggestions. Nevertheless, I shall make an attempt to analyse the budget from the point of view of the workers who have to contribute the lion's share towards the successful implementation of the development programmes of our democratic socialist Government. A look at the budget tends to create a feeling of appreciation and apprehension. Regarding our industrialisation programme, the Finance Minister appeared to be highly optimistic about our market prospects in Western countries, which, according to the Minister's calculations, are likely to provide outlets for our manufactures. While congratulating the Minister on striking a note of optimism, I am afraid I cannot share his views with regard to our markets.”
“Will the Government also give an assurance that some of the claims of the civil service unions will be back-dated when the Commission make their findings?”
“Will the Minister also inform us, when this Salaries Commission is set up, firstly, will the views of the civil service unions he sought? Secondly, will the Teachers' Union representative be allowed to help the Ministry in drawing up the terms of reference?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I know when and how soon this Salaries Commission will be set up? It has been the practice of the Government to delay the setting up of a Salaries Commission and all that. It is always the case that the setting up of a Salaries Commission takes a very, very long time. Will the Minister kindly indicate when this Salaries Commission can be set up?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand from the Minister of State for Education that it is the intention of the Minister to set up a Salaries Commission. This Salaries Commission is to inquire into the salaries of all the civil service. I am asking a question about the removal of the anomalies that have existed since 1958 until today. May I know whether the Salaries Commission is to inquire into the revision of salaries, or into the removal of the anomalies in the salary structure, or both?”
“I wish to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $15,916,530 for Head 1202 ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1965.”
“We hope, therefore, when the next year we convene, much of the acid I have used here will not be necessary and things in general will have improved for the taxi-drivers to earn a living unmolested by the authorities and free from the grim exploitation they are subjected to. Sir, I beg to move.”
“Meanwhile, the owner who extracts a high rental for the car sits smugly at home raking in his money from several cars, I suppose, while the poor wretch has to shell out the $80. What exacerbates the matter is that I am sure the police are conversant with this state of affairs, but they do precious little about booking the real culprits who perhaps would not feel the pinch even if they were fined several times more. I believe if the police want to do some milking, they should get the milch cows - the owners of the taxis - and not the threadbare taxi-drivers, who can hardly make a day's living. I hope these problems of taxi-drivers on which I have enlightened the House will receive the sympathetic attention of the police, that there will be an end to the inhuman persecution of the taxi-drivers, and that they will be allowed to earn a living in the same manner as the majority of workers in Singapore - unoppressed. Sir, to sum up, I hope I have painted a lurid picture of the exploitation of taxi-drivers and the harassment they suffer at the hands of the police, because it was my intention to do so. We hope the remedies will come because the situation is deteriorating and, furthermore, intolerable to a "movement" which prides itself on having solved the problems of workers to a very successful extent. I hope you, Mr Speaker, will not pull me out of order again when I mention the word "movement" because I have to make it clear that the Taxi-Drivers' Association is an affiliate of the N.T.U.C. The problems of taxi-drivers are not ones that defy solution. They can be solved, provided they are approached in the right spirit and a realistic attempt is made to solve them.”
“I have aired all these grievances before, but there has been no response from the authorities. We would like to know why, and we have the right to know why. The days have gone when the cries of oppressed sections of the people can be ignored with equanimity. If there are any inhumanities, then they must be removed and, in my opinion, the system of fines operated by the police bears too heavily on the poor taxi-drivers. I therefore think they must be modified. I am not for one moment suggesting that the fines must be removed, but they can be modified. Traffic offences are a part of the occupational risks of taxi-drivers, but it is too cruel a deterrent to apply high fines for minor offences as crossing over a red light or parking near a white line. I hope appropriate attention will be given by the authorities, because this is being said in Parliament. There appears to be another cruel activity of the police in that they are hounding taxi-drivers for an offence such as excessive smoking. Sir, I do not know whether such an offence of excessive smoking is under the charge of the Traffic Police or the R.O.V. Anyway, I hope the Ministers concerned will heed my warning about this and hope that they pay special attention, whoever they may be. In truth and in fairness, they should hound the owners of the taxis who are the real culprits and who never do anything about appropriate repairs, although they are told so by the drivers to whom they rent out their vehicles at exorbitant rates. 4.00 p.m. Between the owner and the police, the taxi-driver is between the devil and the deep sea. The cruelty reaches enormous proportions when the taxi-driver is made to shell out as much as $80 as a fine for the smoking offence.”
“I am sorry, Sir, I withdraw from my capacity as President of the N.T.U.C. I will speak in my capacity as the Member for Bras Basah.”
“But now it has become different with the accent we have given to creating employment opportunities. With the issuance of more taxi-driving licences, taxi-earnings are not what they used to be. On the average, they earn between $7 and $8 per day. In this connection, Sir, the fines imposed by the police take on an inhuman aspect for minor offences which are settled by compounding. As much as $20 is fined for a first offence and subsequent fines are higher. As President of the N.T.U.C., my ears are full with representations from taxi-drivers asking the police to reduce their fines to a rate consistent with their earning capacity. In other words, they are asking the police to have a heart, not to extract too heavily from their meagre earnings. The N.T.U.C. feels, therefore, that a system should be introduced whereby a warning is issued to a first offender, and small fines consistent with the nature of the offence and with the earning capacity ---”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 1202 he reduced by $100. Mr Speaker, Sir, there was a time when the police in Singapore were feared. This was under colonial rule. Guilty and innocent feared them equally, for they were then a truculent lot and the common ordinary people in Singapore suffered terrible indignities at their hands. Under Malaysia, there was a relapse apparently, when a journalist in broad daylight performing his duty was man-handled in a very rough fashion. This incident, to our considerable regret, was whitewashed and it is now an ugly memory. That was under Malaysia and it was the only jolt in the process which we had started in 1959 of orientating the police to the fact that they were dealing with their own people and not serving colonial masters. Those who could not change their old attitudes, of course, had to go, and was good riddance. We had no place for such bullies in Singapore which is committed to making life pleasant and agreeable for its humblest Citizens. There was no place for police brutality and callousness. They were of the old order and were identified with the colonial government and were perhaps one of the very strong reasons for doing away with colonial rule. Sir, all this is supposed to have changed with self-government and independence. But I am afraid that some dark corners still exist. It has been represented to me that the traffic police are displaying a singular callousness to the problems of taxi-drivers. Taxi-plying is not a lucrative profession as it used to be in the colonial rule where it had been the policy of colonial government to limit the number of taxis, and the fortunate small number of taxi-drivers earned good money.”
“I beg leave to withdraw the motion. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $3,020,600 for Head 0906 ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1965. Head 1202 -”
“For instance, if the leader of one camp, the uncompromising camp, said, "Singapore's independence is phoney; we will have to establish the phoney character of Singapore's independence before anything else," And a chap from the other camp said, "There is nothing wrong with Singapore's independence. We start from that basis," and he received a bash on the head for that, it would clear up the minds of some of our people here who have not decided one way or the other. These people would then be able to say "A pox on these chaps." And the clowns would then be out of business. But I am afraid it will not be as innocent as all that, because political capital can be made out of the bashing they give each other. We will have the Barisan Sosialis shrieking that the bashing was done by the prison guards, acting on authority, and the Government would get a bad name. Therefore, to protect us from getting a bad name, we have got to protect these chaps from themselves. I would, therefore, like to know what special precautions have been taken by the prison authorities to prevent a recurrence of these political fisticuffs. Have extra guards been posted near them during their meet-together hours or has the position been reached where they are "raring to have a go at each other" and they have been separated from each other for their own good? Well, if the second thing has taken place, it is well and good for us, then no fights can take place, but these chaps, to save their face, may make up to preserve the outward form of unity, but this unity which they may pretend would be a sort of fragile unity, easily broken once they engage in controversy. And who is to say that another bashing will not arise? Sir, I beg to move.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0906 be reduced by $100. Mr Speaker, Sir, some ugly incidents involving political detainees were recently reported in the Press. It appears that these detainees, divided into two camps on the basis of the schism in the Communist world, namely, the Russian pragmatic or revisionist communism versus Chinese pristine Marxism, had a free-for-all. Sir, we do not really mind their having a free-for-all amongst themselves because, if they had their heads hit in the right places, perhaps they would be rid of all the stuff and nonsense that they are trying to inflict on the people of Singapore and return as sane citizens. We in Singapore do not care for either brand of Communism. We are getting along fine without Communism of either kind tripping us up. So, if the free-for-all ended with those beneficial effects, we would perhaps welcome these free-for-alls and might have even considered suggesting that they be televised, so that people could get a good idea of the state of confusion these chaps are in themselves, before they set out in their dedicated business of confusing others. There would be both ideological entertainment and entertainment perhaps for boxing fans. I am sure all of us would get a belly-laugh from their slapstick comedy. It is rather surprising to note that the gravity of Communism can descend into such shambles as a free-for-all. It is like a fall from the sublime to the ridiculous. 3.45 p.m. I dare say all of the hon. Members here will agree with me, say, if their squabbles and fights were televised and the whole of Singapore would be suffocated with mirth.”
“I suppose there is no need for me to wonder whether they did, because the sorry situation tells an eloquent story of neglect. Now the cure at the moment is increasing the number of vehicle licences and a temporary halt to the issuance of licences to taxi drivers till the situation is reassessed. The long-term cure is the setting up of an organisation to enable taxi drivers to own their own vehicles. The time has come to think in such terms if taxi drivers are to earn a livelihood without exploitation.”
“Mr Speaker, I fully agree with the Member for Kampong Kapor that here we do not have bus owners and taxi owners registered in the name of Ali Baba. And there is more reason why the number of vehicle licences and bus licences should be increased. Another trade union colleague of mine, the Member for Telok Blangah, has asked a pointed question about the imbalance between available taxis and taxi drivers. The figures are fantastic - so many more drivers than available vehicles. Anyone can see that there is such a ripe field for exploitation, especially when it is known that the majority of taxi drivers are not owners of vehicles. What is the net result of such a grotesque disproportion between vehicles and drivers? It is that the owners of vehicles, knowing that there will be a competition from the thousands of taxi drivers for their vehicles, will push up their rentals for them and lay down all sorts of conditions. The taxi drivers will have no alternative hut to accept the conditions and the rentals laid down by the owners, rather than put up with the disgrace of unemployment. But what we would like to know is how things have been allowed to get out of hand in such a manner, and who is responsible for this mess? Or has somebody felt that by doing so we will be increasing employment opportunities? It is as plain as A, B, C that if you increase the number of taxi drivers, there must be a corresponding number of vehicles. Otherwise taxi owners are the only ones who are going to profit, after squeezing the taxi drivers by high demands on them, because of the paucity of vehicles. Sir, I wonder if these questions did engage those responsible for this situation.”
“I beg to withdraw it. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $611,800 for Head 0305 ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1965. Head 0309 -”
“Our history is not made yet; it is still in the process of being made - the change from a colony to an independent State. The immigration laws devised to protect the economic welfare of the people in Singapore have caused some amputations in the lives of our people which could be amended with a little humanity. And this is significant because it will not cost anything at all. So I hope a little rethinking will be done about this matter and the barriers lifted in these special cases. The immigration suggested will not amount to a large influx, and I think in the last analysis we can afford a little humanity. Sir, I beg to move.”
“That they are such good gate-keepers is worthy of commendation. They do a good job for us. But in respect of the aged parents of citizens of this country, the Department should relent a little because it is humanitarian. And what is far more important in Singapore, where we have taken a very grim and realistic attitude to life, is this, that their presence here would not constitute a threat to the opportunities in the economic field to the citizens of this country, nor would they be claimants of social welfare benefits. Besides, in many cases, money is sent by our citizens here to their parents in their homeland regularly. This practice would cease, of course, should their parents be permitted to migrate here. Consequently, the question of allowing the parents of our citizens to enter this country becomes attractive in this light. If it were a harmful immigration - harmful in the sense that the economic opportunities of our people would be threatened - then we would be the first to raise a hue and cry against the idea. But we have given it sufficient thought and have come to the conclusion that it would be a harmless immigration; in fact, there would be certain beneficial effects. These beneficial effects could be that firmer roots would be driven into this soil of our citizens who at present out of love and affection for their parents, return home periodically. And they would not need to do so once their parents were here. And what is more, there would be a decrease in remittances abroad. Sir, it has not taken us much imagination to see that we could be kinder to our citizens in this regard without losing anything at all in the process. The gains have been mentioned. This much we could do for our citizens in this country.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0305 be reduced by $100. Mr Speaker, Sir, no one in Singapore will hazard the proposition that we ought to open the door wider to immigration. Anyone who suggests so ought to have his head examined. We have a population of two million, quite vigorously reproductive, and to suggest a liberal attitude to immigration would be to court suicide for our growing economy and our ability to provide employment for our fellow citizens. But there is an aspect of immigration which is humanitarian and which should be considered in its proper perspective. It is not uncommon for a number of our citizens to go to India. They used to go to China too, before it became Communist, to visit their parents. I have had it put to me, why should our citizens who desire to bring their aged parents to this island be prevented from doing so? It would be a humanitarian act to allow them to do so. Besides, it would not put them in the possibly invidious position of appearing to have double loyalty. Sir, there need be no apprehensions about immigration on this score. The parents who come in will not be economically active, nor would they be a liability to the State. They would only come here to live out the rest of their days with their sons or daughters who can support them. To enable them to do so would be a humanitarian act which we can afford. Nobody's job will be endangered, and all that we would be doing is to have the parents living with their children. Besides, this will strengthen the roots of our citizens of immigrant stock in this country. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Immigration Department has been singularly unsympathetic to appeals from our citizens to let their aged parents come in.”
“Of course, we have to protect our interests at all costs, and to this extent the Government must carry out its responsibility to our citizens. But sufficient room should be given to the officials to manoeuvre so that, while not neglecting the interest of our citizens, we would be able to win over the people living across the Causeway. In this speech it is not physically possible for me to analyse all the salient features in the policy speech. I have only touched on certain problems which I feel should be tackled with caution and understanding so that we will not fall or falter. Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope that by next year the Head of State will be able to inform this House of our achievements during the course of the year. I hope it will further indicate a completion of the first phase of our struggle for survival. Mr Speaker: I think this will be a convenient time to take the tea-break. I shall suspend now and take the Chair again at 5.30 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.56 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] ADJOURNMENT MOTION (Business Motion)”
“Sir, while touching on the education policy of the Government, I take this opportunity to refer to the English language stream which continues to be unhappy about the delay in the implementation of many of the assurances given by the Minister for Education as well as officials of the Education Ministry. The anomalies in the salary structure of the teaching service are not conducive to the promotion of goodwill and understanding among the teaching staff, and if the Government feels that the Report of the Salaries Commission is unlikely to come out in the near future, it should take immediate and appropriate measures to redress the grievances of the teaching staff. Dissatisfied teachers cannot give of their best. In the end, the victims of the Government's procrastination would be the younger generations of this country. Hence, I would like to request the Minister for Education to look into these matters and do the needful. Mr Speaker, Sir, a casual glance at the policy speech enables us to appreciate the Government's point of view in introducing workers' permits with a view to preventing non-Singapore citizens from across the Causeway from depriving our citizens of the opportunity in the employment field and other social benefits. Nevertheless, I would like to request the Government to direct the officials concerned not to be too strict in the application of this rule since Singapore citizens might have dependants who are Malaysians. Thus, I hope every case will be treated on the basis of individual merit since our intention is not to antagonise any group or section of the population, but to promote mutual understanding between Malaysia and Singapore so that sooner or later we will be in a position to share a common destiny.”
“There is a limit to which the public sector can encourage and absorb Nanyang graduates, and if they are not well-versed in either English or Malay, the private sector is unlikely to employ them in preference to the graduates of the other universities. Thus, at this juncture the Nanyang boys are placed at a most disadvantageous position, and we feel that the Wang Gung-Wu Report would provide a solution, thereby enabling Nantah to cope with the present situation. But the Barisan follow a policy of suicide. We know why they advocate the continuance of the existing policy of Nantah, since it would fit in with their general pattern to recruit frustrated, unemployed intellectuals and, as far as possible, cadres for the cause of Communism and the violent overthrow of the popular democratic regime. And we can assure them that we are determined to foil this attempt to establish a dictatorship in this island State. Nanyang must prosper and it will continue to do so in spite of interference from political opportunists and communalistic Communist elements. Chinese language and culture are not the property of a clique or a group. It can exist and it will continue to be encouraged by this Government at all costs, Barisan or no Barisan. I wish the Opposition will find new pastures for agitation and leave Chinese language and culture alone. There are men of eminence, educationists, men of letters and others, who can take care of Chinese culture. We do not need any assistance from the Barisan Sosialis.”
“I hope that some of the misguided youths, who are led by the nose by the Barisan Sosialis, would also take time off to read the statements and other pronouncements made by those who have passed through the stage of Communism and come out of it with repentance. The Barisan is there not to preserve Chinese culture but to destroy it. It might not be a surprise to me if the recent incidents at Nantah had given an impression to the outside world that chauvinism had got the upper hand in Singapore. In other words, if at all any group, political Party or clique had done any irreparable damage to the Chinese race, their language and culture, it is the Barisan Sosialis and their henchmen in Nantah. Their persistence and continued efforts definitely give an impression that they are determined to strike at the very roots of our concept of a multi-racial society. It is claimed by this motley crowd who demonstrated both at Nantah and the Chinese Chamber of Commerce recently that the introduction of English would destroy this Chinese language university. They conveniently forgot for a moment that Chinese will continue to be the medium of instruction at Nantah, and English takes only a secondary position. In short, while preserving Chinese culture and language the implementation and recommendation of the Wang Gung-Wu Report would only enhance Nantah and provide the graduates with a better opportunity, especially when they become bilingual, by being fully equipped with the knowledge of English in this multiracial society in addition to their mother tongue (Chinese) so that they can compete successfully in both public and private sectors along with the graduates of the University of Singapore.”
“have demonstrated in the past and will continue to demonstrate in the future too that we are always willing to meet any challenge on the political plane from any opposition either by the communalists or by the Communists. But the Barisan Sosialis, after being mauled in the political arena, has turned out to he so naive as to stoop to the level of enlisting the support of the teenage group to fight the P.A.P. Perhaps they can no longer expect any support from the adults of Singapore that they have to pick on the universities, secondary schools and perhaps kindergartens too in order to ensure their own political existence. They can be rest assured that the P.A.P. is unlikely to permit chauvinism and Communism to pollute the atmosphere of the higher institutes of learning in the State and that sooner or later appropriate remedial actions will he taken to eliminate this cancer from the body politic of Singapore. The Barisan infection can continue to do damage until such time, hut we hope the suffering will not be long. It is also true that quite a few Nanyang undergrads who could have become useful citizens have fallen prey to the evil designs of the Barisan. Recently three of them who had been in detention were released and their statements after their release should serve as an eye-opener to those who continue to be swayed by the Barisan propaganda. These three persons have categorically stated the folly of resorting to Communist and violent methods with a view to establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat. They now subscribe to the principle of democracy, and it is earnestly hoped that they will turn out to be responsible and useful citizens, contributing their respective shares towards the prosperity and progress of this nation.”
“After a lapse of a few months, the clique began to operate within the campus, and under their instigation a second round of violence took place in Nantah which resulted in the arrest of the Barisan ring leaders within the campus. Peace prevailed once again at Nanyang University. But the people of Singapore and those who are aware of the modus operandi of the Barisan Sosialis were convinced that the last word was not said on the entire episode. Educationists and political pundits were predicting a final round with the Barisan before political opportunists can be completely eliminated from this institute of higher learning so that the undergrads can continue with their academic pursuits without being subjected to relentless and systematic persecution at the hands of those who follow and believe in operations essentially geared to Communism and communalism. Thus, it was not a surprise that last month the Barisan struck again at Nantah and this time ostensibly to preserve Chinese language and culture which, according to them, was ignored in the Wang Gung-Wu Report. Under the leadership of the Barisan, we witnessed a microscopic minority of so-called student leaders giving instructions to the professors and the Vice-Chancellor on how they should reorientate their thinking and revise the syllabus in tune with the coloured views and muddled thinking of these teenagers. In other words, educationists should not be the people to take a decision or make recommendations on syllabus or curriculum hut a handful of immature individuals, who in all probability take their instructions from political elements who continue to play "ducks and drakes" with the interests of the student population. Sir, we in the P.A.P.”
“It was obvious that the hidden hand behind this hooliganism and mob violence was that of the Barisan opportunists, who had amply demonstrated in the past that they desire to convert Nanyang University into a stronghold for the Barisan Sosialis, with the intention of perpetuating a system by which more cadres to the Communist cause would be recruited at this "Temple of learning". It all began with the capture of the student body within the campus and the continual terrorising of the academic staff by a clique of unruly elements, who claimed themselves to be students or student leaders. The Government naturally could not permit such a situation to develop whereby the Government continues to dump millions of taxpayers' dollars in order to produce elements with a crude mixture of chauvinism and Communism. When the Government began their spring-cleaning a couple of years ago, the Barisan Sosialis, who realised perhaps that their base or foundation would be subjected to a thorough shake-up, decided to encourage the innocent undergraduates to resort to arson and plunder with a view to making the Government kow-tow to their subversive ends. But the Government was determined to checkmate these adventurers, and to maintain law and order, thereby preserving the democratic way of life in this island State. Sir, the swift and immediate response of the Government and the lukewarm support of the general student body caught the Barisan Sosialis by surprise and they were forced by circumstances including, not the least of all, the hostility from the general body at Nantah, to make a most unceremonious exit from the precincts of the University. Communists and communalists are noted for their perseverance and the Barisan Sosialis are no exception to this rule.”
“Such an insurance scheme is bound to be beneficial to the working class in Singapore and likely to serve as a model for others to follow. I hope the Minister for Labour will give due consideration and come out with a plan sooner or later incorporating these ideas. When the workers are told to make sacrifices for the larger interest of the nation, it is the responsibility of the pro-labour Government not to neglect the welfare of labour. Only under such condition where the welfare of labour is safeguarded through securing employment for workers and maintaining wage increases in line with the rising cost of living can we expect or demand an increase in productivity from labour. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Yang di-Pertuan Negara has also touched on the education policy of the Government which should naturally be consistent with the promotion of education in all four language streams. Of course, as usual the Communists will be there to advocate a chauvinist approach and incite racial feelings under one pretext or another. The Nanyang episode and the unfortunate incidents in the campus exploited by the Barisan Sosialis are well known to the Members of this House. Nevertheless, I would like to make a number of references to Nantah since it appears to be a corner-stone of our education policy. Some two months ago, we witnessed the sad and sorry spectacle of innocent teenagers at Nantah being led astray by unscrupulous political elements who were out to destroy this citadel of Chinese language and culture in South-East Asia, under the pretext of preserving and consolidating Chinese culture.”
“We in the trade union movement will continue to be the watchdogs in preventing subversive forces from disrupting our solidarity or slashing the existing wages. In this connection, I would like to bring to the notice of the Prime Minister that his advocacy for wage restraint has been mis-interpreted by a number of bosses of established firms. These business houses which continue to declare high dividends are nowadays reluctant to entertain either the reasonable wage claims of the workers or their demands for an enhanced bonus in order to bring it in line with the general industrial pattern in Singapore. In the case of such firms, I cannot understand why there should be any restraint on the part of the workers. I should he very much obliged if the Prime Minister would qualify his statement and express in categorical terms that he did not mean such interpretation as certain employers have placed on his speech, it is most unfair that the employers should double and treble their profit margin, while denying the legitimate rights of the working class and their standard wages and fringe benefits. An explanation by the Prime Minister to this effect will dispel the fears of the working class and also prevent the employers from capitalising on the Prime Minister's speech. In this connection, I would also like to remind the Government of its promise to utilise the entire amount collected as payroll tax for the benefit of the workers. I would suggest the introduction of an insurance scheme for the workers with the payroll tax forming a common pool together with an equal contribution from the workers and the Government to match the employer's contribution.”
“Our success in this "pilgrimage towards progress" is bound to bring about favourable repercussions in neighbouring areas which in turn will accelerate the pace of a social and political revolution in those States for the establishment of a democratic socialist society. In this way, the policy speech of the Head of State has to be viewed in this perspective and it is my intention to put forward constructive suggestions which might perhaps make it more convenient and comparatively easier to attain our objective of a welfare State. Mr Speaker Sir, the Head of State has reiterated the Government's policy to promote a healthy non-Communist trade union movement as an essential element in our economic life. I must congratulate the Government on not only being consistent in promoting healthy trade unionism but also in providing every possible assistance to us in our struggle against unscrupulous employers who are out to exploit labour. Further, as a result of the progressive measure adopted by the Government, the oft-quoted expression "industrial peace with justice" has received of late an additional significant meaning. The establishment of the State Economic Consultative Council with full representation from labour, management and the Government, has further enhanced the prestige of this nation, apart from providing the necessary machinery at the highest level to minimise industrial friction at its very source. We hope frequent meetings of this Council will be held so that general policy matters pertaining to labour-management which are bound to have repercussions in the industrial front would be thrashed out in order to reach a common basis of understanding.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, let me at the very outset express my deep sense of gratitude to the Yang di-Pertuan Negara for delivering a most illuminating policy speech in this House which, apart from demonstrating the strength and resilience of Singapore's economy, also holds out hopes for a bright and prosperous future. I can see empty rows facing me which perhaps furnish some indication of the mental confusion and vacuity besetting certain Members who are thereby not in a position to make an analysis of the speech of the Head of State. But I do not rule out the possibility that the silence of the Opposition may signify full agreement with the policy of the Government as propounded in the policy speech of the Head of State. While perusing in detail the highly imaginative and constructive approach of the Government towards the economic ills of the nation, I appreciate more fully the fact that the policy speech is well set against the backdrop of reality and the determination to survive. I hope that this spirit will be maintained throughout the coming year and by this time next year the Government in all probability will be in a position to state in categorical terms that they have made considerable progress and achieved the target in record time. It is true that the ejection of Singapore and the economic boycott of this island by our powerful neighbour has done immense injury to the economy in addition to that resulting from the economic confrontation and blockade on total entrepot trade imposed by Indonesia. But I am indeed pleased to note that during the past few months the Government, instead of adopting a defeatist attitude, continues to implement its programme of industrialisation in keeping with its avowed objective of achieving a more just and equal society.”