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 5 of 17.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code SF-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture to the Points Demerit System because I have received many complaints since its implementation. The complainants alleged among other things the draconian measures imposed on the offending motorists over very minor offences by the Traffic Police Enforcement Section. Just take, for example, the case of an offending motorist who was charged for entering a wrong traffic lane. It was a very minor offence because the driver, instead of taking the centre traffic lane to go straight, took the third traffic lane on his right which only serves traffic turning right. Although he was in a wrong traffic lane, he did not cause obstruction because as soon as the traffic light changed, first, from red to amber then to green, he drove straight on instead of turning right. This is the only difference, but he was fined $50 plus three demerit points. The traffic offence cited by me just now is a very minor one and it suffices to warn the offending motorist, but it is unfair to punish him with a double penalty such as an offer of composition of $50 plus three demerit points.”
“Sir, anyway, I will send the case to the Minister for consideration.”
“Sir, I think the Minister is only partially fair but not fully fair because the mother is a Singapore citizen. The mother should at least be entitled to a certain percentage of the rental concession. She cannot be penalised in the same way. as non-citizens. The mother is a citizen. Of course, the son is a non-citizen and he should not enjoy the full benefit. But what about the mother? After all, they are co-owners of the motor workshop.”
“Sir, from the consumers' point of view, if we allow the import of sugar, does the Minister not think that we can also bring down the cost of sugar, so that this will benefit the consumers?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Finance why tariff protection is still accorded to sugar and not to flour.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister concerned that, apart from the post of a pilot or a bank cashier, would the Minister agree to employ reformed drug addicts for other categories of job in the Government? Mr Hon Sui Sen: Sir, we will consider with sympathy the people who have taken drugs and who are prepared to rehabilitate themselves, but we will want to do so knowing the full facts. We will not want to do so out of ignorance because we do not ask the necessary questions.”
“In view of the legal opinion expressed by the Government legal officer that applicants applying for jobs in the civil service need not disclose their past conviction, I wonder whether the Minister still insists on applicants applying for jobs in the civil service to answer the question, "Have you ever been convicted in a court of law in any country?" If the Minister for Finance says that the question is necessary and ought not to be removed, will he then consider introducing legislation to regularise the legal position.”
“These laws and regulations have to be implemented by the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of Social Affairs. And yet we have had this glaring case of a company under the Ministry of Finance blatantly ignoring the law and imposing its own rules and regulations. Mr Speaker, Sir, our Government enacts laws which must be abided. It is a sorry state of affairs if one Ministry chooses to ignore the laws enacted by the Government on behalf of another Ministry. If this state of affairs goes on, our entire legal framework will collapse and the laws of the jungle will prevail. This drift must therefore be halted immediately and the law must be upheld. Sir, this issue highlights the absence of a coordinating body representing the Ministries to ensure that Government's policies are implemented uniformly and equivocally by the different Ministries and authorities concerned. This body could also monitor the activities of different Ministries and statutory bodies and Government-owned companies under their purview so as to ensure that there is no contradiction in the implementation of policies. Sir, I mention this need at our session in January, and I would like to ask whether Government has taken cognisance of this need so as to ensure that Government's policies are interpreted in the way that Government intended them to be, and not be left to individual Ministries to provide their own interpretations which may well be in direct contradiction of the intentions of the Government, to the extent of even flouting the law. Mr Speaker, Sir, the present state of affairs makes a mockery of the concept of the collective responsibility of Cabinet which is a corner-stone of the democratic parliamentary process. I would also like to ask the Minister for Finance this question.”
“May I therefore ask the Minister for Finance what action has been taken to chastise the officer responsible for this unwarranted action and what action has been taken to ensure that this does not happen again? Sir, I would also like to ask how many Government servants have been dismissed for similar offences? In other words, in how many instances have the Government Ministries breached the law? The law is very specific in the matter of probationers, juvenile offenders and those sent to the drug rehabilitation centres for treatment. The law even requires the Registry of Criminal Records to deliver to a person who was acquitted, or discharged without conviction, his finger impressions, negatives and photos. And here, I would like again to quote the legal opinion expressed: 'If no such application is made within three months from the date of acquittal or discharge, the Registrar must destroy the sheet containing the finger impressions and every negative and photograph.' This is the measure of protection the law gives to people accused of such offences. Sir, I mentioned previously that the Government has set up institutions and drawn up rehabilitation programmes at great cost so that the unfortunate victims of drug addiction should have the facilities to kick off the habit and, when rehabilitated, should be provided with equal opportunities to lead normal lives and be given employment opportunities to enable them to regain their places in society. Sir, in order to achieve this objective the Government has enacted laws to ensure that victims of drug habits should not be marked down as criminals, to the extent of requiring that the records of those charged but acquitted without conviction are destroyed.”
“Yes, Sir, I have an amendment for it. At the last meeting of Parliament in January this year, I referred to a case where Singapore Airlines, a wholly-owned company of our Government, dismissed an employee on the ground that, at the time of applying for a job, he had concealed the fact that he was a former drug addict. SIA, Mr Speaker, Sir, had taken great pains to convince us that the employee had not been dismissed simply because he was a former drug addict, but because he had concealed the fact in his application for the job. SIA adopted the posture of a benevolent employer, but it would appear that they have erred. Mr Speaker, Sir, since I raised this matter in Parliament, a legal officer of the Government has stated that probationers, juvenile offenders and those sent to the drug rehabilitation centres for treatment need not disclose their previous offences when applying for a job in the civil service. I quote him: 'Indeed, it will not be wrong for such people to claim that they have no conviction in the application for employment.' In other words, they could specifically and confidently say "No Conviction" in answer to the question, "Have you ever been convicted in a court of law in any country?" A former drug addict need not answer this question when he applies for a job in the Government. And yet, Mr Speaker, Sir, we have a glaring case of a wholly-owned company of the Singapore Government dismissing an employee on the ground that he did not disclose the fact that he was a former drug addict. It is thus clear that Singapore Airlines was ultra vires when they took action to terminate the service of this unfortunate victim in our society who chose to exercise his constitutional right.”
“Sir, I sympathise with the Minister for the Environment because he cannot understand my Mandarin. I have clearly stated that the empty stalls are in the market at Block 93, Lorong 4, Toa Payoh. I have also stated just now in Mandarin that these stalls have been left unoccupied since I became the Member for Khe Bong. I do not see how I can make myself clearer.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I ask the Minister whether all these 268 accidents for last year have occurred as a result of the faults of the Ministry of the Environment's drivers?”
“To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education (a) whether he has figures of the teachers who were called for interview in the 1977 promotion exercise; (b) whether he will inform the House, of the number of teachers interviewed, how many of them had been promoted; and (c) what effect the promotion exercise has had on the morale of teachers.”
“Sir, if CPF savings could be used to buy SBS shares, I see no reason why CPF savings cannot be used to purchase privately built houses.”
“Sir, one point I disagree with the Minister for Labour is that whenever the Government wants to allow CPF members to use their CPF savings it will advance all kinds of reasons to justify it. But when Members on the opposite Bench ask for the same thing, the Government gives all kinds of reasons to frustrate them. An hon. Member: Hear, hear!”
“Sir, in view of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. 3.30 p.m. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon: (3) That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code KF-04 of the Main Estimates.”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. The trouble is that this patient has been asked to go to the clinic every two weeks without having the opportunity to see the doctor. The doctor did not keep tab on the patient's condition. He just takes the money without seeing the patient.”
“But the Government is not supposed to make money.”
“Not only is there an increase in fees but also the patients have to put up with the additional inconvenience of paying more frequent visits to the clinic. The practice is unfair and wrong, for the Government should give equal treatment to all and should not practise discrimination in dealing with the patients. The fact that the patients are required to collect medicine once every two weeks with a month-long supply of medicine reduced to half but without the benefit of a check- up by the doctor, is an obvious case of a subtle and indirect increase in fees. This practice should be discontinued as early as possible. The arrangement may have become more logical if the patients had been allowed to see the doctor when they turn up to collect the medicine as this may help keep tab on the conditions of the patients. The present arrangement of allowing the patients to see the doctor only once every two months with the dispensation of the medicine each visit reduced from a month-long supply to half a month's supply is clearly motivated by monetary gain. This is an unbecoming practice as far as the Government hospitals are concerned. Government hospitals should not try to make money out of the broad masses. May the practice be discontinued as early as possible, as it has given rise to many complaints among the people now. Fairness should be made the norm whatever we may do; otherwise, there are bound to be grievances.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code KB-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, in moving this amendment, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the subtle and indirect increase in fees levied by the Government hospitals and outpatient clinics on patients suffering from chronic sickness. 3.15 p.m. Take an outpatient suffering from diabetes, for example. According to the past arrangement, he would first see a doctor in the outpatient clinic, he would be prescribed 60 tablets as a month's supply at two a day. In the following month he would be required only to visit the clinic for a further supply of the medicine, without having to see the doctor. In the third month, he would again be required to see the doctor, have his urine tested and be prescribed 60 tablets. The arrangement would go on like this in a cyclical manner. However, the arrangement has been changed recently. Under the new arrangement, the patient, after seeing the doctor on his first visit, is prescribed only 30 tablets, half a month's supply. On four subsequent visits to the clinic at an interval of half a month each, he only collects his medicine without having to see the doctor. In other words, under the past arrangement, he had to pay only $6 to see the doctor on his first visit, and on the second visit in the following month he had to pay only $3 per visit to collect the medicine. Under the present arrangement, he has to pay a total of $12 to see the doctor on his first visit and collecting medicine on three subsequent visits to the clinic at $3 per visit within a two-month period. This represents a disguised increase in the fees levied on the outpatients of this category.”
“Sir, I would like to make a couple of observations with regard to the promotion of teachers with a view to partially restoring their morale and hopefully help spur them on to a higher level of performance. I would like to go straight to the point rather than talking a lot of subjective and abstract things. Sir, from the feedback I have received, the majority of teachers are either unenthusiastic or very sceptical about the sincerity of the promotion exercise carried out periodically since 1973 by the Ministry of Education. The reason is that they feel that they do not have a chance at all as the number of teachers promoted in each promotion exercise is invariably very, very small. Such a reaction is very unfortunate and is a cause for concern as it indicates the depth to which the teachers' morale has sunk.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, why was all this communication between the Building Control Division and the developer not conveyed to the stallholders? They have been kept in the dark all this time.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a supplementary question. Would the Minister like to comment on this? His predecessor's predecessor at one time said that he never held any person under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act for more than three years.”
“What we need are people with the necessary training and knowledge to maintain the prosperity and progress that we have achieved, a people imbued with a sense of national consciousness, high moral values and a fine cultural tradition. The cultivation of such qualities is more important than the studying of languages. It is hoped that, while reviewing the school curriculum and teaching methods, the Ministry will not lose sight of this objective.”
“To the Singaporeans, next to making money, what preoccupies them most is their children's education and their future. Any policy or measure that prejudices their children's chance of getting into a good school, or getting a good grade in the examination, or getting into a university, is bound to spring a grouse. Second language teaching in Singapore has not been very successful. Although we have produced students who have mastered two languages, they are in the minority. The general run of students is deficient in second language. Even undergraduates, who are within the best 5% of our student population in terms of intelligence or scholastic performance, are barely proficient in their first language and sadly deficient in their second language. It is inconceivable that these top 5%, having studied the second language continuously for 12 years, several hours a week, could attain only a low standard. The only conclusion we can arrive at is that something must have gone wrong somewhere in our education process. I do not intend to speculate as to where the flaw lies, whether it be the students, parents, teachers or the Ministry of Education. Nevertheless, the flaw exists and nobody can deny this. It is hoped that the Ministry will as soon as possible try to identify the root cause of the flaw and apply the necessary measures to rectify it. While we do not deny the importance of learning and mastering two languages, we should not over-emphasise the acquisition of languages for that is not the main object of education. The main object of education is to bring up young people to become useful citizens.”
“This has happened in Japan, the United States and the West European countries. Singapore is a small island. We cannot permit any serious pollution. Recently, a certain pond in Changi was discovered to contain cyanide; and radioactive material was found in a steel mill. Fortunately, no serious damage was caused, but it suffices as a warning to us. The disposal of industrial effluent water and waste gases generally costs money. In order to economise, some manufacturers have found it expedient to let their factories emit large amounts of black smoke or odorous gases during the night or weekends when the officials from the Ministry of the Environment are not around. To the people in Jurong Town, this has become a common occurrence. I hope the Government department concerned would be more stringent in enforcing the law against industrial pollution. However, assistance should be given to the small-scale industries, particularly the indigenous industries, when the department tackles the problem of industrial pollution. Now I would like to touch on some problems on education. Right now, bilingualism is one problem that is attracting the greatest concern from the people in Singapore. Over the last few years bilingual education has been vigorously implemented in our schools, but the result has been far from ideal. Hence, the Ministry of Education has made quite a number of adjustments in its education policy and its measures which are aimed at improving the quality of education in our schools. But members of the public are usually not aware of the background to and the objectives of these changes and they are therefore most dissatisfied with the so-called sudden and hasty changes introduced by the Ministry. Both parents and pupils are often bewildered by such sudden changes.”
“I hope the staff in our tertiary institutions will be given a chance to participate when this project is implemented. Please do not overlook the manpower resource and potentialities of these people. I agree that we should not emphasise on the fundamental researches which only the Great Powers can afford. However, mastering and transmitting of fundamental knowledge in science and technology constitute the basis on which training of personnel in research and development is based. Therefore, our Government should give its fullest support to the future development of our science and technological faculties of our tertiary institutions. From the Budget, we can see that the sum allotted for R and D for the departments mentioned above is far too small. But I hope this is only the beginning, and the Government will in future give greater assistance to industrial research and development. Our nation is at present marching towards industrialisation which has brought us, as everybody knows, economic benefit and employment opportunities. However, it has also brought about some undesirable consequences, one of which is pollution. Pollution is inevitable in industrial development. We cannot escape from it. We can only minimise it. The Ministry of the Environment has introduced certain laws and regulations against pollution. Its officials visit the factories regularly to ensure that the regulations are being followed. The Anti-Pollution Unit does check on the extent of pollution in the various districts. However, pollution caused by industrial activities is not easy to control. Sometimes pollution caused by industries, intentionally or unintentionally, was discovered to be very serious only when it was too late to remedy.”
“Although the various tax concessions will not benefit every one, all are happy because there are no new tax measures. Last year, we maintained a fairly satisfactory rate of economic growth, together with a low unemployment rate and a small rise in the cost of living index. All these proved our success in 1978 which we hope to repeat this year. The 1979 world economic preview is not good. The increased price of oil will cause a rise in the prices of other materials. In addition, the instability in the international scene and the gradual spread of protectionism will prove to be a detriment to our nation's development. However, I believe that in the coming year, local and foreign investments in our country will gradually increase and Singapore will not only develop into a service centre in this area but will also become one of the safest countries to invest in. In the Budget statement, I am glad to learn that the Government will encourage industrial research and development (R and D). At present, most of our important industries depend on imported expertise and technical know-how. It is time we promoted and carried out our own industrial research and development, without which our industries will not last nor be able to compete with that of other countries. It is a wise decision to extend to new manufacturing companies the provision to deduct expenditure incurred on R and D for income tax purposes. Undoubtedly, this will help to attract more investments. I am also glad to note that the Ministry of Finance is carrying out a long-term research and development project in conjunction with other departments concerned, such as the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Science Council and SISIR, to promote research and development and to train the personnel required.”
“I would have thought that, in recognising the role played by organised labour through the National Trades Union Congress, the Government would be more than happy to make a substantial contribution year by year to show its appreciation of the contribution made by the trade union movement to Singapore's economic growth and lower inflation rate. But what do we observe from the present budget? To quote the words of Mr Harold Wilson, all we hear is "a deafening silence" as regards the role played by labour in support of Singapore's economic and social growth. Mr Speaker, Sir, no rational person can deny that for the workers of Singapore, grouped under the banner of the Singapore National Trades Union Congress, the over-riding factor in industrial matters is our national interest. Our trade unions and their leaders have made sacrifices and contributions to Singapore's development and it should be apparent to all that Singapore, without our National Trades Union Congress, would be like Rome without the Vatican. Without an organisation like the NTUC and the dedicated persons at the helm, Singapore's economy may well fall apart. In the circumstances, Mr Speaker, Sir, may I suggest that Government acknowledges the role of the trade union movement of Singapore and demonstrates this acknowledgement in a tangible way by making a substantial annual grant to the Singapore Labour Foundation which has been set up at the request of the NTUC for the benefit of workers, both unionised and non-unionised. 3.00 p.m. Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, firstly, I would like to congratulate the Senior Minister of State for Finance for presenting what has been unanimously accepted as a painless budget.”
“And it cannot be denied that their responsible attitude has been a major contribution to the investment climate and Singapore's economic growth. Having decided to be partners in economic development, the trade unions have resolved their problems by consultation and by exercising great restraint. They have joined in productivity schemes, they have worked hard, and have thus in no small way contributed to our economic growth of 8.6%; they have also contributed in keeping inflation down to 4.8%. Mr Speaker, Sir, one has only got to look around to see what chaos trade unions can bring about if they choose to be trenchant, truculent, irresponsible and self-centred. One has only to look at the newspapers every day to see how national economies can be upset and disorganised by trade unions who do not concern themselves with their countries' state of development and economic progress. Britain, from whence came our basic trade union concepts, was, for example, thrown into utter confusion by a series of strikes which paralysed the country. This pattern of trade union manipulation and irresponsibility has manifested itself in several countries. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am therefore extremely surprised that the Government has not deemed it necessary to publicly acknowledge the role of our National Trades Union Congress by giving it more tangible recognition in the form of some financial support to the Labour Foundation. When the Labour Foundation Bill was introduced, I was aghast at the statement in the explanatory note in the Bill saying that "the establishment of this Foundation would not involve the Government in any financial commitment".”
“It is often bemoaned that the young workers of today take full employment and affluence for granted, as their birth right; but it seems to me that the Government is similarly guilty of such an attitude. Those of us who were in the Labour movement in the 1950s know the difficulties that confronted workers in those days. The contribution of workers to Singapore's development and economy should not be forgotten. Briefly, in the 50's the workers sacrificed their personal freedom and employment in their struggle for independence, arm-in-arm with the nationalists who were seeking independence for Singapore. In the early 60's, the workers, grouped under the banner of the NTUC, helped the Government to defeat the communists in the trade union movement and ousted the stooges in the trade union movement who, acting on instructions of their principals in other countries, sought to disrupt Singapore's economy and overthrow the Government by violence. In the 70's organised labour began to play an important role as partners in economic development by ensuring social, economic and political stability so that our economy could grow and yet keeping it internationally competitive. The House will recall that in 1968 when Singapore faced serious economic problems as a consequence of British withdrawal, the Government introduced the restrictive Employment Act which would in ordinary circumstances have created an uproar in any democratic country. But the workers of Singapore, having considered the circumstances and the grave problems facing our Republic, subordinated their own interests to the overall national interest by accepting many restrictions and impediments for the common good.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I must congratulate the Minister for Finance and the Senior Minister of State for Finance for a painless budget which, instead of following the traditional pattern of introducing new taxes, has granted several concessions - concessions which are apparently possible without upsetting the Government's financial equilibrium. It is obvious that these concessions, involving loss of revenue, have been made possible only because of the tough and pragmatic measures taken by our Government during the past few years to meet the consequences of crises in the world economy, the changing patterns of international trade and repercussions of economic nationalism. It is gratifying to note, however, that although there was a 4.5% inflation in 1978, our economy grew by 8.6%. In terms of international economic competitiveness, even though the economic growths of Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan were better than that of Singapore, their inflation rates were higher, being 5.7%, 16.4% and 5.7% respectively. In paying tribute to the Government for its success in keeping our rate of inflation below the figure of our economic growth, I am constrained to ask whether the Government is appreciative of the contribution of Labour in keeping this figure so low. I am prompted to ask this question because there are many factors which determine the rate of inflation. The role of labour should not be overlooked or disregarded. I am therefore astonished to find that the Minister's statement did not include a positive reference to the contribution made by the trade unions and workers of Singapore towards assisting the Government to maintain high economic growth, with a low inflation rate.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister this. Recently, Singapore Finance was taken over by Hong Leong. Is he aware that there was a transfer fee?”
“Is this transfer fee applicable to big and small businesses having their premises in Housing Board estates?”
“Then why is it necessary for the HDB to charge $500 as transfer fee for administrative work? An hon. Member: Tea money!”
“Sir, based on the Minister's own argument, would he agree that under the circumstances the HDB can overcharge or undercharge the tenant?”
“Sir, does the Minister not think that the increase in rentals to prevailing market rates or to neighbourhood rates obtainable could do an injustice to the tenants, because no two situations are absolutely identical, because one location may be better than the other?”
“Sir, why did it take so long a time, almost more than two years from 1977 to 1979, for the Ministry of Education to discover that these primary school principals were not efficient, apart from one or two cases; and have they been given a warning prior to their demotion?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for National Development whether he is aware that although the family income may exceed $500, the take-home pay can be less than $500 because of deduction for contribution to CPF. Under such circumstances, will the Minister consider an application from such a family to rent a two-room flat? He is not buying a flat; he only wants to rent, and so there is no question of his using his CPF savings.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I make myself clear? I said that if a reformed drug addict applied for a job in the Civil Service and if the Government was prejudiced against drug addicts, what then was the point of setting up drug rehabilitation centres? Would it not be a waste of public funds?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State for Finance whether or not it is a waste of public funds and efforts to set up drug rehabilitation centres for drug addicts if the Government refuses to employ reformed drug addicts.”
“Sir, I am asking a different question altogether. What I mean is whether the officer's pay will be cut by $150 if he takes 19 days' unpaid leave, since he has been compensated $150 for 19 days.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister concerned whether he will consider withdrawing the scholarships if our Government is aware that the offer of these scholarships to ASEAN students is causing a brain-drain in their countries.”
“All this merits the support of teachers and parents. As our country lacks natural resources, we must raise our technological and scientific levels in order to develop Singapore into a servicing centre in this region. English will enable us to have direct access to all the advanced technology and science in the world and all the latest business management methods without the need for translation. However, in view of the rapid development of modern scientific and technological knowledge, to advance ourselves in these fields or to develop ourselves into a pioneer in this region, we should set up centres both at home and abroad to systematically collect the latest materials from the developed countries, and to analyse and assimilate all these materials at home. Ours is a small country. We cannot afford to spend too much money on research. Therefore, we have to make use of what others have already achieved at very great expense. I feel that our embassies and trade liaison offices abroad could also play some part in this respect, in addition to their normal functions. Sir, if we have good performances in the fields of eugenics, culture and education, we will be able to have continual emergence of people of good quality, so that with the general uplifting of the quality of our nationals the position of our country will be the more consolidated and strong. Sir, I support the Motion moved by the Member for Serangoon Gardens thanking the President for his Address. 3.54 p.m.”
“that the Ministry of Culture will be conducting various activities to promote culture. This is good. Perhaps when we became independent we could not pay enough attention to this aspect. Now that we have consolidated ourselves economically and politically, the time is ripe for us to look after our spiritual development. So, we all must support it. I would appeal to all, particularly those big enterprises and companies and those civic organisations and able individuals, to contribute generously towards the Cultural Foundation Fund and to our National Symphony Endowment Fund. All ranks of our people must come forward to help in our cultural development. As we do not as yet have a culture unique to Singapore, it has to take a long time to preserve the cream of our various cultural traditions and to consolidate them into a culture characteristic of Singapore. The Ministry of Culture should set up a representative co-ordinating committee to plan and promote various cultures, so that all cultures will have an opportunity to develop and vie for mutual emulation in order to achieve a balanced development of our diverse cultures. At the same time, we must also be careful not to allow the development of culture to serve the interest of certain political aims, because this will curb its free development. Sir, we have been implementing bilingual education. This is a farsighted policy. Although this policy has been implemented for several years, we have not seen any concrete results. Only this year onwards we have to start anew by changing and readjusting the teaching content and direction of our education to strengthen the teaching of English so as to enable the students to improve their proficiency in English in a very short time.”
“Singapore has been independent for 13 years. In the early years of our independence, we had to overcome various difficulties. Our economy today is a rosy picture of good prospect. However, there is a saying that "To set up an enterprise is difficult, but it is even more difficult to preserve it." We want Singapore to stand for ever, and to build it into a strong nation in South-east Asia. To do this requires generations of our people to be of good quality. They must not only have good physique but also alert mental capacity. Not only should they have profound knowledge but they should also learn how to conduct themselves. In order to achieve such objectives, we must start off with eugenics, culture and education. We all know that there is freedom of marriage in Singapore, provided the couples register their marriage through the legal institutions. But, sometimes because of hereditary factors and others, there could be born abnormal babies, imbeciles, retarded ones and babies with unbalanced development. This not only causes the parents specially to spend much time and effort to look after such unfortunate children but also affect the quality of the society as a whole, besides constituting a burden to the country. To start off with eugenics, controlling the quality of our nationals should be a good way out. I feel that the only practical way is to compel all those people who want to get married to go for medical examination, as ours is a humanitarian and democratic country. Only those who have got the fitness certificate from the doctor could get a marriage certificate. I believe certain countries have implemented this requirement. Perhaps we in Singapore can also adopt this practice. From the Addendum on Culture, we gather.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has set up institutions and drawn up rehabilitation programmes at great cost with a view to saving these unfortunate persons and though the respective Ministries derive their authority from the same Government, the same Cabinet, the same Parliament, it would seem that there is a contradiction in their approach and in their practice of this declared policy. Mr Speaker, Sir, there are matters which strike at the root of national welfare and individuals concerned and I would therefore urge that steps be taken to monitor the activities of different Ministries, the statutory Boards and Government-owned companies under their purview, so as to ensure that the intention of the Government is carried out unequivocally and implemented uniformly by the different authorities concerned. 3.45 p.m. Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, on the 26th of December, the President delivered in this House the policy speech of the Government. From the speech as well as the various Addenda, we can see that our Government is full of verve and vitality. In spite of the fact that Singapore is a small island, that the world economy is recovering only very slowly, and the fact that we are faced with the dark prospect of increasing oil prices, our people are able to unite together to achieve our target in economic growth. Politically, we have also maintained a high degree of stability. With the successful implementation of the home ownership scheme, our people now do not have to face any housing problems. And because of our success in our industrialisation policy, we have achieved a state of full employment. Therefore, Singapore can be said to be one place in South-East Asia where the people can live in peace and work with satisfaction.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, while on the one hand we have the Government's declaration of its intention to rehabilitate former drug addicts, to enable them to improve their lot and lead normal lives; on the other hand, we have a tragic case of a Government company terminating the service of an employee because it transpired that he was a former drug addict. Singapore Airlines, Mr Speaker, Sir, has taken great pains to convince us that he was dismissed not because he was a former drug addict but because he had concealed the fact at the time of seeking employment that he had been a drug addict. But what would have been their response if he had declared that he was a former drug addict? Would he have been given the job? And how many applicants have the Airlines rejected because they were former drug addicts? Besides, how many permanent staff of SIA have been dismissed because of drug offences? How many permanent staff of SIA who became addicted to drugs are undergoing rehabilitation and will they still be employed? There are many questions yet left unanswered. Sir, what is the position in regard to other Government departments? Do they give former drug addicts a chance to rehabilitate themselves? And when rehabilitated, do they continue to employ them? Or are they cast aside, rejected, unable to find employment, although it is the Government's declared intention that they should be provided with employment opportunities to enable them to regain their place in society and lead normal lives?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is my hope that in raising their perspective to the international scene, the Housing and Development Board will not forget occasionally to lower their eyes and ears to the ground and consider the problems and needs of the very people for whom the Board exists. So much for the Housing and Development Board, Mr Speaker, Sir. I will now turn to another subject, but not education this time. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to turn to a matter that is giving rise to concern among the people of Singapore. And that is the frequent contradictions that arise in actual implementation by different Ministries and quasi-Government organisations of declared governmental policy. In the past few years, arising out of the proliferation of organisations and authorities to provide for the complexities of life due to social and economic changes brought about by our Republic's progress, policies enunciated by the Government appear to be interpreted by the implementing authorities in different ways, and thus make a mockery of our Government's real intention. Mr Speaker, Sir, I need only to make reference to one recent incident to highlight the contradiction in approach. Recently, the Singapore Airlines, a wholly-owned company of the Government, dismissed a former drug addict who was employed by them on the grounds that, at the time of applying for the job, he had concealed the fact that he had been previously convicted for a drub offence.”
“But the Housing and Development Board which has set income ceilings for all applications of HDB flats has ruled that, because the combined income of the family exceeds the ceiling set by the Housing and Development Board for eligibility for a two-room flat, they should move into a three-room flat which many can ill afford. I find this rigid adherence to an income ceiling, set as a guideline many years ago, difficult to understand. The logical step from a one-room flat, as income and the size of the families grow, is a two-room flat and after the two-room flat to a three-room flat. But the Housing and Development Board appears to have turned a deaf ear to this logic and has decreed that such families, living in one-room flats, with income of $500 are only eligible for three-room flats. Mr Speaker, Sir, if the problem is looked at intelligently, this is not a common-sense approach. Since the era of one-room flats, incomes have increased with progress, and inflation has made its presence felt, as Singapore developed economically. Thus, although the actual incomes of one-room flat dwellers may have doubled, their real incomes have only risen marginally. In most cases they are only able to afford two-room flats, but they are denied such accommodation that is within their means by the Housing and Development Board which has refused to take into cognisance the need for financial prudence, inflation and the real value of money. It may well be that the Board does not have economists in their midst, but surely they must have heard about the National Wages Council and the annual wage supplement which our Government recommends annually to meet inflation during the previous year.”