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 7 of 17.
“Sir, in this Debate on the Budget estimates for the Ministry of Education, I wish to point out the remarkable success of the bilingual education policy implemented by the Ministry of Education. This remarkable success is evident to everyone at home and abroad. The successful effort of the Ministry of Education in this respect should be recognised and widely acclaimed by us. However, I now wish to bring up a problem, also a fact, which is right before us. This concerns the successful candidates in the Government Secondary IV examination for the Chinese stream, who have entered Pre-U I classes. It was not until the 9th of March that the Ministry of Education released the list of successful candidates to the various schools. The successful students then reported at their respective schools on the 10th of March. They attended classes on 11th of March, but found that the first school term ended the following day, the 12th of March. They have paid a month's school fees for only one day's tuition. What is the rationale behind all this? The Government Secondary IV examination for the Chinese stream was held in mid-November last year and the results were released on 5th February this year. The results, unlike in previous years, were not published in the press and the candidates concerned had to return to their respective schools to check their results. The successful students were required to return to their respective schools on 7th, 8th and 9th February to fill up the relevant application forms for admission to the schools of their choice. These forms had to be submitted by the various schools to the Ministry of Education for processing.”
“Sir, if the husband had not committed any matrimonial offence during the seven years that both parties were separated, why should the husband pay alimony to the wife on a decree of divorce?”
“Sir, does the Senior Parliamentary Secretary agree that a seven-year period is too long?”
“Is the Senior Parliamentary Secretary not encouraging immorality by insisting on a seven-year period?”
“Sir, by insisting that the separated couple should wait for a period of seven years, are we not encouraging immorality because we cannot expect a man and a woman to remain angelic for seven years?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Senior Minister of State, when he received this question, why did the Department concerned not take the trouble to do a survey of North Bridge Road and Victoria Street?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a supplementary question. In view of the protection for the SIS, as a result of which the people of Singapore have to pay higher sugar prices, will the Minister not consider allowing the import of sugar?”
“Our national policy admits of no class conscious communist ideology to use our newspapers to poison our youths because this would jeopardise the security of our country and the survival of our people. It is as morbid as a poisonous rose. 4.30 p.m. Sir, before passing this budget, I wish to raise this solemn question. Apart from issuing publication permits to the newspapers, does the Ministry of Culture ignore this kind of writing or does it prevail upon the editors to refuse to publish any more these class-conscious writings about so-called "employer/employee" and "rich/poor" confrontation? Besides, our Ministry of Labour accepts the workers' complaints against the employers. There is absolutely no oppression by employers to speak on. As for the poor having no money to seek medical treatment and having to wait for their death, this statement is even more absurd. The General Hospital gives free treatment to patients who are genuinely penniless and to those receiving public assistance. Our workers' living standard here cannot match with that of their counterparts in the United States. But compared to those in China, they are living in paradise here.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I often notice that newspapers and some publications in Singapore do not seem to have a clear picture of our nation-building policy which encompasses none other than (1) pursuit of internal security and (2) economic prosperity. These two charted courses are the major outlets for the survival of over two million people of Singapore. Yet, Sir, two of the local Chinese papers and some publications have often been found publishing workers' complaints about suppression by employers, even about abject poverty, about having no money to seek medical treatment when they fall ill. Sir, writings such as these run counter to our national policy because: (1) they create confrontation between employers and employees, between the rich and the poor; (2) the occasioning of employer/employee confrontation gives rise to the communist concept of class conflict in their anti-Government subversion; (3) the presence of the concept of class conflict generates hostility between employers and employees and between the poor and the rich; (4) consciousness of hostilities affects our internal security and deals an instant blow to our industry. Instability at home will weaken Government's control, cause industrial unrest and result in investment and productivity sliding downhill. Sir, if we fail to maintain the foundation of a stable government, if investments do not come forward and productivity remains stagnant, our economic growth will slow down immediately. Our two million people will then lose a firm hold on their means of livelihood. This situation will then afford a good opportunity for the communists to seize power and enslave our people.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, although the answer is unsatisfactory, I still beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, similarly I have said just now that if the woman is sterilised and medically proved incapable of giving birth to any more children, is that not enough? He has already got his two children. Why should the Minister insist that the man must also go for sterilisation?.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this is exactly what I have said. The Minister is "measuring other people by his own narrow yardstick." He has got only one wife, but he believes that everybody else would take concubines. I think that is a wrong way of putting things.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have said just now that the Minister has been "fathoming a gentleman's thought by a petty-man's measure." Why should he suspect that the husband would keep mistresses? In Singapore we have the law of monogamy. Unless a man is divorced by law, he cannot marry another woman. Why should he raise this question in his answer to me? I am rather surprised.”
“Sir, the Minister has just said - (In English) Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, - The Chairman: According to the Standing Orders, if a Member commences to speak in one language, he should continue to speak in that language.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I do not believe the Minister of State is talking from his heart because I know he is a very religious man. I think it is not difficult for me to refute his argument. In the first place, he said that sterilisation is required of this couple not by pressure or force. That I quite understand. But there is a subtle pressure behind that. If a couple just marries without the approval of the Commissioner for Employment the consequence is obvious, the woman will be sent back to Malaysia. I am not quarrelling about the objective which is to reduce our rapid population growth and that is why we have to bring in all kinds of measures to achieve this objective. But what I am quarrelling about is that the Commissioner should not bring in this condition to induce a couple to agree to sterilisation which will later on bring about this tragedy and trauma. Now the family has broken up virtually. I disagree with this exercise. So I say, "OK. Since he wants to get married he signs the bond," All right, he faces the consequences. But in future I say that this exercise should be removed. Otherwise, you will create more cases like what I have referred to.”
“To add insult to injury. I was told that this woman concerned was sent back to Malaysia by the Immigration Department on the instruction of the Commissioner for Employment. Since then she has been prohibited from entering Singapore to visit her two children and her husband because the Immigration Department refused to endorse her passport when she applied for the usual two-week temporary stay in Singapore. I think this is wrong and unjust. I seriously urge the Labour Minister to put a stop to this kind of restriction, like requiring people to undergo sterilisation before approving their marriage. The Commissioner's duty is to accept or reject according to the merits of the case. If the application merits consideration, then he approves it, otherwise he rejects it. Trading a marriage approval for sterilisation should not be allowed to be practised in future. If we believe in achieving a more just and equal society, moral duty requires the Labour Minister to act and restore the happiness of this family concerned.”
“Sir, I beg to move, *That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead ACA 1101. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs. Teong Eng Siong, P. Govindaswamy, Ho Kah Leong and Ch'ng Jit Koon). Sir, the matter I would like to raise before this House, which comes under the portfolio of the Ministry of Labour, concerns the case of a marriage between a Singaporean and a Malaysian. This couple applies to the Commissioner for Employment for approval to marry in 1 973. The application was approved on the condition that they should sign an undertaking to undergo sterilisation after having two children. This couple signed the undertaking to obtain the Commissioner's approval, and they were married. Trouble begins after the arrival of their second child, as they are now required to undergo sterilisation. The woman was willing but the man was not. He argued that it would suffice if his wife alone was sterilised. He said that even if they continued to cohabit as man and wife, they cannot produce any more children. But the Commissioner insisted that both the husband and the wife must undergo sterilisation, and warned the husband that his wife would be expelled from Singapore if he failed to comply. The man did not go despite the warning. This resulted in the wife being sent back to Malaysia. The woman now lives in Malaysia while the two children live with their father in Singapore. Thus this once happy family is now broken up virtually by the injustice of a man-made decision. Why must the Commissioner insist on both the husband and wife to undergo sterilisation? So long as the wife is sterilised and medically proved incapable of giving birth to any more children, is this not enough? What is the necessity to sterilise the husband also?”
“Thus, any increase in wages has been consumed and nullified by rising prices. The third reason the Minister has given is that the ever-increasing public expenditure has to be borne by as many people as possible and that the services provided by the Government must be paid for. Of course, nobody expects the services of Government free of charge but surely some consideration can be given to those in the lower income group, who in 1948 were not so badly off when prices of goods and services were lower. In an article in "Socialism That Works, The Singapore Way", Dr Goh Keng Swee, our former Minister for Finance, stated that "from 1959 to 1975, the Consumer Price Index increased by about 70%". What then would be the increase from 1948 -probably well over 200%. Thus whatever wage increases the lower income group may have received have all been absorbed by rising prices. It should also be borne in mind that taxpayers' expenses have also increased, if he is married and has children. The allowances for his wife and children have not been increased since 1948, despite rising prices. Thus the end product of the existing tax pattern means that although a man's wages may have doubled or trebled since 1948, he is left poorer than what he was in 1948 despite our Republic's progress. It is not that I am advocating a substantial reduction in the rate of income tax; all that is being asked for is that cognisance be taken of the rising prices and the fact that they have reduced the wage-earner's real income as opposed to his money wages. 6.33 p.m.”
“In regard to the first observation, I would like to draw attention to the fact that in presenting his budget the Minister gave us the impression that Singapore is financially sound. In a budget of $5 billion, $26 million is a drop in the ocean. In regard to the second sentence in the quotation, does the Minister imply that he is thus giving us a guarantee that there will be no new taxes or increase in existing taxes during the current financial year? I would like to make one other observation in regard to this $26 million which undoubtedly is being collected from marginal tax payers, who undoubtedly number several thousands. In a previous sitting of Parliament, the Minister indicated that the collection of taxes from hawkers was too tedious and cumbersome, as it would entail a large number of staff and revenue would rather be small. On the other hand, I would like to enquire if it would not be better to transfer the staff who are collecting this meagre $26 million from thousands of the lower income group and let them concentrate on the collection of income tax from those earning higher incomes and from those who may be at present evading income tax. The second reason the Minister has given is that while the cost of living has gone up, so has per capita income, which increased the ability of the taxpayer to pay more tax. Of course, it is evident that if a person earns a higher income he has to pay higher income tax if personal relief is not increased. But what the Minister has apparently omitted to consider and mention is the fact that although incomes have gone up so has the cost of living. The Minister for Finance sometime ago admitted that the Consumer Price Index for the year 1973-74 has gone up by nearly 25%. How many times would it have gone up since 1948?”
“I have given up smoking. I would like, however, to ask the Minister for Finance if he is willing to give us an assurance, in the light of the confidence displayed in presenting the budget, that no new taxes will be introduced and that existing taxes will not be raised during the course of the year. I ask this, Sir, because of late, there is the tendency to present a painless budget but after the electorate has been lulled into a sense of satisfaction and complacency, new taxes are imposed or existing taxes raised for various reasons during the course of the year. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, with the indulgence of the House, may I raise once again a question which I have raised before and which I am sure is of interest to most of us in Singapore. I refer, Sir, to the personal relief afforded to taxpayers. Sir, income tax was introduced more than 25 years ago and there has been no increase in the personal relief of $2,000 except for the relief of $1,000 allowed for earned income. Despite representations made in this House year after year, the Minister for Finance has brushed aside all arguments with the same old excuses. His refusal to increase the stagnant personal relief brings consolation to nobody. The Minister for Finance has given us three reasons for refusing to increase personal relief. Firstly, he says that the Government will lose about $26 million in revenue a year, and that (I quote Hansard, 24th February, 1977): Our revenue performance in the last financial year and in the coming year is not so strong as to permit an increase in such income tax relief, If such relief were to be increased, a new tax or an increase in other taxes may have to be imposed to make up for the loss in revenue.' This appears to be an answer which he repeats year after year.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to congratulate the Minister for Finance for his painless budget and for his confidence demonstrated in his deficit budgeting. The only increase in taxes are on luxuries, and if people insist on drinking and smoking they should be prepared to pay for the extra cost. An hon. Member: So do you.”
“Sir, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has said that there is no need to expand the Serangoon Garden Market. Is this decision his own or has he consulted the hawkers themselves before making that decision?”
“The people of Singapore have once again elected us to form the government. As has been said by the Prime Minister, and I quote, "The people are anti-communist; they do not want communists." One danger facing Singapore today is internal communist subversion against the government. It is in response to the request of the electorate that such a measure is introduced. During the "Spring and Autumn" period in China (period of feudal warlords), there was a great statesman by the name of Kuan Chung who once said, "Expelling foreign invasion should be preceded by the maintenance of internal security." In other words, there must be internal security before foreign invasion can be checked. Without security what other things can we talk about, even saving daylight? Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to support the Motion moved by the Member for Ulu Pandan. 3.43 p.m.”
“" Only then did the agent disclose that he was, in fact, a communist underground agent. Do you think we also have such dangerous elements in our security set-ups? The second story tells about the pre-liberation Saigon where the Income Tax Department was already infiltrated by a Vietcong agent. At that time, the Nguyen Van Thieu Government did not know about him. This Vietcong agent, who managed to infiltrate into the government department, made use of his official position to make secret attacks on the rightists so as to weaken the anti-communist force of the Saigon Government. As soon as Saigon was liberated, except for those who escaped, those who remained behind were arrested one by one on information supplied by this Vietcong agent. Do you think we have any Communist infiltrators in our tax department, postal service or the churches, particularly the choirs? Such is the important work of internal security on the lives and properties of the people of Singapore. We must, therefore, make sure that the work is done well and thoroughly and that there is no loophole in it. Any loophole will mean that all previous efforts will have been wasted. I do not mean to praise the communists. Any communist regime, be it the Soviet Union or China, will carry out a purge every now and then. They eliminate undesirable elements and strengthen their regime through purges. If we want to seek permanent security and safeguard for the people of Singapore, if we wish to ensure that the people enjoy their rights and happiness, to seek peace and progress for society and stability and prosperity for the country, it is necessary, I think, for the Ministry of Home Affairs to introduce measures whereby information can be gathered from various Government departments.”
“The communists are like the all-permeating mercury. For instance, now only we have found that G. Raman, a lawyer, is an out-and-out communist; now only do we know that he has colluded with European and Malayan communists in their attempt to overthrow the elected Government of Singapore. He became a communist long. long ago when he was studying at the University of Singapore. At that time he harped on the same string as the Malayan communists, but why did he not come to the notice of our security authorities then? Why has our institution of higher learning cultivated such a high level communist intellectual? I wonder if there is anything wrong with our education system. I also have friends who teach in the secondary schools, They told me that today, there are communist elements even in the government secondary schools. Such a phenomenon did not exist in the past. Formerly, communist elements were found mostly in private secondary schools. They invariably did not study well. However, the communist students today are good in their studies. They sport long hair and pretend to be hippies. They are, in fact, members of the so-called branch committees of the underground Malayan communists. My friend told me two true stories. One happened in Shanghai in 1949, when the Nationalist Party, that is, the Kuo Mm Tang, was about to withdraw from Shanghai. Lo Lung Chi, an important member of the Democratic League, was arrested by the KMT agent for sympathising with the communists. However, as soon as Shanghai was liberated, the agent who interrogated Lo immediately invited him out of the prison. Lo was so frightened that his face turned pale. But the man said, "Comrade Lo, you have been invited to go to Peking.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to express the gratitude of the Khe Bong electorate to the President for his policy speech on the 8th February this year After reading the speech again and again, I strongly feel that the policy outlined therein is a "universally acceptable" policy that provides 100% safeguard and security for the livelihood of the two million people of Singapore. In this context, Mr Speaker, Sir, when the Singapore electorate returned our party to power, what they want is, in short, security and safeguard for their livelihood. This is the only thing they expect of us. Just as the President has stated in his policy speech, there are numerous important problems facing our country, such as those concerning the economy, education, communications, finance, the judiciary and so on and so forth, but none more important than internal security. This is because our present situation is at a very critical juncture, and if we do not handle it properly, this ship of ours will capsize immediately with all of us swallowed by the huge waves when it will be too late to talk about anything, and all of us will not be here, The ship I refer to is the present Government of the party-in-power; the huge waves are the Malayan Communists and their fellow travellers. They are our archenemies. They jeopardize the peace and security of Singapore and attempt to seize power by armed force. They are the public enemies of the people of Singapore -elements who must not be allowed to exist for internal security's sake. We, the party-in-power, are not unaware of this internal danger. For this reason, we have been paying particular attention to the question of internal security However, to be honest about ourselves. I think what we have done is inadequate and not thorough enough either.”
“Sir, can the Minister throw some light on this mystery? Tan Wah Piow entered the United Kingdom through London on 30th June, 1976, and was given six months' stay. He must have his passport with him like any other visitor. What puzzles me is this: how could the British authorities readily get hold of his passport to make photostat copies? Can the Minister throw some light on this matter?”
“Sir, what would be the Minister's comment if one says that our medical services in regard to charges could be still further subsidised?”
“Sir, will there be a consequent increase in medical charges?”
“If, therefore, the Government envisages difficult times ahead and a slowdown in our economic growth, I have no doubt that the situation will be reflected in the National Wages Council's recommendation. But this does not mean that the annual increments provided in the worker's wage scale should be abolished. It must not be forgotten that wage scales were obtained after hard bargaining on the part of the unions, very often at times when we were fighting the communists, and to suggest that they should be scrapped on the ground that wage increases should from now on only hinge on improved effort and output is most illogical and could even be construed as a breach of faith. One does not chase the rat by burning the house down.”
“It was only in the last few years, in the wake of rapid industrialisation and full employment, did rising prices and the cost of living make such an impact that it has necessitated state intervention to provide remedial act on to contain rising prices since external factors and the unrestricted free enterprise could otherwise upset not only our people's livelihood but also our very economy. Sir, the recommendation of the National Wages Council must be seen in this context to meet higher prices and the rising cost of living. The wage supplement recommended by the National Wages Council is thus the extra quantum of money that has to be made available to the employee to augment his remuneration so as to redress the imbalance between his actual monetary remuneration and the purchasing power of his wages. The inflation that we have experienced during the past few years is not the making of the workers of Singapore but imported inflation due to external factors which are beyond the control of the workers. In the circumstances, it will be unfair to blame the worker for expecting a wage supplement to enable him to meet rising prices. The wage supplement of the National Wages Council can therefore be viewed as a stop-gap measure. Wage increases are only recommended when the situation warrants it. If our statistics show that there is no fall in the purchasing power of the dollar, there will undoubtedly be no wage supplement recommended by the National Wages Council. In this context. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is clear that the National Wages Council's wage supplement is thus only an adjustment to meet the rising cost of living.”
“This also gave the left-wing trade union leaders a firm hold over the rank and file, because if the workers had not backed them up in creating labour unrest which could even wreck our economy they were put at the mercy of the unenlightened employer and doomed to no wage increases whatsoever. It was to remove this sense of insecurity which was often the source of labour unrest that wage scales were introduced. Thus being assured of his rice bowl the worker could devote all his efforts and energy on his work and productivity without the nagging fear that he may be Out on a limbo when the union's collective agreement with the management expires. Sir, if we do away with salary scales and annual increments, we might well bring back the old scenario and once again have a restive labour force, all waiting with agony and fear as to what would happen on expiry of their collective agreements. In regard to the NWC's recommendation for wage increases, it must be pointed out that this was a measure introduced to meet a new phenomenon that of a rising cost of living a phenomenon which has made its greatest impact in post-war years. Those of us who belong to the older generation and who were working before the war will remember that even after the Great Depression the term "inflation" was hardly ever heard of in this part of the world nor did it cause any social or economic problems. It was only after 1939 with the outbreak of war in Europe was there any appreciable rise in the cost of living for government to take cognisance of the matter. In the first few years after the end of World War II there was not really any marked upsurge in prices and in the cost of living.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I refer to the Minister for Finance's observation on wages policy in his Budget statement on 1st March, 1976. He said: 'The time has come for the National Wages Council to consider whether it should not include all forms of wage increases, including annual increments, incentive, allowances and bonuses, in the computation of the annual NWC wage supplement to arrive at a single total annual increase.' I would like to make reference, Mr Speaker, Sir, to the recent statement that "for Singapore workers the days of automatic increases were over." Since this statement is obviously linked with the Minister's observation it would seem, therefore, that the Minister for Finance is suggesting that we do away with annual increments for workers on the grounds that the annual increments will by augmenting the NWC wage-hike upset the national economic equilibrium. Sir, I respectfully submit that any attempt to abolish wage scales would be a retrograde step. Annual increments for workers must be viewed against the background of their introduction for the lower income group. If we disregard the rationale behind annual wage increments, we will be doing so at our own peril. It must be remembered that, generally speaking, annual increments of wages for workers are comparatively new in origin because, briefly, wage scales bring about a sense of security for the workers. Let me outline the history. In the not so recent past when the extreme left wing elements dominated the labour movement their tactic was not to have wage scales but short-term contracts with employers so that at regular intervals they could confront management with new and unreasonable wage increases so as to bring about industrial unrest.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it cannot be denied that the turnover rate of teachers has been high. This leads to a shortage of teachers, especially in the secondary schools. I do not know why, but it could be due to some mistake or due to the policy of the Ministry of Education. But the situation is that, on the one hand, while we are short of teachers with tertiary educational qualifications, on the other hand, we find that these teachers with tertiary educational qualifications have been asked to teach in primary schools instead of secondary schools. This is one question which I would like the Senior Minister of State to clarify. Another matter is that we have accepted professionals from Taiwan in the field of architecture, engineering and so on. But for teaching, our Government has refused to recognise the Taiwan graduate. I understand that a number of Taiwan graduates have not been allowed to teach in the secondary schools, and this has created a bad feeling among the Taiwan graduates who are now still teaching in the primary schools.”
“As the Minister has said, there is an element of human frailty.”
“Sir, the reason which led me to ask the question just now is that the Minister was so confident and proud of the fact that it is not fortuitous but by design that there have been no raging infernos in H DB flats. But the fact is, by his own admission, that fire still occurs in Housing Board flats. If this statement is not corrected, he may be giving misleading information to the public that the Housing Board flats are really fire-proof. They are not fire-proof.”
“Sir, the fact still remains that fires do occur in Housing Board flats, Therefore some sort of preventive measure is necessary, as prevention is better than cure. Sir, does the Minister not think so?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask a supplementary question?”
“Sir, I do not think the Minister has got any leg to stand on in his argument that they were the cause of our high population density. Does he not know that many of them have already been in Singapore before our population reached 2 2 million? However, they being here before or after the population reached that figure has got nothing to do with our population density. This is the point”
“Computation from the Minister for Finance.”
“Sir, we all know that the Singapore Government grants permanent stay to a foreigner if he can pay $250,000 And moreover his family is also given permanent residence The other day, in the debate on the Budget Statement, the Finance Minister said that our per capita Gross National Product is about S6.000 So if a non-citizen wife or husband happens to be in Singapore for 10 years, then that person has actually contributed $600,000. I do not see any good reason for refusing permanent stay to an applicant. I am fully in agreement with the Member for Jalan Kayu who said that apart from wasting time and money in renewing visas, the important thing that we should consider is the anxiety of the applicant. They do not know when they will be asked to leave Singapore. Sir, these people already have children in Singapore and there is no question of the bona fides of their marriage I think the Minister has to make some ruling in respect of these people who have already stayed here for more than 10 years and who are still unable to get permanent residence. Besides they do not have identity cards.”
“Sir, in Singapore there are quite a number of subnormal children. I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether there is any home to accommodate these retarded children and whether the Social Welfare Department has any plan to help them.”
“Sir, after hearing all this. I feel a bit excited and would like to say a few words. Money is important in this society. Without money a lot of things cannot be done. There is a saying that even if you want to spend money, there has to be a purpose. If there is too much money, it is not so good either. Touching on TV advertisements, can it not be arranged that commercial advertisements come either before or after the programme, and not interrupting the programme every few minutes? Perhaps this would not give rise to so many complaints from the viewers.”
“I am closing it, Sir, I was saying that the residents will soon be cut off from their friends and neighbours and remain isolated, living in solitude within the four walls of their little flat. I can only express the hope that this increase in parking fee from 20 cents to 40 cents is the result of an honest mistake on the part of the Board's officials and not a perverse desire to isolate the residents.”
“In the past it was 20 cents for half an hour, and it is difficult to understand the reason for the increase. If the Housing Board is really honest in its declared intention to encourage greater intermingling and interaction among the residents of the different Housing Board estates, these arbitrary rules do pose a serious problem because in the not too distant future more than half of Singapore's population will be living in Housing Board flats. And if the Housing Board continues to build artificial barriers to prevent the free interflow of residents in those estates”
“One such arbitrary rule which puzzles me is why residents who are allotted car park lots are not allowed to park their cars for a few hours in an adjoining car park when vacant, if they have a reason to do so. Apparently the Housing Board's rule, for reasons best known to themselves, is that "you shall park your car in your given lot and nowhere else", even if there are vacant lots in adjoining car parks. It seems to me, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the Housing Board is determined to forge a regimented society, a society that will obediently abide by their many arbitrary rules and regulations, and may not seek redress. This attitude of the Housing Board appears to stem from their monopoly in public housing. As the biggest landlord, they appear to be succumbing to the thirst for power by dictating the rules instead of arriving at mutually acceptable rules and regulations that will equally provide discipline necessary for the efficient management of housing estates. I would also like to seek clarification from the Minister as to the reason for abolishing the half-hour parking in Housing Board estates at a rate of 20 cents and substituting it with a minimum fee of 40 cents in the hour. This new rate means that anybody who parks his car there even for a short while has to pay the minimum rate of 40 cents for a full hour. This appears to be an arbitrary decision without any justification whatsoever. It excites suspicion that the Housing Board merely wishes to increase its revenue. In most cases people stop by at these car parks for a few minutes only to speak to their friends or to have a quick meal at the restaurant, or to make some purchases at the supermarket there. So although they may be there only for 15 to 20 minutes, they now have to pay the minimum fee of 40 cents.”
“Living in flats and apartments and the tempo of life today, including television, have all contributed to encouraging or even compelling Singaporeans to sleep late. Because of longer working hours and transport problems, social calls to friends are usually possible only after 8 p.m., and if visitors to residents in Housing Board estates have to clear their cars out by 10 p.m, it leaves very little time indeed for them to socialise. We have not got a wonderful public transport system to encourage them to travel in public transport. They therefore have to travel in their own motor cars. In addition, Sir, young couples living in Housing Board flats have been encouraged to invite their parents to visit them frequently and to help look after their children when they are out. But the Housing Board's car park rules make this practically impossible if grandparents who make the visit by car have to clear out by 10p.m. This 10 p.m-deadline has a very unsettling and unnerving effect on visitors because if, by any chance, they are delayed by a few minutes they may find their cars locked in or parking posts chained at the whims of the Housing Board officials. Moreover, they will also be subject to a heavy penalty. Sir, it would appear that the officials of the Housing Board are insensitive to the requirements and wishes of the residents of the flats, although they have been administering the flats for more than a decade. May I, therefore, request the Housing Board to take a closer look at its rules and regulations and consult the residents through the residents' association or other organisations and work out more pragmatic schemes not only in respect of car parking but also in other matters. This will be a more democratic approach instead of introducing arbitrary rules.”
“Sir, I would like to make reference to the Housing Board's policy in regard to restrictions imposed on visitors using their car parks when calling on friends living in Housing Board flats. On the one hand, the Government proudly announces that public housing provides accommodation for more than 40% of Singapore's population and has urged the people to develop a greater sense of neighbourliness not only in their own estates but also with those in the estates around them. On the other hand, the Housing Board appears to be determined to stultify every attempt at neighbourliness by imposing petty restrictions, such as the closing of car parks at 10 p.m, and even at 7 p.m, in some estates. This makes it difficult for residents to receive friends for any length of time in the evenings. Sir, it is difficult to comprehend the rationale behind this restriction if the Housing Board is really sincere in their attempt to encourage neighbourliness and cohesiveness among the residents in the housing estates. I believe that in some housing estates visitors are allowed to use the Housing Board car parks until 11 p.m. If this is so, why is it not allowed in other HDB housing estates? This extension will at least allow friends to meet for a few hours after work. In fact, the Housing Board should permit visitors to utilise their car parks until midnight. I am sure that there can be no administrative problem in keeping the Housing Board car parks open till midnight. Sir, I have suggested extension of use of the car parks until midnight because as Singapore becomes urbanised so also must the life-styles of Singaporeans change. Thirty years ago when we were less urbanised and less industrialised, life went on at a slower pace and most people retire early to bed.”
“Sir, arising from the Minister of State's answer to my question in respect of the charge for colour telephones, may I know whether it was because the TAS had to pay more for the colour telephones, or whether they charged it simply because the people demanded it. What is the difference in cost between the colour telephone and the conventional black sets?”
“Sir, I was told that when the TAS introduced colour telephones, they levied an extra charge on those who applied for colour telephones. But this charge was later withdrawn. I want to know what is the justification for the extra charge in the first instance, and why was it withdrawn later. Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, the reason for levying an extra charge in the early stages of the introduction of colour telephones was because there were a limited number of colour telephones available to meet the high demand for them. But since then the supply of colour telephones has been adequate, and it has therefore been decided to withdraw the extra charge.”