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 9 of 17.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in regard to the Ministry of Education's proposals for the coming year, I would like to draw the attention of this House to the problems that are being created and the irritation that is being felt by local students as a result of the University's policy to give foreign students their share of accommodation in the hostels, ignoring the requirements of our own students. This is not to say that I am advocating the total ban on accommodation at University hostels for overseas students. On the contrary, they are most welcome, in principle, for it is a good thing for our students to live and mix with students from other countries. It promotes understanding, tolerance and a widening of horizons. However, I feel that a correct proportion must be maintained for many reasons. Perhaps I need only mention two. One is that if a large proportion of our students are unable to get accommodation, they are bound to feel disgruntled and dissatisfied and this, instead of promoting harmony, will ultimately bring about resentment against overseas students. This should naturally be avoided. Second, if large numbers of foreign students are permitted in our hostels, they will tend to group together and form little societies of their own, and this will inevitably be counter-productive in a very real way. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad to note that the Government is planning to impose stiffer penalties for certain crimes. It is a well-known fact that it takes a long time to change laws. It is true that in recent times, some laws and regulations have been updated, but I feel that most of our laws could bear closer scrutiny and are worthy of updating and revision. Singapore inherited quite a large number of laws which were enacted during colonial days, for a different era.”
“There they receive or the job training which, in due course, will enable them to do the actual work they are expected to do. Although workshop practice and theory will undoubtedly provide some basic training, it is the practical application of this learning-in-industry which is most important, and this sort of training can only be acquired by solid work experience in factories. If we leave it solely to vocational schools to train our future technicians, there will be a time lag of two or three years before these technicians can be efficient in the work that they will eventually have to do in the factories, the workshops and so forth. I would respectfully submit, therefore, Mr Speaker, Sir, that Government should evolve more training schemes for apprentices in factories and utilise funds for these training schemes instead of spending more money in building vocational schools. I feel sure that industry would welcome this move, for although many industries are willing to train apprentices, training also consumes the employer's time and money. Perhaps a scheme could be worked out whereby the apprentices receive simultaneous on-the-job training in the factories as well as instruction in the existing vocational schools. This, Mr Speaker, Sir, would appear to be a more practical approach to the problem. In considering training schemes, with joint participation from industry, provision should be made to disallow apprentices from joining trade unions, because they are trainees, and as such, are students. There appears to be no valid reason why students should join trade unions of employees. If the apprentices join in, one can appreciate the employer's reluctance to take on apprentices.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by the Member for Kim Keat in thanking the President for his speech at the opening of the Third Parliament on 21st February. Singapore has had to face a number of crises over the past decade, both internal and external. However, the Government has been constantly on the alert and was able therefore to draw up alternative plans well in advance. The Republic has consequently managed to weather the storm. The determination and willingness of our people to make adjustments to new situations also contributed in this effort. In fact, it was possible for Singapore not only to survive but to prosper as well. Although most people, including well-known economists, predicted that 1975 would be a year of economic recession which could bring in its wake very difficult situations, things appear to have levelled off, at least for the time being, and there is every hope that with a certain amount of sacrifice, determination and careful planning, we will be able to surmount the more recent crisis. Therefore, Mr Speaker, Sir, it is imperative that we ensure that none of our resources is wasted and that government spending will help bring about maximum returns. In this context, I would like to refer to one item which I feel has not been given sufficient attention. The Government, I understand, intends to spend a large sum of money to recruit and train apprentices, to boost the supply of skilled and semi-skilled personnel for our industries. I would like to point out that vocational schools do not provide the entire training required for apprentices. The training at vocational schools cannot be as effective as that given to apprentices in factories.”
“Yes, but your arguments just now seem to tell the House that there is no risk at all. This is the impression the public will get. If you say that liberalised abortion is for the sake of stopping the population growth which is the best for the future of Singapore and its people, then I will agree with him. But I will not agree that liberalised abortion is to protect women because they do not want to have more children, nor do I agree with him that the woman just wants an abortion.”
“What authority has he to tell us that promiscuity has not increased? He is not a student of sociology! The risk of mortality through abortion is still there. He can get a battery of doctors under him to explain that there is no risk, and so forth. And I can also get so many doctors to testify that the risk is still there.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, after hearing the Minister for some 20 minutes, it appears that he crows over the achievement of the Abortion Act. According to the Minister's arguments, the Abortion Act is to protect the woman who is afraid of having more children. If that is the case, then I think this Abortion Bill does not justify our support. I think the intention of the Bill is more than that, and the Minister has failed to explain it. That is why we cannot agree with him. Our arguments which had been put forward five years ago when the first Abortion Bill was introduced in this House still hold water today. The Minister has said that the Abortion Act has not shown increase in promiscuity. But I say that it certainly encourages promiscuity.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in Singapore today I find it difficult to drive around and I find it even more difficult to walk around. Although I support this Bill, I feel that it is not quite so effective. It is like leaving a headache to cure itself, or when your foot aches you treat it yourself. If we want to reduce the number of accidents we will have to reduce the number of vehicles and drivers. I agree with Members that the minimum age for holding a driving licence should be raised to 21 years. This is a correct move. If we do not allow more drivers on the road, the Government can easily reduce the number of private car ownership. This will lead to a reduction in the number of accidents. Sir, I am not against the introduction of the Points Demerit System. It is only a medium to treat the symptoms of a permanent ailment. It does not cure the pain fundamentally. In the Points Demerit System many different points of view have been given. Some Members think that we should be even more strict, but the Member for Sembawang feels that it is already too strict for the professional drivers. I am in full sympathy with him. The case for these professional drivers is just like the Chinese saying that if you go to the mountain often enough, chances are you will be eaten by the tiger. Therefore, I think the Government should give some consideration to this point of view. Sir, I support this Bill. 3.45 p.m.”
“Sir, this information is not enough to satisfy me. At the moment, there are a lot of experienced wiremen, and if this Bill is passed then these people will not be allowed to handle any electrical work. So they want to find out whether there is any examination board to which they can go for a test in order to qualify as licensed electrical workers. Otherwise they will be stranded the moment this Bill is passed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, 1 would like to ask a point of information from the Minister. Since the Bill requires every electrician, wireman, and so on, to be registered or qualified before he could handle any electrical work, may I know whether there is any examination board where people who seek to be qualified electricians can be tested?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, at this time of economic strain and stress, what justification is there for the Housing Board to provide such luxuries like swimming pools and a sports complex? Will there be any economic return because we do not know what is in Store for us in the future?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support this Bill in toto. Although what I wanted to say has already been said, there is just one point I wish to mention. I feel that there is one clause in the Bill which is a little too preponderant. In Part III, clause 9 (2) says: `No newspaper company shall refuse to issue management shares to any person who has been granted the written approval of the Minister to purchase such shares.' I feel that this is a little too drastic, and I hope to present certain views on this point when this Bill is sent to Select Committee.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this matter is related to policy, but you must give me the opportunity to develop my theme on the policy.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, what I wish to talk has nothing to do with the Police or the policy on Police. The social ethos of Singapore is getting worse. Yesterday at about 4.00 a.m, there was an incident involving some foreign streakers. They have come from abroad to my constituency to streak themselves.”
“Sir, I was a bit disturbed when the Member for Anson alleged that a patient was not attended to in time. There was some delay. I just want to know whether or not the Minister for Health has received any such complaint. Was he aware of this case or did he come to know of it only just now when the Member for Anson brought it up?”
“Sir, I think the Member for River Valley has a point. Poisons may mean life or death. That is why he gets so excited. I think the Minister is too light-hearted. He does not concern himself with this problem as an important one. The Member for River Valley has mentioned that the oil of methyl salicyclates (the common name is Winter Green) has caused a number of deaths. The Ministry of Health allows this oil to be sold very freely. I do not understand why this oil, which, is classified as a deleterious drug, is sold so freely in the market.”
“Sir, although my constituency is an urban one - we do not have pigs in an urban constituency -- I fully agree with the Member for Jalan Kayu who suggested that Government should give subsidy to the farmers so that they can bring down the cost of rearing pigs. I would like to suggest that, if Government were able to give a subsidy, it would be good because it would enable the farmer to reduce the price of pigs. And when the price of pork is reduced, it would be in the interest of the people of Singapore who eat pork.”
“Going to court and fighting a case against the Government is one thing, there is also the legal expenses, the time spent in court, and the inconvenience caused. In view of this, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister: is four years the usual length of time that the Commissioner of Lands needs to determine the offer of compensation for acquisition of houses?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to touch on a very small point on the Government's policy on land acquisition. The Government policy has caused dissatisfaction among those property owners who have been affected by it because they felt that the compensation was not only inadequate but also unfair as the offer of compensation was made to them nearly four years after they were informed of the acquisition. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has started acquiring houses for urban renewal in my constituency since 1969, and the owners were asked to submit claims for compensation to the Commissioner of Lands. In compliance with the notice, all affected house owners submitted claims for compensation through their certified valuers in 1970. But after that, nothing was heard from the Commissioner of Lands. However, in 1974, four years after the submission of claims, the Commissioner of Lands has just made up his mind to announce his offer of compensation to the people concerned. Sir, you will agree with me that there is a world of difference in land prices as well as the purchasing power of money between 1970 and 1974. There is no need for me to illustrate or elaborate on this. They felt that the Commissioner had taken unfair advantage by delaying the matter for four years, as the claims for compensation had been forwarded to the Commissioner since 1970. Why was it necessary to take four years to pay the compensation? Besides this unnecessary delay, the compensation offered by the Commissioner of Lands was only half of what they claimed four years ago. No doubt, there is provision for appeal if they feel that the compensation is inadequate. But let us be frank about it. How many people would like to go to court and appeal against the Government?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in line with the Government's policy on family planning, does the Minister not think there is a need for these creches to introduce rules saying that for those mothers with more than two children an increased fee will be charged if they send their children to these creches? In this way we can help make family planning more effective. Otherwise if we go on building creches, and they go on giving births, family plan- ning is going to take a downturn, and 1 do not think this is the right way to help our family planning to be more effective.”
“Sir, I would like to make a clarification. By "parasites", I do not mean the aged people who are without care are parasites. I was referring to certain able-bodied young people with good physique and good health. Such young people can actually take up various kinds of work in our society. But they are lazy, and do not want to take up proper jobs. They only want to receive public assistance. So my description is to apply to this kind of people.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, just now I heard various colleagues of mine appealing to the Minister for Social Affairs to increase the aid to the aged who are without any proper care. I very much agree with this view. However, I feel that the customary practice of providing aid to the aged is not the final solution in the long-term. I believe that the Government should try to seek other avenues. For instance, Government can look for certain light jobs for the aged so as to help them to be productive. In this way these aged people will find that not only are they occupied but they are also useful to the society. Therefore, they will not be a parasite to society.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, last year when we were discussing colour television, there was an overwhelming demand for colour television. The time was good then and nobody had expected that we were going to have the oil crisis, and so on. Now suddenly everybody is complaining that it would be extravagant to spend money on colour television. However, I believe that if the viewer does not want a colour set, he can still receive black and white programmes.”
“Sir, when this new hospital is ready, I would like to know by how much will the Minister increase the medical fees, which at one time were free.”
“Sir, in the long-term I think it is cheaper to buy than to rent. HAWKER CENTRE IN BRAS BASAH CONSTITUENCY 5. Mr Ho See Beng asked the Minister for Law and National Development whether there are plans to build any market/hawker centre in the area earmarked for urban renewal in the Bras Basah Constituency.”
“Sir, I think you are more than aware that today it is not so easy to rent a flat. That is why I think this poor fellow was forced to purchase the shophouse, not because he did not want to rent one.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, according to the Minister's reply, the HDB tenant would have no alternative but to give up his tenancy. However, under extenuating circumstances, would the Minister exercise a little bit of flexibility? There is the case of a shophouse tenant who was affected by urban renewal. The Housing and Development Board offered him only a residential flat and so he could not do his business. So he had to buy a shop-house in order to run his business, upon which his family's livelihood depends.”
“Sir, even if we go on debating until the cows come home, I do not believe that we can really force the issue asking the Government to nationalise or to take over the SBS. We are all very satisfied with the Government's reply that it has got no intention of taking over nor is it backing the SBS. The only way we can put the issue to a test is to hold a referendum to see whether the bus service should be run by the Government or whether it should be in the hands of a private organisation.”
“I believe we have got ample time. We are supposed to carry on until 8 o'clock.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand that the Member for Anson has some urgent matter to attend to. So the Minister need not answer his question. May I request the Minister to answer my question?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is one of the members of ASEAN. Nevertheless, the Labour Ministry's Work Permits Office has practised two standards in regard to the issue of work permits. For instance, a worker coming from Penang, which is about 500 miles away from Singapore, can be issued with a work permit, whilst another person coming from, say, the Rhio Islands in Indonesia, the distance is about two hours' boat ride, cannot be issued with a work permit. They can only be allowed to work on an employment pass. I just want to know the reasons for this double standard.”
“In that case, Sir, I will submit the name to the Minister later on. The Chairman: That is better.”
“Sir, for obvious reasons I do not want to make a telephone call to the Commissioner. The reason why I am annoyed is that this letter was sent two months ago and, before sending it, this man might have already waited for three or four months. All in all, he may have been waiting for six months or a year, but nothing has happened. If the Minister wants me to give him the applicant's name, I have it here.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for inviting me to submit particulars of the applicant. I wrote a letter, on behalf of a constituent of mine, and sent it on 16th January, 1974, to the Commissioner for Employment, and to-date, after more than two months, I have still not got a reply nor an acknowledgement. I expect the Work Permit Office to have the courtesy of acknowledging my letter. An hon. Member: Very inefficient!”
“Another issue which I would like to draw the attention of the Minister is the applications of permanent residents to marry Singapore citizens. I would like the Minister to investigate why it is necessary to take two months to process the applications. Once a person, who has been given permanent residence in Singapore, is prepared to renounce whatever citizenship he holds, he should be given permission without undue delay. Sir, I am not suggesting that this permission be granted indiscriminately, but a permanent resident who has stayed in Singapore for more than five years obviously has every intention to make Singapore his home. And if he has regular employment during the last five years, there should not be any undue delay in processing the application. Mr Speaker, Sir, in affairs of the heart, the Government should not take a hard line, otherwise the impression will be given that our Ministers do not know what falling in love means. All our Ministers are successfully married, and they should encourage permanent residents to marry and settle down instead of having permanent affairs with our Singaporeans.”
“Sir, in regard to inflation and rising cost of production which are threatening to jeopardise the competitiveness of our exports, may I suggest that, since one of the contributing factors of this high cost of production is the present shortage of labour, we reassess the basis upon which our Employment Act rests. Since this is a difficult year it may be desirable to adopt emergency measures to tide us over the present crisis. For example, overtime is now not compulsory, and to meet target dates if employers need the services of some employees for more than 48 hours per week, it is often difficult to ensure that overtime is performed because of the restriction imposed by the existing law. As a consequence, in order to meet the deadline some employers are carrying more staff than they need. This has two adverse effects. Firstly, it will aggravate the labour situation and, secondly, the cost of production will be pushed up, thus making our goods less competitive internationally. 2.45 p.m. Since Singapore has to export in order to survive, it may be worthwhile to consider exploring the need for compulsory overtime in certain essential areas. While this may help ease our labour shortage as well as reduce costs, this, of course, can only be considered after full and exhaustive discussions with the NTUC. I am sure that members of our trade unions, who have the interests of our young nation at heart and who fully appreciate the need for our * The amendments read as follows: (6) That the sum to be allocated for Head GA be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead HA 1111. (10) That the total sum to be allocated for Head GA in respect of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. survival, may be prepared to accept certain restraints during this crucial year that lies ahead of us.”
“Sir, when the Minister gave his answer, I was present in the Chamber. But the answer was so sophisticated that it was not easy to understand. The Minister did not make it clear. My question is: is Singapore still regarded by other ASEAN countries as being a Third China that we do not want to take the initiative to establish diplomatic relations with Communist China?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, from time to time we have heard of people advocating establishment of diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China, and at each time we hear from the Government that since we are in ASEAN we should wait, and so on and so forth, without giving very clear answers. So I would like to find Out whether it is because Singapore is regarded by the other ASEAN countries as being a Third China that we do not want to take the initiative. It is not only my personal belief that it is so but it is also the belief from various quarters. So I would like to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether he is able to confirm this. 6.45 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to know whether the Minister for Health has been informed of the reasons why these unmarried women wanted to carry out abortions.”
“And, if the present state of affairs carries on, we will only be stifling our workers' desire for higher productivity and higher wages. 3.59 p.m.”
“The Minister has stated that consumer prices rose by an average of 22.9 per cent over the previous year alone. In that context, how much more then must consumer prices have increased over the last 20 years, since the tax relief of $2,000 per head was first fixed? Sir, I presume I am right in saying that, when tax relief of $2,000 was fixed more than 20 years ago, the figure was arrived at after careful study, and that $2,000 was considered to be an equitable minimum to allow for a reasonable standard of living. With the rise in the cost of living, there has been practically no increase in personal relief, except for the $1,000 allowed as earned income, introduced some years ago. And I am sure you will appreciate that if the consumer price index had risen by an average of nearly 25 per cent during the last year, surely it has gone up many times since the figure of $2,000 relief was fixed. The final result is that the poor have become poorer, and the tax sits heavily on them. What is required, Sir, is for personal relief to be increased to a more realistic and pragmatic level, in keeping with the inflationary trends which the Minister referred to earlier. Only then will there be an incentive for our people to work harder because only then will they be able to retain the fruits of their labour, instead of having it siphoned away on the one hand by income tax and, on the other hand, by inflation. Every now and then, we hear exhortations and warnings that higher wages can only be related to higher productivity. While this is undoubtedly a reasonable dictum, what is the incentive, if higher wages, resulting from higher productivity, are negated by taxation and inflation? Sir, I submit that there is no incentive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Hon. Minister for Finance for his very clear and lucid exposition of the economic situation obtaining in Singapore, and for his realistic and frank appraisal of the problems confronting our nation in the year ahead. The three crucial factors that are felt acutely by the workers of Singapore, namely, oil prices, imported inflation and currency instability, are matters of concern to all of us, because even though there may be long-term solutions, in the short term, they generate problems. In this context, the tax reliefs announced by the Minister are no doubt welcomed by all but may I, with your indulgence, Sir, touch on a few points where I feel that sufficient thought may not possibly have been given, for reasons that perhaps I am not aware. Sir, I would first like to touch upon the question of tax relief for parents and grandparents, which has been raised from $300 per year to $750 per year per dependant. While, no doubt, this relief is welcome to a number of people and is a step in the right direction, I would like to enquire whether we know exactly the number of taxpayers who will benefit by this concession. In other words, Sir, can the Minister inform us how many taxpayers will actually benefit by this concession? This is important because our people should know the extent of relief granted under the head, Income Tax. I ask this question, Sir, because it seems to me that the larger area where tax relief is required, has not been touched upon. And this concerns personal relief in income tax. Personal relief, Sir, stands at $2,000 per year, plus $1,000 relief for earned income. And this personal relief of $2,000 was fixed more than 20 years ago, when incomes were much lower, and purchasing power much higher.”
“Sir, there has been Some talk that public transport may be nationalised. I would like to have the views of the Minister on this talk about the nationalisation of the transport service.”
“Sir, this is not the fault of the people who want to beat the deadline because the announcement was made earlier than the effective date of the regulation. Naturally, those who had already contracted to marry wanted to apply before 1st July, 1973. Therefore, since they applied before 1st July, I just want to know why the Minister turned them down.”
“Sir, I have even come across a case where the girl is already pregnant.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully agree with the Minister for introducing this regulation. But I would like to ask him why has the regulation been made retroactive. When the regulation came into force on 1st July, 1973, those people who had already contracted to marry before that date, applied to the Commissioner for Employment for approval, but their applications were rejected. I want to know what is the justification for making the regulation retroactive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as you know, with the present high cost of living - to use a Chinese expression, Tsai mi chu hsin kui ter shih ho - if the Government still does not think that now is the time to introduce some kind of price control, I would like to know what is the reason for it, and when would be the proper time to introduce such control.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just a small point of clarification. Will this Bill consequently lead to the control of prices of essential foodstuffs?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with the increase in the purchase price of Housing Board flats, will there be a consequent increase in the rent for Housing Board flats?”
“Sir, assuming the applicant has got residential qualifications, hut because his family has been staying in other countries, then the Government could use the reason against the applicant, in which case he will never get citizenship. Is it not so?”
“Mr Speaker, may I know whether the Minister will allow an applicant's wife and children who are residing in other countries to come and join him so as to enable him to apply for citizenship?”