Lim Cheng Lock
Singapore
“Mr Speaker Sir, under subhead 003, a sum of $100 million will be provided to the Housing and Development Board. I believe this sum will be provided at an interest rate of 7¾ per cent. The Housing and Development Board, in assisting persons who wish to own Housing and Development Board homes, gives loans to persons purchasing H.D.B.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 92 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 201. Mr Speaker, Sir, a token vote of $10 has been entered in this item for the development of an underground car park at the Padang.”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 31 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 101. Sir, the provision of over $1.7 million is for the construction of a luxury hotel adjacent to the Hotel and Catering Training Centre.”
“Sir, very briefly, what I wanted to find out from the Minister is whether he is aware that the sum of $100 million is being provided to the Housing and Development Board at an interest rate of 7¾ per cent, whereas the Board is giving loans to purchasers of flats at an interest rate of 6¼ per cent, which means that the Government is subsid…”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 51 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 911*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Hwang Soo Jin) Sir, in moving this amendment, I wish to seek information from the Minister for Communications as to whether he proposes to introduce a television informat…”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to find out from the Minister whether there is a policy on the marking out of parking lots in the city area. As you are aware, Sir, recently the marking out of parking lots has been extended to places away from the central area.”
The complete record
Every one of 205 lines we hold for Lim Cheng Lock, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“In view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 92 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 202.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 92 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 201. Mr Speaker, Sir, a token vote of $10 has been entered in this item for the development of an underground car park at the Padang. In view of the importance of this piece of land which is being used from time to time for national purposes, I wish to seek information from the Minister as to how he proposes to develop the Padang into an underground car park.”
“In view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $11,770,000 for Head 91 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 92 -”
“Sir, in view of the assurance, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $6,678,110 for Head 51 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 51 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 911*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Hwang Soo Jin) Sir, in moving this amendment, I wish to seek information from the Minister for Communications as to whether he proposes to introduce a television information system at the passenger terminal building in addition to the public address system.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Mr Ng Yeow Chong and Mr Ng Kah Ting - (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 31 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 31 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 101. Sir, the provision of over $1.7 million is for the construction of a luxury hotel adjacent to the Hotel and Catering Training Centre. In view of the overbuilding of private hotels, I wish to ask the Minister for Labour whether it is prudent for the Government to go into the hotel business on a commercial basis in competition with the other hotels.”
“Sir, very briefly, what I wanted to find out from the Minister is whether he is aware that the sum of $100 million is being provided to the Housing and Development Board at an interest rate of 7¾ per cent, whereas the Board is giving loans to purchasers of flats at an interest rate of 6¼ per cent, which means that the Government is subsidising $15 per $1,000. In addition to this subsidy, can the Minister say whether the flats are sold by the Board at cost or at a profit?”
“Mr Speaker Sir, under subhead 003, a sum of $100 million will be provided to the Housing and Development Board. I believe this sum will be provided at an interest rate of 7¾ per cent. The Housing and Development Board, in assisting persons who wish to own Housing and Development Board homes, gives loans to persons purchasing H.D.B. flats at an interest rate of 6¼ per cent. I wonder whether the Minister for Finance is aware of this subsidy that the people in Singapore who purchase H.D.B. homes are receiving. I am quite sure many persons in Singapore who purchase these homes do not realise the subsidy they are receiving from the Housing and Development Board. I also wish to find out from either the Minister for Finance or the Minister for Law and National Development whether, in addition to this subsidy of $15 per $1,000 loan, the houses are sold at cost or at a profit?”
“Sir, in view of the explanation. I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $750,010 for Head 10 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. 2.45 p.m. Head 11 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 10 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 101. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is acknowledged that over the past ten years, Singapore has made considerable progress politically, socially, industrially and economically. New laws have been introduced and passed and existing laws have been revised and brought up to date. But I must say that reasonable and suitable accommodation for the administration of justice does not keep pace with other fields of progress that we have made. I refer to the Criminal District and Magistrates' Courts at South Bridge Road. It is stated in the Memorandum on the Development Estimates (Misc. 2 of 1970) that the building is very old and dilapidated. In fact, the conditions are considered unsafe and also overcrowded. Sir, although the total expenditure for the construction of a new building is estimated to cost $6.4 million, only a sum of $750,000 is to be voted for this year and that is also subject to Treasury's sanction. According to the Estimates (Cmd. 4 of 1970), the revenue derived from these courts during the past year amounted to about $3 million for fines in the subordinate courts, and about $2 million in the traffic courts, making a total revenue of about $5 million. I am sure, Sir, that the Minister for Law will agree that even the offenders should expect reasonable accommodation when they appear in these courts. Furthermore, the judges, magistrates and the staff who work in these courts should be provided with more reasonable and suitable accommodation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I request the Minister to instruct the Superintendent of Car Parks that in the marking out of parking lots, he should be more discriminate and considerate to shopkeepers and have regard to the type of business and the loading and unloading activities which they have to perform.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to find out from the Minister whether there is a policy on the marking out of parking lots in the city area. As you are aware, Sir, recently the marking out of parking lots has been extended to places away from the central area. Can the Minister inform us whether the policy of marking out parking lots is to ease traffic congestion or to earn revenue without consideration for the hardship caused to shopkeepers in the area?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in speaking on this amendment, I am drawing the Minister's attention, through his Parliamentary Secretary, to the subject of the maximum total family income qualification for renting or purchasing Housing Board flats. The present regulations are such that people who wish to rent or purchase Housing Board flats must not have a total income exceeding $1,200 per month. I am aware that this qualification has been revised recently to allow more people to take advantage of this revision to rent or purchase their own house. It is quite right that in the beginning when the Housing Board commenced to build houses for the people it had to restrict the allocation of houses to those in the lower income group so that they could enjoy this facility first. But over the years, our standard of living has risen and the incomes of people have also risen. Recently we have introduced legislation increasing contributions to the Central Provident Fund. Will the Minister consider revising this maximum further, so that the total family income is fixed at a higher figure to enable the middle of the middle income group to enjoy this facility also? At the present moment, I would say that, with over a hundred thousand flats built by the Housing Board, the needs of the lower income group are more or less satisfied. I think the people in the middle of the middle income group who are at present denied this facility should also be given a chance to rent or own houses under the Housing Board scheme.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may help the Minister and the Members. I believe that Good Conduct allowance is similar to the one that we have heard from the Minister for Communications.”
“He is also the Chairman of the Housing and Development Board and also the Permanent Secretary for Home Affairs. I feel that he cannot devote sufficient time to the Central Provident Fund. Just before I was interrupted, I was trying to make it known that in 1968 the total balance of the C.P.F. amounted to over $500 million. This goes to show that the C.P.F. is an important institution which looks after the interest of over half a million workers in Singapore, and it is not desirable for one person to be made responsible for so many important institutions.”
“Sir, if you will allow me, I am talking about the Permanent Secretary because he is also the Chairman of the Central Provident Fund.”
“Sir, according to past practice, the Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Labour is also the Chairman of the Central Provident Fund.”
“Or trousers, Sir. They are not directly responsible to the people of Singapore. Some even have the audacity to ignore Members of Parliament. Sir, I want to make it very clear that my remarks are not directed at the Permanent Secretary under subhead 1005. Sir, under this subhead, I would like to touch on another important subject. This is in regard to the Central Provident Fund. The Minister for Labour is in charge of the C.P.F. and, according to past practice, the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Labour is made Chairman of the C.P.F. Sir, I am raising this point because the C.P.F. is one of the very important institutions in Singapore today. It started in 1955 when the total balance of the Fund was over $9 million.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a few days ago the Minister for Science and Technology, who is also the Chairman of the P.A.P., made a statement in the Straits Times on the need to ensure that competent political leadership for the Republic is available to carry on the work of government when the present leaders retire, and also that the political stability of Singapore is maintained. Sir, these are very commendable objectives of the P.A.P. But whether in time to come they will be acceptable by the people is another matter.”
“m. At the last Budget session the Member for Delta suggested that we should have an advisory committee to review all applications for citizenship. In today's debate there is also a similar suggestion. I think this is a very good idea. We should review all the outstanding applications once and for all, and see to what extent we can grant citizenship to deserving cases. Over the last few years we have gone through various political changes. We went into Malaysia and came out of Malaysia. There has been a lot of confusion. There are people residing here who have been caught in this unfortunate situation through no fault of their own and they now find themselves in the difficult situation of not being able to obtain citizenship. I would suggest that the Minister review this matter again and deal with all the outstanding applications.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the subject of citizenship has been a burning issue for some two years now, ever since the announcement of the British withdrawal and the tightening up of the policy on Singapore citizenship. On 21st May, 1968, the Minister for Labour said this in regard to the new policy on the issue of citizenship, and again in the last Budget debate on 16th December, 1968, he was quoted by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour. It says here [Hansard, Vol. 28, col. 339]: 'A person who is granted citizenship must be able to make a positive contribution to the economic well-being of Singapore.' Accepting the fact that it is necessary to protect the majority of the people of Singapore by granting citizenship only to persons who can positively contribute to the well-being of Singapore, I think there is no clear-cut definition of what "positive contribution" means. All this started off with the Government offer to a person who has $250,000 to invest in Singapore. That was the first announcement. Some months ago the Government reviewed the policy, and it was priced at half, $125,000, to Malaysian citizens coming in to invest in Singapore and so contribute to our well-being. Recently there was another review, and the policy says that, because of the shortage of skilled labour, persons who have technical skill can come into Singapore, work here, and after a period of five years they can be considered for citizenship. The question that we want to ask is: what about those stateless citizens here who are now making an economic contribution to Singapore'? What is their worth? If the Minister can give a clearly defined statement of what is "positive contribution", then I think we can possibly clear up a lot of misunderstanding on this issue of citizenship. 4.30 p.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have an amendment in respect of subhead 1251, which is also on citizenship. I wonder if I can speak on it now, with your permission?”
“2 million, a very significant sum. The only people who do grumble are the hawkers in the school tuckshops, because this was the sum of money they did not get, but is nicely tucked away in our Savings Bank. This particular subhead brought up by the Member refers to special savings gift accounts for Secondary I students in particular. This is what you call a gift account. If a Secondary I student has a minimum sum of $5 in his P.O.S.B. account, then Government will donate $5 to make it $10. But there is a little catch here. It is not possible for the student to withdraw the $10 the next day and so have a good time with it. It has to be kept in the Savings Bank for the next five years. Of course, there will be the four per cent interest credited to his account. The idea is to keep it in cold storage for five years, so that when he leaves secondary school, he will then have $10 plus the four per cent interest accumulated for the last five years. I am afraid this campaign did not quite succeed during the course of last year. For the last 14� months, that is to say, from January 1969 to the middle of March 1970, there were only 4,290 accounts, and the sum contributed by Government was $5 times this number, which is $21,450. This year we hope to step up the campaign to encourage more of our Secondary I students to save. As you can see, we have a provision of $156,000 for this year. I have indicated just now that we have handed out only $21,450. But I think that, with a little extra effort this year, we might be able to utilise fully this provision of $156,000.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0403 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2202. Sir, this subhead is entitled "Contribution towards the Students' Gift Accounts of P.O.S.B.", i.e., the Post Office Savings Bank. Sometime ago the Minister for Communications disclosed that Government was trying to encourage our students to save by saving with the P.O.S.B. This is, I think, a move in the right direction - encouraging children to start saving when they are young. Sir, I wonder if the Minister would care to enlighten this House by answering a few questions. First, how much savings have been collected from students last year, and how many accounts have been opened? Second, how long does his Ministry intend to continue contributing towards such gift accounts? Third, as at last year, what is the percentage of the number of savings accounts opened as against the total school population? The Minster for Communications (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): Mr Speaker, Sir, in order to give an adequate reply to the Member for Punggol, it may be neccessary for me to state that this question of postal savings in schools has to be divided into two sections, although the point he has raised is in respect of gift accounts. so I will try to give the first section for his edification. We started a campaign for schools' savings beginning in January 1969. With the full co-operation of the Ministry of Education, that is to say, officials, principals and teachers, we were able to get 486 out of 511 schools, or 95 per cent, to participate in the savings campaign. More that 144,000 students opened savings accounts, and this represents 28 per cent of the total school population. which exceeds half a million. The amount saved was more than $1.”
“I am also trying to find out from the Minister what are the functions of this Engineering Industries Development Agency.”
“, because if we could improve production systems in our industry, then both the employer and the worker stand a lot to gain from it. More than this I cannot say, other than that my Ministry and I are placing a lot of importance and emphasis on the future activities of the National Productivity Centre.”
“Whether he is right or the N.P.C. is right, I do not know. It is not for me to say. But in this instance the work proved negative. Whether it is that the recommendations were unrealistic or whether it is that the Director could not understand the recommendations is something on which I would not comment, but it illustrates the difficulties under which the staff of the N.P.C. have to work. First, the employer or the industrialist or whosoever it is has a problem, must believe it can be solved by the application of time and motion study or whatever remedy the N.P.C. staff are capable of working out. If the employer, or the owner, or the industrialist, does not believe that the N.P.C. can make such a contribution, then he will not make use of these services. Since quite a number of our industries are small-scale industries where capital is rather scarce, and where the owner or the industrialist improvises as best he can, clearly there are limits to which the services of the National Productivity Centre can be put. This again helps to explain the reluctance of employers to use these services. Maybe the employers are wrong, or maybe the employers are old-fashioned or ignorant. Or it may be that in most instances the N.P.C. has very little to offer and that employers either solve the problems with their own staff or engage experts to help them. If that is so, we probably have to find a different role for the National Productivity Centre. As the Member for Telok Blangah has said, a major effort is being mounted through the United Nations Development Programme special fund project to improve the staff and expand the scope of services of the N.P.C. We hope that they will succeed. I am sure the N.T.U.C. will offer its unstinting support to the N.P.C.”
“There is in Singapore an expert in the field of management consultants, sent by the United Nations, whose job it is to evaluate in some depth the working of the N.P.C. and its future organisation structure. As a result of this, no doubt something useful will be done. I think I can best illustrate the difficulties and handicaps suffered by the N.P.C. by giving an account of actual assignments which, to my knowledge, the N.P.C. undertook. These were assignments commissioned by me. I asked the N.P.C. to do a study of systems of baggage handling at the airport to see where the hold-up was, and how matters could be improved. The N.P.C. has quite a talented team of engineers and it is a pity that these talented young men and women are wasting their time because of absence of proper guidance of leadership. But anyway they did the study of baggage handling in the airport. I thought it an excellent study, and so did the authorities concerned, and they are implementing the recommendations of the N.P.C. with the result that there has been a marked improvement in the rate at which passengers are being handled at the passenger terminals through all the formalities of customs, immigration, health and so on. Of course, this is a continuing programme of work. The second assignment which the N.P.C. undertook was to study systems of wage incentives in the Jurong Abattoir, which was established by Government at great cost with technical assistance from Danish Government. It is under the charge of my colleague, the Minister for Law and National Development. The N.P.C. productivity study was sent to the appropriate department, in this case the Primary Production Department. The Director of Primary Production was not convinced that the recommendations had any value.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, when I sent in this amendment, I was trying to seek some information from the Minister regarding the work and progress of the National Productivity Centre. So much emphasis is being placed on higher productivity these days. In fact, the Member for Telok Blangah has provided me with some useful information. As far as I can gather, the only report on the work and progress of the National Productivity Centre was a short statement in the annual report of the Economic Development Board for the year ending 1967. I would like to find out from the Minister, as this sum of $663,000 for the Centre is the first time that it appears in the Estimates, whether the Director of the National Productivity Centre will present to Parliament an annual report of its activities for each year or will it be included in the annual report of the E.D.B. Dr Goh Keng Swee: To answer the Member for Kampong Kapor first. I intend to establish the National Productivity Centre as an autonomous organisation, independent of the Economic Development Board. I think the past inadequacies of the N.P.C. were due to the fact that it was part of the Economic Development Board; staff were appointed by the E.D.B. and were responsible to it. Since the E.D.B. was interested more in promotion - getting in touch with potential investors and seeing that they start something here - than in follow-up work such as maintenance of efficiency in industries in Singapore, the result has been neglect by the E.D.B. of N.P.C. activities. There has been clear evidence that the N.P.C. has suffered from such neglect. Therefore, I propose that the N.P.C. be established as an organisation independent of the E.D.B. How and in what form the N.P.C. will be reorganised remains to be seen.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we have read in the newspapers recently about the Jurong Bird Park. May I ask the Minister whether this is an economic proposition? And how is Jurong Bird Park Pte. Ltd, going to derive its revenue?”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $136,250 for Head 0402 ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st January, 1969, to 31st March, 1970. The sum of $1,412,000 for Head 0701 ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st January, 1969, to 31st March, 1970. Question, "That the sum of $1,548,250 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st January, 1969, to 31St March, 1970, contained in Paper Cmd. 7 of 1970," put, and agreed to. Resolution to be reported. The Chairman: Second Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st January, 1969, to 31st March, 1970, contained in Paper Cmd. 8 of 1970. The summary is on the last page of the Paper. There is only one head of expenditure, namely, Head 21 - Loans and General - and there are amendments in respect of all the three subheads under the head. Head 21 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0402 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2003. Sir, will the Minister provide this House with a breakdown of the number of retirements which were not anticipated? Has this big increase in retirements affected any particular Ministry? And were there any main causes for it?”
“I would say there would be more hardship for the people if we were to carry on as before at an uneconomic rate, and if we do not find the finances to run an adequate and efficient water system and we let it slide back to the point where we are not sure whether our taps are going to give us adequate water for bathing and cooking. On that basis, I think it is might and proper to impose this little additional increase in charges now to ensure that we continue to enjoy an efficient water system, adequate for our people now and in the future. 6.56 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, like all human beings, we resist paying increased charges. But luckily we in Singapore have an abundant supply of clean water, and because of this, we lack appreciation of this precious commodity. Sir, this Bill seeks to give the Government authority to levy increased charges on water for the financing of the sewerage system. In fact, after listening to the speeches of both the Minister for Law and National Development and the Minister for Finance, I would say that the sooner the people of Singapore realise that water is still relatively cheap, the better for them. The imposition of the additional 20 cents per 1,000 gallons for domestic consumption and 50 cents per 1,000 gallons for commercial consumption is only the beginning, because without the Minister for Finance having to tell us about it, I think it is already a well-known fact that the water charges will have to be further increased. As I see it, we want to extend and improve our sewerage system. With its extension and improvement, more water will be needed. Since this is so, it goes without saying that we have to build more reservoirs, which means that additional capital expenditure is required. In fact, when this Bill was introduced, I thought to myself that this additional charge would be acceptable to the people, because it is no longer economic to supply water at 80 cents per 1,000 gallons for domestic consumption. As has already been indicated, it costs over 80 cents to produce 1,000 gallons. If we think over this point soberly, it is unlikely that the increase in the water rate will cause hardship even to the lower income group.”
“Sir, for several years I have been a member of the Public Accounts Committee which drew attention to the appalling state of affairs in the financial administration of the Sewerage Department. Can we have the assurance of the Finance Minister and also of the Minister for National Development that they will seriously look into the financial administration of the Sewerage Department and will take corrective measures on the financial side of the department?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Finance Minister this: if the Sewerage Department is losing money, would it not be more equitable to raise the sewage fee rather than the rate of water consumed, because the people who do not now enjoy the use of the sewage system will be asked to pay for something which they are not receiving?”
“This vote should come under "Personal Emoluments" instead of under "Passports". Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong --- (3) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0902 be reduced by $100.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0902 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3004. I find that the subject of "Passports" appears under two subheads. Under subhead 2013, there is a vote of $75,000 for Other Charges Annually Recurrent, and under subhead 3004 there is a vote of $111,410 for Other Charges Special Expenditure. May I ask the Minister whether he intends to issue new passports under this subhead?”
“I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2007. Mr Speaker. Sir, this item is in respect of telephones in M.I.D, headquarters. I wish to ask the Minister whether he is aware that there are not enough lines in the telephone exchange of the M.I.D. From experience I find that sometimes it takes almost half a day to get a call through to his Ministry because of over-loading at the telephone exchange. M.I.D, being an important Ministry, I feel that this matter should be drawn to his attention so that the situation can be improved.”
“Question No. 7. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Develop-went (National Development Division) (Mr Ho Cheng Choon) (for the Minister for Law and National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, the total number of housing units sold by the Board under the "Home Ownership Scheme" up to the 30th of November this year was 14,615 units, and the total number of housing units proposed to be sold under the "Home Ownership Scheme" in 1969 is 10,000. HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD SHOP PREMISES (Particulars) 8. Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will ascertain from the Housing and Development Board (a) how many shop premises were completed by the Board between 1st January and 31st October, 1968; (b) how many of ihose premises have been taken up (i) by persons on resettlement; and (ii) by public tenderers; (c) how many of those premises remained vacant on 31st October, 1968; and (d) how many outstanding cases there are of persons who have already vacated shop premises on clearance sites and are waiting to be offered the Board's shop premises, and when they will be offered such premises.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong --- (9) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $100. Madam Chan Choy Siong: I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $2,646,180 for Head 0601 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. 4.45 p.m. Head 0701 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3003. Sir, this subhead refers to "Expenses for Hotel and Catering Training" with a token vote of $10. In reply to a question on the expansion of the Hotel and Catering Training Centre in this House on the 3rd of December, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour said [Hansard Vol. 28 No. 1, col. 12]: 'The Hotel and Catering Training Centre. . . , will be extended to train more personnel in view of the expansion in the hotel trade.' I find it difficult to believe that the necessary training can be provided in 1969 with only a token vote of $10. Am I to understand that no additional training will be carried out until more facilities are available?”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001. Sir, in the later part of this year, regulations were provided under the Central Provident Fund rules to enable contributors who have the required balances in their accounts to make use of such balances and monthly contributions to purchase Housing and Development Board flats under the home ownership scheme. The response to this scheme was a great success and the Housing and Development Board is unable to cope with the demands. In moving this amendment, may I ask the Minister when he proposes to provide regulations to enable contributors of the Central Provident Fund who are not eligible to purchase Housing and Development Board flats, to make such purchases with other approved housing schemes with their balances and monthly contributions? I am sure this will accelerate our economic growth, assist the building industry and thereby increase our state revenue.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in this year's Budget under the Income Tax Division, there is a provision of $500,000 to set up an Anti-Evasion Unit. I would like to know whether the Minister can give any indication of the amount of income tax that is being evaded annually. At a time when our Republic is in need of every cent for defence expenditure and social services, it is most appropriate that the Anti -Evasion Unit be set up to collect every source of revenue that is due to the Government. I suggest that this sum of $500,000 would be more usefully spent on the employment of staff to prevent tax evasion and to streamline income tax collection than to wait for persons to evade tax and then bring them to book.”
“I am not moving, Sir. The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong (15) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0401 be reduced by $100. Madam Chan Choy Siong: I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $121,694,340 for Head 0401 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. Head 0403 -”
“The Government should however give the capitalists opportunity to show their patriotism and sense of loyalty by donating a certain percentage of their profits towards our Defence Fund. So far, it seems that the Government has been too generous to them. The introduction of the Employment Bill has given a very bad impression to the broad masses of people who wish to support the P.A.P. Government. I would like for the reasons outlined in my speech to support the amendments proposed by my colleagues. 3.40 p.m.”
“Does the Government wish to see more hawkers appearing and more pirate taxis running on the roads? Clause 15 as it appears in the Bill must not therefore be passed into law. The Government must accept the amendment tabled by the Member for Bukit Ho Swee. There is another point on which the workers are unhappy. This is the question of bonus. My colleagues have touched upon this issue. I would like to say that the amendment tabled by the Member for Bukit Ho Swee fails to meet the objections. If the discretion is given to the employer alone, the workers will be at his mercy, because it is not likely that he will be generous or charitable to them. I would like to suggest that the quantum of bonus should be a certain percentage of the workers' wages and should depend on the employers' profits. If the employer is satisfied with the productivity and performance of his workers, he may also give them certain rewards in the form of a bonus. Thus, there will be no animosity between labour and capital. Instead, there will be co-operation to increase productivity. These measures, if embodied in the Bill, will encourage the workers to raise their productivity, and good relationship between labour and capital will last longer. They will be able to co-operate even more and this will lead to a more stable situation in Singapore. The maxim whether a country survives or perishes depends on its citizens is valid. To ensure its survival is the highest virtue that any patriotic citizen can aspire to attain. Everyone should be prepared to struggle and make sacrifices for our country's survival. United, we should be able to meet the coming challenge. This should be the task of each and every one of us.”