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 2 of 5.
“Certain provisions in the Bill have, on the other hand, caused some anxiety among the workers. On the surface, the provisions can easily be construed to be anti-labour or contrary to the Government's policy of bias towards labour, because, to a certain degree, these provisions will adversely affect the future livelihood of the people. For this reason, I am of the view that if the Government can be enlightened enough to accept certain amendments tabled by my colleagues, it will still be possible to avert any wrong impression gained by some people about the Government. The President in his speech in May mentioned certain Bills which reflected the general mood, thought and spirit of our people. He also exhorted the Government and Members of Parliament to give a lead in the thinking and feeling in the country. In view of these considerations, I hope Government will accept the amendment which will be moved by the Member for Bukit Ho Swee (who is also the Secretary-General of the National Trades Union Congress) to clause 15. If the Government does not accept the amendment, it will have to consider the consequences that will follow. If this clause is passed as it now stands, the Government will not achieve any good results. On the contrary, it will achieve the opposite of that which the clause intends, because there will be quite a number of people who will be retiring prematurely. The purpose of this Bill is to provide more jobs for the unemployed, but its enactment into law will mean driving more people into unemployment. If these people are unemployed when they are forced to retire, what can they do thereafter? if they want to be non-criminal types, they may resort to becoming hawkers or pirate taxi drivers.”
“As democratic socialists, the first step for us is to seek independence and to raise productivity. Unless we can concurrently increase national productivity, we will not have a fair, just and equal society for the people. It is therefore necessary to get a larger market. We must industrialise in order to improve the livelihood of our people. Now that Singapore is an independent country, we can depend only on our human resources. We have to carry out the great tasks of our country. The people should meet the challenge of this age and march forward in unity. The source of economic strength cannot be separated from our resources. Even with natural and human resources, we cannot ensure our country's prosperity and progress. There should be some catalyst to promote economic progress. One mode of bringing this about is by way of legislation. The introduction of the Employment Bill can be said to have come from the consideration of trying to ensure full-scale economic prosperity. The Minister for Labour explained the true purpose of this Bill in Parliament the other day. After 1971, the economic welfare and survival of Singapore lies in the hands of our people. In a small island like Singapore, we cannot plant cotton or other crops or foodstuffs but we have to maintain the livelihood of many people. One square mile in Singapore will have to support 8,000 Singaporeans. So a stagnant economy will mean starvation. This Bill is introduced so as to meet our political and defence requirements and so that the people can adjust themselves to face the new situation when the British troops are withdrawn. I support the views of the Minister for Labour. The introduction of the Employment Bill does not mean that the Government has already adopted a policy of suppression of the workers.”
“Therefore, we must pursue our scientific studies actively in order to promote our economic progress. We must study the potential effects that science and technology can play in our economic development and stability so that we may step into a new era of industrialisation in which there will be innovations and more employment opportunities. It is necessary to have innovations and modern techniques of manufacturing in order to meet the increased needs of the consumers. There should also be improvement in the techniques of production. There should be modern equipment and co-operation between employers and employees in order to increase productivity. Labour's demand for wage increases and fringe benefits is usually a stimulant to economic progress. In other words, this demand will also stimulate technical progress. In this present age, trade unionists realise that wage increases without increased productivity will result in a rise in the prices of goods and a reduction in the number of people employed. Therefore, they try to get fringe benefits for the workers. The present Employment Bill seeks to take some of these away. This is contrary to the concept of industrial psychology and is also against the mood of the workers. It is a retrogressive act. I believe most people can understand the labour policy of our Government. The original policy of bias towards labour will not be changed. Undoubtedly, as an efficient Government with long-term political objectives, it will preserve its pro- labour policy. The enactment of the Employment Bill into law is only a change of technique. The basic pro-labour policy of our Government will never change. What can be changed is the technique in order to meet the requirements of the nation and the changing situation.”
“If we examine carefully the arguments of these people and assess them against the spirit and content of this Bill, we will find that there is a certain degree of discontent among some of the people. We will also realise that some of the provisions should not have been included in the Bill at all, or at least they should be amended in the process of debate. Viewed this way, I regret to say that the contents of this Bill are entirely divorced from the realities of present-day society. Those who drafted this Bill have not gone among the people to assess the living conditions of the general masses. If it is said that the Bill gives the correct definitions for reward, efficiency, effort, productivity, then we are neglecting the common interests between labour-cum-consumer on the one hand and the employer on the other. This neglect arises because the long-term interests of the employer depend on a large consumer market. This market in turn depends on the price of goods and on whether the people have the means to buy such goods. At the same time, in order to increase production, there must be a demand for them. The fact remains that labour-cum-consumers do not have the money to buy them. I believe all loyal citizens will do their best to meet the challenge of the 1970s. The solution cannot be dependent on merely passing a Bill, or on any passive way of readjustment to the distribution of wealth, because that is not enough. We must take all measures to maintain our economic prosperity for the long-term stability of Singapore and to strengthen our economy. It is important also to prevent any grave repercussions in our society. When people are desperate, they cannot contribute anything worth while to the country.”
“I look forward to the amendment of some of the provisions therein, especially as some of my colleagues have already tabled amendments to certain clauses in the Bill. When it comes to the Committee stage, I would like to move to amend the amendments proposed by my colleagues. First, I refer to the spirit of this Bill and the mood and reaction of the people to the Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, the masses have been gravely concerned since the Employment Bill was read the First time in this House. Many groups of people, either in the streets or in the coffee shops, have gathered and discussed the contents of the Bill. At the same time, another class of people living in luxury flats gather together in their offices and discuss the Bill. They rack their brains over it. Obviously, this class of people represent the employers. They appear quite satisfied with this Bill so far because we have not heard any opposition to it from them. The only people who are not happy about this Bill are the working class. They have discussed its contents in coffee shops, in the streets and many other places. Many of the provisions in the Bill are the same as those contained in the original labour laws. However, there are some new provisions which will affect their future livelihood and their family. As a result, they are grumbling and have complained that the Government is trying to change its attitude towards them and that it has changed its consistent stand on labour. Some of them have even gone to the extent of saying that because there is only one party in Parliament, it can do things arbitrarily without regard to anybody's opinions. This is a very good opportunity to be made use of by the Barisan Sosialis and others like them.”
“In particular I refer to clause 112 which empowers the Minister to make regulations to control the engagement of employees by employers. On this I would sound a note of caution to the Minister and his Ministry. Present indications are that the machinery of the Employment Exchange is totally inadequate and it is not efficient enough to cope with additional work. This provision should not be implemented until the machinery of the Employment Exchange is adequately geared to its new task. There should be consultation with employers and the N.T.U.C, on the proposed regulations so as to ensure that their implementation does not impede efficiency and retard employers from recruiting the right type of persons they require in the shortest possible time. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill in its present form is unacceptable without amendments. Several amendments have already been tabled by the Minister for Labour and the Member for Bukit Ho Swee and I urge that these amendments should be seriously considered. While the Employment Bill updates the working conditions of workers in the private commercial sector, Government should not overlook updating similar working conditions in the public sector. Both are complementary and must be implemented concurrently if we are to achieve results. Government should also expeditiously consider and release the Report of the Salaries Commission and to take steps to remedy and correct any anomalies so as to ensure also an efficient, productive and contented civil service in the Republic. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support this Bill with amendments. 3.04 p.m. Madam Chan Choy Siong(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to speak on some of the provisions in this Bill.”
“With the introduction of the Employment Bill as well as the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill and the Central Provident Fund (Amendment) Bill, a new era in the employer and employee relationship will emerge. The intent of the Employment Bill is to secure on a firm and sound basis a healthy, disciplined and competitive labour force in the Republic which will ensure our continued survival. It is designed to standardise and regulate the working conditions of all workers regardless of whether they are white-collar or blue-collar workers or shop assistants. It seeks to remove malpractices and restrictive practices which make enforcement and maintenance of discipline difficult and, therefore, hinder economic growth. If we are to increase productivity, there must be discipline in our labour force. Without discipline there can be no efficiency, and without efficiency it is not possible to increase productivity. Mr Speaker, Sir, it has often been said that the island of Singapore has no natural resources of its own and that we owe our living to the ingenuity and skill of our people. If we are to meet the challenges of the l970s, if we are to continue living as a people with an identity, if we are to make progress, then we must be prepared to make sacrifices now to ensure our survival as a nation. Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not propose to go into the controversial provisions of the Bill in detail, as many other Members have already dealt with them. There will be ample opportunity to do so when we are in the Committee stage. But I would like to touch on Part XI, consisting of clauses 109 to 112 which incorporate changes to give Government a measure of control over the hiring of workers.”
“In order to appreciate the intent of this Bill, which is essential and vital to accelerate economic growth and expansion so that more jobs can be created, it is absolutely necessary, first, to remove those doubts and fears and restore the confidence of the workers in the pro-labour policy which the Government has always pursued and practised, so that the implementation of this Bill would have a fair chance of success. I feel it is absurd to suggest that the leaders of the Government have all of a sudden turned anti-labour and taken sides with the employers. What could they benefit at this stage of their political career and what benefit could the country gain from a weak labour force and a beaten N.T.U.C.? There has been in the past a total lack of discipline in the labour force. Now is the time for all good trade union leaders in the Republic to be honest and courageous enough to enforce strict discipline among the members, particularly those who are malingerers, lazy, inefficient and unproductive workers. They should stop giving them protection. By and large, our citizen workers are a hard-working lot and if only our trade union leaders will stop giving protection and cover to this very small percentage of malingerers and unproductive workers, we will no doubt achieve a much healthier situation. The existing Labour Ordinance, the Clerks Employment Ordinance and the Shop Assistants Employment Ordinance, which became law more than 10 years ago, were enacted against a different background and in different circumstances. They are all now outdated and no longer serve the needs of the people at present and for the future.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if this Bill had been called our survival or salvation Bill, it would have been less controversial and would have been more receptive. A great deal of misapprehension, fears and doubts on the provisions of the Employment Bill were created in the minds of our working citizens even before this Bill was introduced in this House. True, it was openly admitted that there had been consultations and discussions between the Government, N.T.U.C, leaders and employers, and in discussions of this nature it is not possible to contain and confine the contents of the discussions. But the allegations and rumours concerning the provisions of the Bill, which had been circulated to the public prior to the introduction of the Bill in this House and even after its introduction in this House, have, I feel, caused much harm, particularly as to the real purpose and intent which this Bill is designed to do. Mr Speaker, Sir, rumours, however unbelievable, have their source of origin. I feel it will be worth the while for the Government to inquire whether there had been any unauthorised leakage of information or intentions in regard to the Employment Bill. It is unwise to spread rumours, more so in this House. If you would allow me, Mr Speaker, Sir, to cite one point which was alleged to be a provision in this Bill just to illustrate how harmful these rumours were. The rumour was that married women, whose husbands are employed, would not be permitted to work in order to create more jobs for the unemployed. Such a rumour in the prevailing situation would be difficult to disbelieve. Nevertheless, as I say it, it had a very harmful effect on the people.”
“I would suggest that the Ministerial statement on tourism should be given wide publicity to correct the thinking of all those persons associated with the promotion of tourism. Mr Speaker, Sir, Bali for a tourist is not new. Before confrontation, Bali was a selling point for American tourists. But because of confrontation and the difficult conditions in Djakarta, American tourists stopped proceeding south of Singapore to Djakarta or Bali and, therefore, Singapore was affected. Now that we are back to more normal conditions, it is correct to say that we could benefit if Bali could be further developed and we may not be at the tail-end of this enormous Pacific tourist traffic. In fact, I would like to make another suggestion to the Minister for Finance, that if the Singapore Government and the Governments of Australia and America can be persuaded to get the airlines to lower fares from America to the South Seas via Tahiti, Australia, Bali up to Singapore, we certainly will not be at the tail-end, but we will be on the correct circuit of a booming tourist traffic in which the American tourists can come either via Tokyo, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, down to Bali, Australia and back to the United States or vice versa. 6.20 p.m.”
“There must be a certain time limit for applications to be considered, and the applicants should be told whether they qualify for citizenship or not. It is true that in the past many chose to sit on the fence and they have only themselves to blame for the situation they are in today. I am not so much concerned about those fence-sitters who are finding it difficult to get citizenship, but I am concerned for quite a number of people who are neither citizens of India nor citizens of Malaysia, who are stateless through no fault of their own, who have lived here and who have applied for citizenship. If they so qualify, I think they should be dealt with more expeditiously, because citizenship is now tied up with work permits. There are quite a number of stateless persons in Singapore and if they are permitted to live here, surely they should not be denied the right to work here. Yesterday, the Prime Minister stated in this House that it is not our intention to withdraw work permits, but because of the situation where we have large numbers of less educated citizens we should accommodate them and make jobs available to them. He also said that he did not mind other persons doing "tough" jobs. If that is the case, I would suggest that when a work permit is withdrawn from a person doing a "soft" job, he should be offered a "tough" job. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to comment on the Ministerial broadcast on tourism by the Minister for Finance. I am glad that at long last the Minister for Finance is on the right track about tourism when he said that a lot of nonsense was being said about how to attract tourists. He then went on to give the correct view of the basic trends of tourism.”
“The Government can help by ensuring that incentives are given to those workers who contribute to productivity. There must be a basic change of thinking on rewards. For instance, in the past under the colonial system, rewards were measured in terms of seniority of service. A clerk who starts with $150 a month need not put in great effort, because he knows that at the end of every year he will get $15 a month increment. But if he reaches the $500 a month grade, why should he put in extra effort to produce more work? So if this kind of thinking is not changed, it will be difficult to induce our citizens to be more productive. Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to touch on two points which are most disturbing to a section of the people in Singapore and of which most Members of Parliament in this House are fully aware. They are citizenship and work permits which are tied together. Some time ago when citizenship was of less value, it took an applicant about six months for his citizenship to be considered, and if he qualified for citizenship it normally took about six months to get his citizenship paper. Citizenship then became more valuable. An application for citizenship took about a year to be considered and approved. At present, I believe there are about 40,000 applicants for citizenship. It takes about a year for applicants who have filed in citizenship papers to be interviewed. Some of them are wondering whether their applications will be successful. Many of them are still waiting for an answer even after a year. This is a very unhealthy situation. Although one may ask, "Why should you worry about them? They are not citizens. They cannot vote for you?", I think we have to be humane about this.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the President in his speech outlining the policies of the Government said that this is a Parliament which is faced with problems of more than usual magnitude. Is it because of these problems which we are facing that the Opposition have chosen not to contest the elections? This is the Second Parliament in which the P.A.P, has been given a clear mandate to govern the country. The people of Singapore can be assured that we, who have been in government for the last nine years and with the experience of our leaders, will certainly resolve the problems facing us and we will do the best we can. In the President's Speech and also the statements by various Ministers, emphasis is placed on sacrifice and greater effort by our people and by our workers. I think we should restate our aims and objectives. What are we making sacrifices for and why are we asking our workers to make great sacrifices? I think we have to ensure that our economy is good, because we all know that we need to expand our industry and create more jobs for our young population and those who will lose their jobs as a result of the run-down of the British Forces in Singapore. But I think it is not sufficient just to ask the workers to make sacrifices. The Government must ensure that the sacrifices which the workers make will eventually benefit the country and not a few firms or a few individuals who want to make money as quickly as possible and call it off. If the Government can ensure that there is a reasonable balance of interests between workers, management and capital, I am sure that at the end of our five-year term the workers will find that their sacrifices will not have been in vain, otherwise I am sure that we will be in for trouble. Great emphasis is placed on productivity.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendments stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong --- (2) That the sum to be 0901 be reduced by $10 head 1101. (3) That the sum to be 0901 be reduced by $10 head 1103. (4) That the sum to be 0901 be reduced by $10 head 1151.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister is evading the issue. The Central Provident Fund was introduced for the specific purpose of making provision for employees in their old age, and what we are suggesting to the Minister is not in a sense to withdraw the money from the C.P.F., but to ask the C.P.F. to come to some arrangement with the I-lousing Board whereby it would be easier for contributors who have a certain sum in the C.P.F. to purchase houses which they could now enjoy instead of waiting until their old age.”
“is a good source of capital accumulation for the Minister for Finance in his economic projects, but surely I think the contributors themselves should have first priority for their own benefit or for their own family benefit.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001. Mr Speaker, Sir, in moving this amendment, I wish to touch on the Central Provident Fund, which is under the charge of the Minister for Labour. We are all aware that the Central Provident Fund, ever since its establishment in 1955, has been a very good source of provision of capital to the Minister for Finance for economic and other development. Since 1955 amendments have been introduced from time to time to improve the collection of contributions from members and employers, which is a good thing. But other than amendments for tightening up the evasion or avoidance of collections, I think no other provision has been made to improve the social benefits for its contributors. Sometime in November I asked the Minister whether he would look into the feasibility of setting up a committee to examine the possibility of allowing members of the C.P.F. to use their contributions as down-payments for purchase of houses in order to promote home ownership among the lower income group and, if necessary, to recommend such amendments to the C.P.F. Ordinance. The answer I got was that 74 per cent of the contributors have less than $1,000 in the Fund. This means that 26 per cent of the contributors have $1,000 or more in the Fund. Is the Minister not aware that this 26 per cent, though it may be in the minority now, will be a big minority as the years go by, and will outnumber the 74 per cent? Is it not time now to sit down and consider what improvements can be worked out for the benefit of its contributors? I am aware that the C.P.F.”
“Formerly it was sold at 65 cents per tin, but it has since been raised to 70 or 75 cents per tin. These are all daily necessities, and the increase in the prices of these necessities has led to an increased burden. In actual fact, our Singapore currency has not been devalued and, with the introduction of the new coins, merchants should reduce their prices in order not to cause hardship to the general public. But up to date we have not seen any reduction, and the Ministry of Finance has not taken any steps to stop the increase in prices or to bring the prices down to their original level. The general public are suffering and this will increase their burden. On the other hand, their salaries are not increased. Therefore, I request the Minister for Finance to take suitable measures to deal with the general increase in prices.”
“In view of the information, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn Madam Chan Choy Siong (in Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0809 be reduced by $100. It is important that the Trade Division should be efficient in controlling the prices of goods in this country. Certain shops have lodged complaints. For example, the Government has intioduced quotas and import duties because of our industrialisation drive in order to protect local industries for domestic markets. The question arises whether local products are sufficient to meet local demand. Many small shops dealing in textiles have experienced a shortage of such goods. 7.00 p.m. On the one hand, they are not able to import foreign textiles to meet the demands of their consumers because of the quota system, which therefore results in complaints lodged by the shops. On the other hand, this also affects the consumers and increases their burden because the local products are insufficient to meet the demands of local consumers and therefore results in an increase in prices, thus leading to an increased burden for the lower and middle income groups. Apart from textile goods, there are other local products which are manufactured locally. They too have the same problem. Another point is that at the moment there has been a general increase in the prices of goods, especially since the devaluation of the Pound Sterling. At that time, for the convenience of exchange, merchants raised the prices of certain goods. For example, ground nuts or peanuts were sold at 80 cents per katty formerly, but in order to facilitate the coin exchange, they have raised the price to $1 per katty. Another example is milk.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0809 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo. Sir, with the rapid industrialisation programme and our export drive, I think it is important that our Trade Division, particularly the Import and Export Office, should be efficient, helpful and incorrupt. Early this year, certain persons in the Import and Export Office of the Trade Division were involved in alleged corrupt activities. Can the Minister say whether investigations in the Depa rtment have been completed and whether he is satisfied that it is now satisfactorily reorganised?”
“I beg leave to withdraw, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $5,974,300 for Head 0806 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. Head 0807 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0806 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3017. Sir, a sum of $350,000 has been entered in the Estimates. I assume that this is to set up a department for the Export Incentive Scheme and to implement the provisions of the Bill which has been passed by Parliament. May I have more details and information from the Minister?”
“I am not moving. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - (6) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2382.”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of this, would it not be fairer if this cess is extended to cover more hotels than to confine it to persons living in a few tourist hotels to pay this cess? In view of the present boom experienced by the hotel industry, will it not be beneficial to the Tourist Promotion Board if this cess is extended to cover more hotels?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2281. Mr Speaker, Sir, I imagine that I will be in a similar position, as the question I am going to ask concerns the Tourist Promotion Board which is under the charge of the Minister for Law and National Development. I might as well ask my question in case the Minister for Finance would like to answer it. Sir, the Tourist Promotion Board has a three per cent cess levied on all tourist hotels with a minimum of one dollar. I believe the object of levying this cess on tourist hotels is to obtain revenue for the Tourist Promotion Board for the promotion of tourist activities. But this cess is in turn passed on to the tourist, in addition to his hotel accommodation, he pays this cess and not the hotel. I would like to ask either the Minister for Finance or the Minister for Law and National Development whether this is the right way to promote tourism. Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, I think it is the right way to promote tourism. Other countries have this kind of cess which is passed on to tourists. They also have sales tax which is passed on to tourists. I have gone to many countries and stayed in many hotels and, quite frankly, the charges in some hotels in some cities are quite appalling. Ours are really cheap compared with what we have to pay in other countries.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2159. Mr Speaker, Sir, this is the first time I note that a sum of $5,000 has been entered in this year's Estimates as a grant to the Chinese Physicians Association. May I ask the Minister whether there are any special reasons for this grant and will it not open the way for other associations to ask for similar grants?”
“In many departments some public servants are very careless in using Government property. They do not know how to economise. We all remember that we have to economise public funds because these funds come from the people. They have worked very hard for them. If we do not investigate this problem carefully, then the task of nation building will be endangered. I hope the Minister will carry out a careful investigation into the problems I have mentioned. 5.00 p.m.”
“However, I believe this problem cannot be completely eliminated in a short time. Compared to other countries, Singapore is better than them a hundred times. But I hope the Government will not be complacent in dealing with this problem. As long as there is any corruption, I hope the Government will try its best to eliminate it. Another point is that the bureaucratic attitude of public servants is still prevalent in various Government departments. Ever since the Government came to power, we have tried to eliminate it so that all the public servants can carry out the policy of our Government. As a result, the people in Singapore have been praising the Government for the effective measures taken. In each department there should be a courteous atmosphere when civil servants are dealing with the public. But I do not understand why this problem has gradually come back again in every department. There is again this attitude of discourtesy. If the Government does not believe this, I think every Minister should inspect the various departments in his own Ministry, as was done before, and he will discover that this attitude exists. The civil servants are not only impolite to the public but also to Members of Parliament. They are impolite and do not regard us as Members of Parliament. I am sure many Members have had a similar experience and will agree with what I have said. If we allow this state of affairs to continue, then, as an effective Government our policy will be defeated. In addition, after our party came to power, a course of training was organised for the public servants. If this is the result of such a course of training, then I think such training was completely useless. Another point I wish to bring up is the waste of public property.”
“In view of that information, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Madam Chan Choy Siong(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $l00+. + The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Teong Eng Siong and Mr Chow Chiok Hock. Mr Speaker, Sir, before I speak on this topic. I would like to ask your permission to speak a few words on some other topic. I hope you will not hurry us too much when we are speaking, otherwise we cannot speak because Budget time should be the time for us to air our complaints. So if we have any complaints, we should make use of this time to raise them, otherwise we will not have much time to air our complaints. Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that every responsible citizen will not have any objection to the various items in the Estimates. 4.50 p.m. [Mr Tang See Chim in the Chair] One of the reasons is that at the moment the person in charge of financial affairs is an experienced as well as an intelligent economist, Dr Goh Keng Swee. However, the most urgent problem today is whether the Government is effectively controlling all the items of expenditure without any waste. Sir, I wish to mention some Government departments where there still exist a number of problems. I will make use of this opportunity to list them one by one. For example, at the moment, there is still the problem of corruption in Government departments. It has not been completely eliminated. Of course, when I mention this problem of corruption, I must say that in accordance with the P.A.P. policy in 1959 when we came to power, we did try to eliminate completely the problem of corruption. I can say that we have had some success in this task.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3026*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr. Ng Yeow Chong. Sir, a sum of over $7 million has been entered for the purchase of property for Overseas Missions. Can I ask the Minister what property has been purchased overseas so far, and what other property he proposes to purchase with this sum of money and from where?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sure the Minister is aware that a new form of gambling under the guise of football pools is being legalised and introduced in Malaysia, like the Social Welfare Lottery. Given time and an efficient distribution system, and with the encouragement of the Press, this form of gambling will find its way into Singapore. I do not think we can afford to see large sums of our money flowing out of the country, and in this respect I would like to ask the Minister what he proposes to do - whether he intends also to grant a licence for the operation of a football pool in Singapore. If the answer is in the negative, what does he propose to do with people who indulge in this game of chance or gambling?”
“I beg to withdraw the amendment, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0501 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2090. In moving this amendment, I wish to seek information from the Minister as to when this mission will be set up in Tokyo and whether an Ambassador has been appointed.”
“Sir, I wish to seek information from the Minister as to the functions and scope of this Commission and when it will be set up in Johore Bahru.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I entirely disagree with the other two speakers that this Commission should not be set up at Johore Bahru. 7.00 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I touch on this same subject so that I need not move my amendment (6)* which is also on this subject? *Amendment (6) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 0501 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2094.”
“There is a proposal about the Naval Base Dockyard when it reverts back to the Singapore Government. I would also ask the Minister if he could seriously look into the possibility of an aircraft engineering maintenance service which is very successful in Hong Kong and which we can establish very successfully in Singapore too. At the present moment, maintenance of aircraft servicing is being done by foreign airlines and is earning them very good revenue. This is paid to their Head Offices, on which I believe no income tax is derived by the Singapore Government. When the British withdraw from Seletar, I think it would be ideal to look into the possibility of such services. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 7.08 p.m. Mr Speaker, Sir, there is a constant need of increasing the revenue of our State for social and development purposes. Either we raise taxes or we increase our economic growth. To raise taxes would be painful, but the better form of raising our revenue would be through economic growth. One point which I would like to point out to the Minister for Finance is that there are still large numbers of people occupying State land for which they pay very uneconomic rent. The occupiers commercialise on the occupation of this land and make easy money for themselves. Since revenue is needed by the Government, I suggest that the Ministry should consider reverting this land back to the State for more economic purposes. This will be a means of raising further revenue for our State. With this note, I support the financial policy which has been presented to this House. 7.12 p.m.”
“In this respect, although the Minister has sounded an optimistic note in his Budget Statement of five new hotels coming up which will give an additional 566 rooms, another 16 new hotels giving another 2,089 rooms, with another nine more under consideration having 1,240 rooms, I would say these are inadequate to meet the needs if we are to stimulate tourism. With the exception of a few of these 21 projects, they cannot be considered as first-class luxury hotels. What we need in Singapore are hotels with the capacity of between 500 and 1,000 rooms, and this would involve large capital investment, and no one would invest in these large concerns unless more attractive incentives are considered by the Government. This is proved by the fact that the "Golden Mile" projects have not brought in any firm investors. As I understand the approach to these projects would have to be by Beach Road, as it cannot possibly be through Nicoll Highway because of the vast amount of traffic there, and as the Planning Department cannot give an assurance that the old houses along Beach Road would give way, I think most of the investors are not so keen in bidding for these projects. I would request the Minister for Finance to consider again the question of incentives for first-class luxury hotels as this would not only be needed by tourists but there is a need in Singapore whenever large conventions are held. The Minister for Finance has also quite rightly mentioned the manufacturing industry which is labour intensive. In this respect, I would also like to ask him not to forget the establishment of engineering servicing which is very labour intensive. We have the Keppel Dockyard and the Jurong shipyard.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Finance Minister, in presenting the financial policy of the Government to this House, could be regarded as presenting the election manifesto to the people of Singapore. Compared to the financial position of the State in 1959 before the Finance Minister first presented the financial policy for 1960, which was then in a most unhealthy position - one would say a gloomy position where certain economic measures had to be taken which were quite painful to some people - the position now looks not only very healthy and encouraging, but we have as at 1st January, 1967, assets totalling over $628 million, which is twice as much as what we had in 1959. [Mr Tang See Chim in the Chair] 6.56 p.m. In addition to this, I need not mention the assets of the other statutory boards - the Singapore Housing and Development Board, the Singapore Telephone Board, the Singapore Harbour Board. The Finance Minister has given a very clear picture of our future in presenting the Budget for 1968, the problem of unemployment, the necessity to create jobs, firstly, because of our young population that is going into the employment market, and, secondly, as a result of the run-down of the British Bases and the reduced spending arising out of this. It is encouraging to note that the Finance Minister has recognised the tourist industry as an alternative measure to offset the effects of the rundown of the British Bases. The tourist industry - or to be able to understand the tourist industry, I think it is important to know that "tourists" are normally associated with American tourists, and American tourists plan their tours at least a year ahead. One of the basic facilities which will encourage tourism is adequate first-class hotel accommodation.”
“Does the Minister agree that the incentives were inadequate to attract the public to tender for the other projects?”
“Can the Minister inform the House how many tenders were received for all the projects, and how many tenders were received for each project?”
“Mr Teong, I am afraid that is out of order. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 5.12 p.m. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Mr Lim Kim San]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 5.13 p.m. Clauses 1 to 9 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 10 - Amendment made: In page 3, line7, to leave out "the form set out in the Schedule to this Act" and insert "such form as the Minister may prescribe" -[Mr Lim Kim San]. Clause 10, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 11 to 25 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. The Schedule -”
“Mr Teong, I am afraid your question is out of order. You may raise the question at the Committee stage if you wish.”
“I think this is a convenient time to suspend the sitting. The House will resume at 5.05 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.55 p.m. until 5.05 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.05 p.m. [Mr Lim Cheng Lock in the Chair] Debate resumed. Question again proposed.”
“A poster competition is being organised in conjunction with the campaign. Enormous sums of State money are being spent to level off roadside ways, plant trees and flowers to make the Republic attractive. As from next year we were told that a $5 fine will be imposed on a householder not in possession of a dustbin. There will also be a campaign to select the cleanest, best-kept and organised community centre in the Republic. Mr Speaker, Sir, health education and effective control is needed to remedy this problem. So long as filthy and unhygienic conditions of toilet facilities in coffee shops, eating houses and restaurants are permitted to continue, it is incompatible with the efforts now being pursued to make Singapore a clean garden city. 6.25 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the subject matter I propose to raise today on the Motion for the Adjournment is not a pleasant one. But, nevertheless, it is a matter and a problem which most people face and suffer daily. I refer to the filthy and unhygienic conditions of the toilet facilities in most of the Republic's coffee shops, eating houses, restaurants and public conveniences which have been allowed to continue under such unhealthy conditions for such a long time. Mr Speaker, Sir, this will certainly not attract tourism. Are we to remain complacent and tolerate such filthy and unhygienic conditions indefinitely? It is acknowledged that we have one of the best standards of health in this part of the world. Are we not going to maintain and improve this standard? Toilet facilities are one of the essential items which is being used daily. Yet most coffee shops, eating houses and restaurant owners pay very little concern for their cleanliness. In quite a number of these establishments, the water closets have been deliberately jammed and spoilt in order to save water expenses. I need not describe the untidiness of the water closets in these public places. Members will undoubtedly have faced the situation. In quite a number of these public places, food is also being prepared for consumption adjacent to these filthy lavatories. So far the Public Health Division has had no effective control of this problem. It is appreciated that effective control may be difficult because it would need a large force to police these establishments. But are they not operating on licences issued by the Health Ministry under regulations with which they would have to comply? There is now a campaign to keep Singapore clean. We want to make Singapore a clean, fragrant and attractive garden city.”
“Will the Member speak a little slower so that the Interpreters can translate?”
“But I also do hope that the Ministry's staff should be considerate and fair where fairness and consideration are merited. 6.21 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the introduction of the National Service (Amendment) Bill is a very serious matter which will affect the lives of our youths and will change the whole character of our people and our Republic. I support this Bill and I am proud to be associated with its introduction. No self-respecting country can depend or continue to depend on outside forces to protect it. National service will provide an opportunity to integrate the various races of our citizens into a closely-knit society. It will bring together our youths from all grades. Whether they are rich or poor, whether they come from wealthy merchants or shop-keepers, they will have an equal opportunity and play their part in the building of our nation. The introduction of this Bill is most significant especially at a time when the British, through their representatives, are urging their Government to consider seriously to reduce or withdraw their security commitments in this area and in the Far East. It is likely that in the near future the British Government will hold discussions with the Singapore Government en the reduction or withdrawal of their armed forces. I am glad this Bill, which has been introduced, will give cur Minister of Defence pride in the discussions as we will not be found wanting in the will or determination to organise our people to defend and to protect our own country. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an honour to take up national service, and to ensure that the scheme is successful, parents should give every encouragement to their children to take up national service. In the implementation of this Bill, I would urge the Minister to exercise extreme firmness in dealing with those who evade or attempt to evade national service.”