Low Yong Nguan
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it looks like the Message rate system will not be introduced for some time to come. Sir, I have a few supplementary questions to ask. First, will the Minister consider issuing public bonds by tile S.T.B, to meet part of the development cost?”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, of the two outpatient clinics mentioned by the Minister, I suspect that at least one of them will be demolished within the next few years. If so, can the Minister consider building a clinic on the centre of this area to cater for the residents of the housing estate?”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, can the Minister of State for Education assure us that if the school to he demolished is an aided school, then an aided school will be rebuilt from funds raised from the public? Or will only a Government school be rebuilt to accommodate the students?”
“The point is this. The arrears have been accumulated not because of the fault of the officers, it is due to the delay in the implementation of the consolidation which was recommended some two and a half years ago.”
“No, Sir. NATIONAL SERVICE (Particulars of applications for deferment) 4. Mr Teong Eng Siong asked the Minister of Defence how many applications for deferment of National Service have been received since January, 1971, and how many of them have been (i) approved, and the circumstances for which approval was given; and (ii) rejected.”
“Resolved, That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1st April, 1971 to 31st March, 1972. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn."-[Mr Hon Sui Sen.] Adjourned accordingly at Nine minutes to Eight o'clock p.m.”
The complete record
Every one of 100 lines we hold for Low Yong Nguan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 2.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Culture was set up in 1959. At that time it was given a lot of duties, for example, to develop a sense of patriotism, and to instil in the people a higher set of values in order to eliminate racial prejudices, and so on. All these are but beautiful and grand talk and very pleasing to the ear. But what I would like to ask is: what has the Ministry of Culture done in all these years? What contribution has it made towards its objectives, especially in the field of mass education? What has it done to instil in our people a higher set of values? Mr Speaker, Sir, I would also like to know what the Ministry of Culture has contributed in the past 10 years towards the cultivation of spiritual values? I completely disagree with the Member for Sembawang. If by promotion of a lively cultural standard, one refers to the programmes we see in the National Theatre and on T.V., such as the "All Stars" and variety shows Mr Teong Eng Siong rose -”
“Madam Chan Choy Siong: (25) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $100. The sum of $173,976,920 for Head 0701 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.”
“Was the Minister trying to imply that through their trial and error methods - this Government seems to be very interested in trial and error methods - we are going to put our security in the hands of non-citizens first? Let them prove their worth first and then grant them citizenship. To allow non-citizens to defend our country, people whom we cannot trust in the first instance, please, do not try that.”
“In order that our achievements in the last decade will not be wasted, we must develop and accept new values, new ideas, be more achievement-oriented, tolerate differences, have pride in group performance, and be willing to expose ourselves to technological innovations. In short, we must develop a modern outlook in life. We must fit ourselves into the new and challenging world. The Minister for Science and Technology, after being elected pro-tem chairman of the P.A.P. on 21st November, 1954, said, and I quote: 'A country big or small can only be great if the spirit of the people is great.' Sir, the spirit of our people as manifested in the last ten years has been great, and we must necessarily succeed as a great country. 3.06 p.m.”
“At this point, Sir, I wish to join the Government in appealing for a better appreciation of the problem of attracting foreign investments. Quite apart from the fact that such investments as reported by the Minister bring in ready markets and technological know-how, they too can bring us stronger backing for our security. If we keep our open door policy, we will be able to get more people interested in our security to ensure that they can go about making money safely and that their investments are not harassed! I have no doubt that Singaporeans are pragmatic enough to understand that, for all the advantages that come with such investments, a price will have to be paid! Talking about paying a price for progress. I take this opportunity to praise the worthy contribution of our workers. They have worked very hard and have accepted the Employment Act. 1968, in good spirit. This is a high price they have to pay for the progress of all Singaporeans, including the prosperous businessmen, industrialists and other commercial tycoons. The labour movement has had its share of glory in our struggle against the Communists. The workers have always taken the brunt of any change for better or for worse. They deserve our praise and admiration. To strike a more materialistic tone, Sir, I have to remind the Minister for Labour of his assurance given on various occasions that if everything goes well, our workers should have their take-home pay revised upwards in two to three years' time. They deserve it. Sir, Singapore has progressed not because of any natural resources or heaven-sent riches. Singapore's success is due to the iron will of the people led by able political leadership.”
“Firstly, during and after Malaysia, one lesson we did learn is that one sure and quick way to impede progress is to have too many people living on the good-will and provisions of the Government. Secondly, contrary to the expectations of many, our separation from Malaysia did not spell our death warrant. We did manage to continue to grow and prosper through sheer willpower of a hard-working people. Thirdly, we have to explore new fields of co-operation between the two territories. New personalities will have to meet more frequently to work out fields of common interest. It is vital to our survival that both territories must map out possible courses of action so as to face up to the realities of life after the shock of May last year. On various occasions, our Government leaders have repeatedly pledged to support any move that would contribute to uplifting the economic life of the people in the region. It is on this framework that we can co-operate with our neighbours. Singapore, having made very rapid progress in industrialisation, may in future find itself to be relatively more advanced technologically, in so far as the region is concerned. There would be others who would have still to make headway in industrialisation. Would it not be a good idea then to look into the possibility of arriving at some kind of a "common market arrangement" for the distribution of technological know-how? The time will come when countries that are relatively less affluent in technological know-how should concentrate on less sophisticated industries, while others relatively more advanced can involve themselves in industries that require greater skill. In this way the relatively more advanced countries in this region can help the others on the road to industrialisation and progress.”
“Sir, my mind is disturbed and I feel sad that while we in Singapore are happy and proud of our achievements in the last decade and grateful to the Government leaders for what they have done, there are many of our friends outside of Singapore who would have wished to share our joy and pride as brothers and equals and unable to do so for reasons beyond their control. I refer, Sir, to the many, known and unknown to us, who have been secretly wishing us well since the day we acquired independence as a sovereign republic. These kind people, sharing our hopes and aspirations and knowing our difficulties as an independent state, must be searching deep within themselves for the evil curse that disallows them to rejoice with us over our achievements at this very moment. Sir, our stay in Malaysia was short, but then we did make many friends. We went into Malaysia because - and I quote the Prime Minister from his book The Battle for Merger, a book from which I have derived much political inspiration - he said "if merger does not come with the consent of the people of the two territories, then inevitably it will come by the use of force by one territory over the other, because each is so vital to the survival of the other." It is ironical and inconceivable, in so far as I am concerned, as fate would have it, that we after 4 1/2 years of independence should flourish and prosper, while our friends and relatives should 3 3/4 years after that fateful August 1965 have suffered loss of lives and homes and may soon have to face the dilemma of a deadly choice. In any case, I do not consider it wise to dwell too long on this subject except to make the following observations.”
“It will be time for regrets if we should find our public servants succumbing to the temptation of material gains when they are so exposed. It might be worth while to take note that Singaporeans will find it really hard to forgive such mistakes if they do occur. With the recruitment of new talents into its fold, the bureaucracy has invariably strengthened itself. I do not wish to be a prophet of doom, but I do see signs of gradual erosion of the power of the politician by the bureaucrat. Having been in power for more than a decade and seen things getting more and more institutionalised, Government leaders may tend to take such erosion with extreme kindness. But, Sir, being a firm believer in democracy, it is hard of me to allow the creation of a formidable or even near supreme bureaucracy. A closer check must be made before any great damage is done. Sir, please do not allow what I have just said to carry to the House the impression that I have ruled out the contribution of the public service to our progress in the last decade. Indeed, Sir, I have made it the second point in my speech to pay tribute to these people and to express my deep appreciation of the grand work of the civil servants as a whole. It is to the credit and satisfaction of many that we should have such a generally honest, hard-working and efficient civil service. My point is that the Government should not in its preoccupation with problems create out of this civil service a Frankenstein to the disappointment of many, like myself. Finally, I will turn to our relations with our neighbouring countries.”
“Those entering and those who wish to remain in the political arena must pledge to uphold this tradition of dedication, sincerity, determination, honesty and basically the principle of parliamentary democracy. Sir, the fear that our achievements can be destroyed by a political leadership of inferior quality is not unfounded and we must be vigilant at all times. Another great transformation the Government has brought about in the last decade has been in the bureaucracy. Members will recall the uneasy relationship the Government had with the civil servants when it first assumed office in 1959. It was evident in those days that the bureaucracy was not geared to the changes that were taking place. The bureaucratic system had to be streamlined, and new talents brought into prominence. Patient search had to be made to bring in the brighter sector of the population to assist in the administration. The Government realised that with more and more institutions set up for economic expansion and social services, greater exercise of initiative had to be given to the civil servant. I have observed also that the Government has deliberately exposed its bureaucrats to the intricacies of the commercial world. In many of our statutory boards and public owned commercial agencies, civil servants are made to work hand in hand with businessmen. The obvious advantage to be gained in such a set-up is that the bureaucracy will have a better understanding of our highly commercialised society and they will invariably learn a trick or two from their more seasoned commercial counterparts. But I must raise here the fear of possible erosion of the integrity of an incorruptible bureaucracy which is essential to the successful operation of a democratic system.”
“Patiently, the foundation was laid, as reported by the Finance Minister, in spite of political pre-occupation, to prepare the way for economic progress and to provide the average citizen with a happier life. Despite situations of tension and crises, the democratic socialists, through the P.A.P., have proved that through persuasion, convincing and working within the framework of parliamentary democracy and not through terror and ruthlessness, as the Communists would want it, they too can achieve progress. I think there was one other factor that contributed towards consolidation of the people's faith in the democratic socialists, and thereby helped them to make progress in the country. The Communists front-men, through their own folly, had convinced the people that they were more interested in political gains for the Communist cause than in the general welfare of the people and the country as a whole. Sir, I have gone to great lengths on this subject because it brings home a crucial point. I am convinced that ultimately our economic well-being, political stability and national security will depend to a very large extent on whether or not we have developed in our younger generation an unyielding faith in the principles of parliamentary democracy. And this is determined to a large extent by the quality of the political leadership we provide and can continue to provide. In this connection, Sir, I think we cannot, and should not, hope to ignore the possible doubts that our people might have in the question of succession to the highly successful political leadership that they have been accustomed to for the last ten years.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, very few people in Singapore can remain unimpressed by the narration of our economic success in the last ten years by the Minister for Finance in his Budget statement. I am no exception, Sir. One of the most important factors contributing towards our great leap forward can be found in the quality of our political leadership. As such I intend to dwell on this subject a little. In 1959 when the P.A.P. first took office, our Prime Minister did have "grave reservations". His reservations were not unfounded. The politicians that held power prior to 1959 were inept, corrupt and made a sham of parliamentary democracy. They did not have the foresight to lead Singapore to independence. The P.A.P. itself was finding difficulties with the adventurous opportunists and treacherous Communists within the party. Furthermore, the Government was confronted with a fierce display of anger and disappointment by a large section of the people in the earlier regime on the one hand, and the apathetic and disenchanted orientation of many average Singaporeans on the other. Thus the P.A.P. government was faced with the gigantic task of reshaping a colonial society for independence, and to set Singapore on the road to development and modernization by restoring the faith of the people in the principles of parliamentary democracy. This was by no means an easy task. It calls for strong character, determination and unselfish dedication on the part of the political leadership, plus an unyielding faith in the validity and workability of parliamentary democracy itself. It was the good fortune of the people of Singapore that they do have such a leadership.”
“Will the Minister consider giving them special incentives?”
“Sir, will the Ministry encourage these occupiers to participate in urban renewal projects that are meant for building warehouses and stores, etc.?”
“Sir, what is the Minister's attitude towards occupiers of stores and warehouses who have been evicted and are unable to find legal structures for their stores? Probably they have moved to places which are illegal as storehouses.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before the whole project of sewerage development is undertaken, has the Ministry ever explored the possibility of allowing it to be handled by private enterprise? It might be more economical.”
“Sir, I beg to support the motion. 5.01 p.m.”
“That really is the crux of the problem. Sir, I beg leave of the House to refer to the submission of a local journalist and also, as pointed out by the Minister, that of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court. Both of them have intimate knowledge of the working of the jury system, and both of them were convinced that the jury system must go. But, of course, we cannot prevent frustrated politicians who have been left way behind by the progress of time from attempting to make political capital out of such an issue. I really do not see the wisdom of such a move. One can accuse the Government of preparing the way for total dictatorship or totalitarianism, but one will soon bite one's tongue when one is permitted to hold a public rally in Fullerton Square on the issue over which the accusation was made. It will be better if everyone will sincerely search his own conscience and ask himself if the jury system has really worked well in Singapore. I wish to conclude by expressing my full confidence in the Bill as reported by the Select Committee. I have no reservation at all in supporting the Government on this issue. Some people have been insinuating that we Parliamentarians will not oppose the Bill for fear of being expelled and, therefore, losing our seats. Let me take this opportunity to make it clear to everyone concerned that we, as representatives of the people, will support the Bill or, for that matter, any other Bill worthy of support, because we realise that we are good enough to administer our affairs, and, therefore, we are bold enough to face the facts and have the courage of our convictions. In this case, Sir, the fact is that the jury system has been proved to be unworkable in Singapore and we have the courage to say so and to vote for scrapping it.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. Sir, with the passing of the Bill, we in this House will be happy with the enhancing of the Government's role in ensuring that fair and proper administration of justice is made applicable and available to all our citizens. It will also meet our citizens' demand that the administrative machinery should provide sufficient safeguards to protect their rights and liberty so that they can safely go about their business. Sir, the Bill will also reduce the possibility of error in a trial where a man's life is at stake and ensure that in a murder trial both the accused and the murdered person will receive justice. The Minister has referred to the evidence in the Select Committee's Report when the Select Committee heard evidence from some ten members of the jury who had served in two recent trials. I am sure if Members go through the record of the Committee, they will see for themselves the things that happen in the jury room in Singapore. And I am sure they will join us in wishing to see this Bill passed as soon as possible so that a trial for a man's life is not reduced to a game of chance. Sir, we have to ensure that justice is done to an accused person on the basis of whether or not he has actually committed the offence, and not whether he is able to engage a good lawyer. There was a suggestion to raise the academic qualification or the standard of English of our juries as a solution to the problem, But I doubt if this will really help. We have had a special juror who was a professional man trained overseas and yet who fumbled over the terms commonly used in a murder trial. It is a matter of attitude. It is a matter of understanding the fact that at times there are certain unpleasant things in life we just have to do.”
“Sir, can the Parliamentary Secretary inform the House of any example of "special circumstances" that has been applied in such a case?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to stress the necessity for standing committees because of the increase in the Board membership. In any case, I accept your ruling. I have concluded my speech.”
“Under the provisions of the new clause in the amendment Bill, there should be a standing committee comprising Board members to look into the question of administration or organisation, because there is an apparent drop in the efficiency of the staff of the Board. I will quote one example. Not long ago, a member of the public paid a deposit for the supply of gas. But after repeat, ed inquiries, nothing happened. It was only when I rang up that the whole matter was solved in two days and the gas supply was turned on. This shows that there is a drop in the general efficiency of the Board. I think the setting up of a standing committee to look into the organisation and daily functions of the Board is urgent. That is why I have said that there may be a necessity for more full-time members to sit on the Board. Sir, I also feel that a standing committee should be set up to look into the de-salinisation of water with the co-operation of the Ministry of Science and Technology.”
“Sir, I just want to show why an expansion of the membership of the Board is necessary”
“But since 1963, and up to the latest report which we have, that is 1966, no mention has been made about this whatsoever.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it is obvious that there is a necessity for enlarging the composition of the Board. From the reports of the Board, the electricity generation has doubled from the time the Board took over, and the consumption of water and gas has increased by more than 50 per cent. However, I do not consider that by increasing the membership of the Board it will be able to cope with such expansion. The United Kingdom Central Electricity Generation Board, for example, has more full-time members than the Public Utilities Board has. If we can align the composition of the Public Utilities Board with that of the United Kingdom Central Electricity Generation Board, it is likely that the efficiency of the Board can be further improved. Sir, I note that with the resignation of the previous Deputy Chairman of the Board, the loss of whose services we have greatly felt, there are, at present, no technical personnel sitting on the Board whose functions are mainly concerned with the installation and supply of public utilities such as power, water and gas. Can the Minister give an assurance that at least some technical personnel will be appointed on the Board so that they may be able to give competent advice? Sir, I am not doubting the ability of the present members of the Board. But I am sure that with technical men sitting on the Board, they will be of great assistance. Sir, I have gone through the reports of the Public Utilities Board since its inception in 1963, and 1 have found that it has gone to great lengths to publicise the activities and achievements of the Board. If I am not mistaken, sometime in 1964 or 1965, the Board appointed some American consultants to look into the administration and organisation of the Board.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to have one point clarified. If there are changes in the urban redevelopment scheme, can I have an assurance that the Members of Parliament concerned will be duly informed?”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir,If we want a Factory Inspectorate to function efficiently, I think we should provide it with more staff. Even if it means paying them better salaries, by all means do so.”
“But if we think that such laws are hampering our industrial progress - or even hampering any progress for that matter - let us revise them. The Inspectorate should not be asked to go round and try to do a good job when the requirements are not being carried out properly. It just goes round to see that the legal requirements are carried out by the industrialists. Of course, when I refer to industrialists not conforming to our requirements, I do not refer to all of them but to a number of them in Jurong who only care to make a quick profit and who do not worry about simple safety rules to protect the health and welfare of their workers. Sir, the Government has professed itself to be democratic and socialist. The workers have given their unfailing support to us all these years. If we are asking them to sacrifice their fringe benefits for years to come, let us at least make sure that the factories are run in such a way as to ensure the safety and health of the workers. Sir, I must say that the Factory Inspectorate has been trying to do a good job in spite of a shortage of staff and experienced engineers. Here again. I have to bring up the same point which I brought up under the Head "Ministry of Foreign Affairs". If a job is to be done, it should be done well, and if it is to be done well, attractive salaries should be paid to the staff so that they will want to stay in the service. I believe that only the Chief Inspector and the Senior Assistant of the Factory Inspectorate have sufficient experience to carry out involved inspections, such as inspections of boilers, etc. This means That they have to make such inspections all the time. They cannot get much help from their younger inspectors who do not have sufficient experience. This is all wrong.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1101. It is also my intention to speak on my next amendment No. (4)*, because I think it is best to take them together, thus saving time. * Amendment No, (4) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1103. Sir, the Factories Ordinance, 1958, provides for minimum health, safety and welfare requirements for persons employed in factories in the Republic. In some cases, these provisions fall short of those recommended by the International Labour Organisation. If we compare our legislation with that of other countries, our requirements are not up to their standard. The Factory Inspectorate is entrusted with the enforcement of these requirements. However, very often, the recommendations or rulings made by the Inspectorate are quietly overlooked or ignored by industrialists who make representations to other authorities entrusted with economic development, on the flimsy excuse that a rigid enforcement of such re quirements would result in hampering the growth of industrialisation. Sir, I wish to warn the House that there is a rising trend in the rate of industrial accidents, one type of which has not been discussed. I think these accidents are mainly due to the absence of safety devices and safety appliances and the poor maintenance of industrial equipment. This is exactly what the Factory Inspectorate is out to eliminate. In Jurong, many industrialists ignore the simple requirements set out in the Factories (Persons-in-Charge) Regulations, 1960. Sir, this is bad. I consider that if we pass a set of laws, we should ensure that they work.”
“Sir, I just want to clarify the situation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to clarify two points. I do not know how the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs came to the conclusion, from my short statement last Friday, that I was questioning the incompatibility of the defence build-up with our foreign policy. What I did say was that too much money was being spent on defence and too little on foreign affairs. Secondly, on Vietnam, what I wanted to say was that the end of the Vietnam war does not mean the end of confusion, it will most probably result in more confusion, more guess-work and doubts.”
“The members of ASEAN should not allow the history of Europe -which took two centuries of wars of tragedies to make them realise the inevitability of regionalism-to be repeated in this part of the world. The other point on which I seek clarification from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is whether there is a better definition of what the Minister for Foreign Affairs has so repeatedly and unfailingly said about our non-aligned foreign policy. Sir, can I have an undertaking that this policy should not give an assurance to any country or any power bloc that we will remain defiant to the inevitable changes that are taking place in Asia? Rather, that it should be a flexible and adaptable foreign policy that will not commit the generation that comes after us to a difficult position. Sir, the fact that we have committed ourselves to the defence of democracy does not carry with it the right for us to jeopardise our succeeding generation to tolerate or even to co-exist with enemies of democracy if the need arises. Readiness to defy overwhelming changes and the facts of life is an invitation to domination, whether military, economic or otherwise.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it is generally agreed that Southeast Asia is, and has always been, beset with trouble, confusion and conflicts. Sir, the throe big powers are pushing ahead with plans to exert their influence, if not domination in Southeast Asia. Japan, being the third world ranking industrial power, a position which it has not previously enjoyed throughout her history, will inevitably, with its achievements during recent years, push ahead too and exert her economic influence in this region also. She may exert her domination in the economic field over those states which are in a helpless position. What is more, Sir, in our own estimate, if the Vietnam war should come to an end, we will face a nation which has a well-trained and battle-tested army with the best military equipment. There is no single member nation of ASEAN which can match this nation. Let it be known then to those member nations of ASEAN which may have any ulterior motive or even doubts about ASEAN that the political power shifts are changing rapidly and that there are many combinations and permutations of power association to reckon with. Faced with such a possible situation, the logical conclusion obviously is an approach to regionalism. I am glad to say that Singa pore has recognised this as an inevitable process in this part of the world. Sir, the logic of regionalism cannot and should not be doubted. In spite of all our difficulties, can I have a clear and straightforward undertaking from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that it will do its level best to promote this logical development and play an active role in formulating a closer inter-state relationship between the member states of ASEAN?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad that the Member for Joo Chiat has given me this opportunity to raise a point which I think is quite important. I was told during the debate yesterday that the salary scales for Ambassadors, High Commissioners, etc, are related to the whole salary structure in the public service. But today, during the debate on the amendment on the vote allocated to the legal adviser in the ministry of Finance, we were told that we need to pay for talent, and that we need to pay for brains. Will the Minister for Foreign Affairs adopt a similar attitude in the attempt to get good men for our Missions abroad? For instance, we should get people who can perform the same type of duties as our representative in Indonesia. His performances were praised in this House yesterday. In the attempt to attract the best brains into this service, we should increase the salary scales and allowances of our Ambassadors and other representatives overseas.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I take this opportunity of asking the Minister con cerned whether, in view of the new circumstances confronting Singapore, he will consider expanding the Political Study Centre to provide political courses for the civil servants. I believe that the Political Study Centre - as pointed out by the Member for Delta - was set up not long after the P.A.P. took over the administration of the State and its activities then were at their peak. I do not see refresher courses for many of the Division I administrative officers in various statutory boards, apart from superscale officers and those who assist directly in the formulation of government policies. They have not been given the opportunity to be informed of and trained for the changing circumstances that confront the Republic. Therefore, may I know whether it is the intention of the Minister to provide the Political Study Centre with more facilities for the carrying out of its duties?”
“Point of clarification, Sir. My point is that the Ministry has no money. That is the reason why we cannot pay them well.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I know from the Minister whether the Government is prepared to accept the suggestion of the Commission as contained in paragraph 227* of the Report regarding medical benefits to aided school teachers? * Paragraph 227 reads as follows: 'We suggest that consideration should be given to the possibility of extending to Government-Aided Teaching Personnel the Medical Benefits applicable to Government School Teachers.'”
“The introduction of this provision will put a stop to such nonsense. Sir, on a more general coverage, the Bill seeks to bring the white-collar workers' conditions of service in line with those of the blue-collar workers. This, as I see it, will definitely enhance the status of the latter. As I pointed out in the debate on the President's Speech, this must be done if we want to lure more of our youngsters into taking up blue-collar jobs. Maybe at the end of the trial period of this Bill, we will be in a better position to provide better conditions of service for blue-collar workers. In conclusion, may I say that basically, this Bill, far from being designed to deprive the workers of their rights, actually sets out to outline the minimum and basic conditions of service for our workers. These basic conditions are in no way inferior to those existing in the countries surrounding us. I am confident that our work-force is mature enough to understand the problems of the day and accept the position that what is asked of them is really relevant and necessary under the present circumstances. And I am sure that they will work harder and make the neccessary adjustments and sacrifices so that we may emerge in the 1970s more stable, better organised and more flourishing. With the passage of the Bill, I am sure many more foreign investors and industrialists - I must echo what the former Minister for Labour has said, that they do not owe us a living - will bring their money here and stake it with us. Because they can then safely say that here in Singapore, we have a brave and sane government and an intelligent work-force that understand problems and care, not only for the future of their children, but that of the country as a whole. Sir, I am sure the Bill will prove a success. 5.”
“It should not be part and parcel of the take-home pay of the worker at all. What I would rather see is a law to request every employer to declare his profits and some kind of profit-sharing schedule drawn up. In this way, both the employer and his employees will make it a point to increase productivity so that the net profits will go up and everybody in the company gets more. However, let the N.T.U.C.'s scheme be tried out first. I envisage that at the end of the trial period, my N.T.U.C. friends will want to see the system changed. In this respect. I really do not understand why the traditional ang pows given at the end of the year by the Chinese towkay to his coolies in Chinese business circles cannot really work. In this system, the question of how much to give is entirely up to the employer who, I believe, after he has done his calculations - Chinese businessmen are very calculating - will give the most to his most productive employees. And I do not see how this cannot be extended to the unionised sections of the work-force. Sir, clause 42 (2) of the Bill is of particular interest to me. When I was in the public service, I noticed that every so often a worker would conveniently absent himself either on the Tuesday after or the Thursday before the Easter holidays so that he could enjoy watching the Grand Prix in grand style without worrying whether at the end of it, he would be fit to work or not.”
“These adjustments and sacrifices are made not for some tribal chieftains, not for a group of capitalists, not for a set of self-seeking politicians, not for some fortunate sons of the soil, but for a more prosperous, secure and flourishing Singapore wherein every citizen shares equal rights and obligations, enjoys equal privileges and opportunities! The fruits and the end result of all these adjustments and sacrifices shall feed not only the generation that will see through the 1970s, but also for the many others who will come after them! So I say - I again quote the Hon. Minister for Labour - that we should "postpone immediate rewards for greater gains in the future". Sir, if our workers are not prepared to work just five hours more a week, forego a few public holidays, restrict scoring on overtime now, let me say to them, in the very near future they will have to strive very much harder under sterner rule of a chaotic and disorderly state which must come about when our unemployment could not be checked and has reached such unmanageable proportions that many workers will want to work even for a dog's reward! Sir, let me now confine myself to one or two specific clauses in the proposed Bill. The provision on the payment of bonus has aroused great interest. To me this must necessarily be non-negotiable. But I understand from my N.T.U.C. friends in this Chamber that they would want to make it negotiable up to one month's wages. I do not see the logic of all this. I foresee what the employer will do is to evaluate the annual worth of his workers and divide it by 13 rather than usually by 12, thereby leaving himself a quantum of one month's wages for negotiation. Sir, this is what we set out to eliminate. Bonus should be an incentive.”
“Then the sum total of all this is that our people will make merry, drink and dine. Our Prime Minister will turn round and say he is the happiest man because his people know how to enjoy life. But, Sir, the truth is that this is not going to be the case. If we just sit back and relax, we will be on the sure way to economic stagnation and eventually we will collapse. The result of such a collapse is too horrible even to imagine, when we consider that here in Singapore we have a population density of something like 8,500 or so to a square mile. The Hon. Minister for Labour has predicted here in this Chamber, when expounding his philosophy of development and consumption, that we can only live by eating one another and the Prime Minister sums it up by saying that we must then all perish! This must be the case because we just have not the agricultural base to allow us to plant anything to feed ourselves. I am confident, however, that this is not going to be the end of a people and a country that has over the past one and a half centuries built out of a fishing village a prosperous and flourishing island State! We have that spirit of self-reliance that even with all the problems coming on us as a result of the British pull-out, we will emerge all the more stable, secure and flourishing. That is what I see the Bill sets out to prove. The attitude of the workers shall be and will be remoulded. Because our people understand the problems, we have decided to make certain adjustments and sacrifices at this stage of our country's history. Our workers cannot depend on abuses of fringe benefits to deprive their unemployed fellow citizens of jobs. Each and every worker will get a day's pay for a day's honest work.”
“For all these things a price must be paid, because history has shown that neither economic growth nor industrialisation has ever been achieved on the cheap! We know that many of the more advanced countries of today have paid a very high price in toil, discipline and sacrifice to achieve this. In some totalitarian countries, human lives were deliberately sacrificed so that the country could achieve rapid industrialisation. In our case, thanks to the democratic principles we uphold in Singapore and the practices we carry out, the cost demanded for such development cannot be made and are not being made so high as to make life intolerable. We have here in front of us a Bill that merely sets out to curtail malpractices and lessen opportunities of abuse of fringe benefits. A very small section of our work-force is asked to work five hours more a week only when requested. And 1 say this particular section of the work-force has for many years in the past been living on the fat of the land. As the Hon. Minister for Labour has put it, the medicine we are now administering is not really that bitter. And I say that it is well worth it if at the end of it all we see progress and stability emerge all the more flourishing. Let us see what will happen if we in this Parliament are weak and try to seek an easy way out. We can sit back and admire the Government's achievements for the last nine years (of which we in the P.A.P, are extremely proud). We will let the problems of the l970s take care of themselves. Maybe some of us will kneel down and pray that by some good fortune, conditions in Britain would improve so much that the Pound would overnight become so strong that the British Government would be prepared to maintain the bases here longer.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, when we first sat here as a new Parliament of the people's choice, we were promised that the Employment Bill would standardise and regulate the terms and conditions of service for all grades of employees. It was to be a package deal designed to lessen abuses of fringe benefits and malpractices amongst our work-force and, more important still, to aim at increasing productivity and promoting and hastening industrial growth. Sir, I consider it a task and responsibility we owe to the people of the Republic to provide the leadership in seeing this Bill through. In considering any piece of legislation, the basic consideration, as I see it, must be whether or not such a piece of legislation and its provisions are relevant to the prevailing circumstances. It is not my intention here to reiterate all the difficult problems we are going to face in the next few years. The Hon. Minister for Labour has, for the benefit of - the more absent-minded, listed facts and figures and has dwelt on them in great detail. It is essential to have these problems in mind when examining whether the present Bill is relevant to our circumstances. It calls for more than ordinary courage to face the situation and make the necessary adjustments and sacrifices to overcome these problems. Our workers must be made to understand the problems ahead so that they know why and for whom they are making the adjustments and sacrifices. We have all agreed that the years ahead are difficult and cruel. To survive these years, Singapore must launch a programme of rapid economic growth and promote speedy industrial expansion. This will then provide employment opportunities and, in so doing, ensure continuance and consolidation of stable political and social conditions.”
“Talking about technical know-how, I would request the Finance Ministry seriously to consider instituting stricter control over the quality of products that bear the mark "Product of Singapore". It is no use producing synthetic leather bags at a cost higher than what is imported from outside if these locally produced bags are not going to be any good in quality at all. It is no use protecting these products if we are producing them at such low quality that they will never be able to have a chance to go into any international market. Sir, if we are to compete in the highly competitive international market, let us ensure that our products are up to the mark and that the quality is up to specifications. May I conclude by saying that come what may in the years ahead, we have no choice but to succeed. The result of failure is too much even to ponder. I am confident, as I said earlier, that we will make it. I quote the Prime Minister in saying: 'The response of our population to these difficulties that we are faced over the last decade has been a constant source of inspiration, the ability to adjust, to adapt and to change. It is this collective sense of endeavour which will carry us through.' And I say triumph we will. Sir, I beg to support the motion. Mr Speaker: Order. I think it is convenient to take the suspension now. I will suspend the sitting and take the Chair again at five minutes past five o'clock. Sitting accordingly suspended at Twenty-two minutes past 4 p.m. until 5.05 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.05 p.m. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Debate resumed. Question again proposed. 5.06 p.m.”
“I read with great interest the speech of the Minister for Science and Technology on science education and industrial development. In his speech he has shown a clear understanding of the need to streamline our technical education system to satisfy the requirements arising from our industrialisation effort. True enough, our engineers, technicians and their supporting artisans are not being produced in the right proportions. But if it is a set-up of a quasi-Government to have a set-up whereby 10 engineers with four technicians are supervising and being supported by, say, ten artisans, and if such a set-up is not being checked, I would contend that any attempt to streamline and produce manpower in the right proportions would become meaningless. Sir, I am optimistic that the high-powered Cabinet Committee established to tackle this problem will soon come out with a solution. And one day - we hope it will be soon - we will see our education system harmonising with our social and environmental requirements. Sir, I remember also there was talk of centralising our apprenticeship training. In this connection, I hasten to request the Government to institute a centralised apprenticeship management without further delay, and no effort must be spared to ensure its success. Private employers must be urged to institute a comprehensive apprenticeship scheme with active assistance from this management. In so doing, it will be able to provide a well-trained technical base. All in all, Sir, the Ministry of Science and Technology must take on rapidly the task of providing enough people with the know-how at the right place to ensure the success of our industrialisation effort.”
“I also feel that it is my duty to caution the Public Utilities Board against allowing itself, on account of trying to cope with the increase in demand for electric power, to be intimidated into expanding its generating network at such a rate as to affect sound planning, or to retain or employ expatriate officers, who do not have our interest at heart, to manage and superintend over these extension stations, especially if such officers are inefficient and proved to be irresponsible. We must and have to allow our own local bright and energetic engineers to participate in such management, because ultimately it is they who cannot afford to see their own country's progress affected by any disruption in the power generating industry, the result of which will be too horrifying even to imagine. In this context, I must hasten to say that the mere sending away of officers on short training courses and conferences is not enough. Local bright engineers must be given the trust and encouragement to manage. Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to make a further suggestion to the Ministry of Law and to the Public Utilities Board, and that is to look into the possibility of making some kind of arrangement, say in the form of a grid network, with our neighbour in the north in ensuring security in loading capacity. Such an arrangement will not only help establish good neighbourliness but it will also help to cut down expenses and inefficient standby plants. Of course, even countries which are technically more advanced than we are are co-operating or seeking to co-operate in this respect. Sir, coming to the Ministry of Science and Technology, I must first of all welcome the timely setting up of this Ministry.”
“At least four engineering works were asked to move out without their being offered alternative accommodation. The officer in charge made an offer by asking them to move out as soon as possible and possibly to move back at a later stage when circumstances permitted. Sir, if only this officer would understand better the cost and the labour involved in moving out and moving back foundries and machinery, I think possibly this might not have happened. It is hoped that steps could be taken early enough to prevent my constituents having to operate their foundries and to park their machinery along the roadside. May I suggest, Sir, that local organisations, such as the Consultative Committees, be requested to participate and help in solving resettlement problems so that with an understanding of local conditions, resettlement will not only be carried out fairly and efficiently but will also appear to have been so done. Sir, let me hope that in the very near future slums will be replaced by high quality buildings and that people who are resettled in the course of doing so will feel happy that the little sacrifices they may be asked to make are not in vain. At this point, I think it is appropriate for me to congratulate the Ministry of Law and National Development and the Public Works Department on the grand work they have put in to cope with the phenomenal increase in power, water and gas consumption over the last few years. But I must confess that I am alarmed by the feeling that overhead charges added to the production cost of these amenities might have increased too rapidly for anyone to be comfortable. I hope it will be checked and brought to order.”
“Let us also hope that this Bill will bring with it a change of heart among these workers for, being on the public payroll, they have to be more than just ordinary employees. May I also call upon the Government, as an employer, not to abuse any restrictions on the workers that may be introduced in the proposed Bill, lest others will follow. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I now draw the attention of the House to the section on urban renewal and redevelopment in the Addendum to the President's Speech. I come from a constituency which will in the next few years be completely changed and altered by these schemes. I will not be so naive as to dispute the necessity of urban renewal and redevelopment. Indeed, I welcome the Government's measures taken to encourage and promote substantial participation from the private sector in this respect by making necessary administrative changes and providing incentives, so that these schemes may be more rapidly and efficiently pushed forward. However, may I remind the Ministry concerned to treat assurances given, that there will be adequate compensation and that affected tenants will have adequate time to move on to alternative accommodation, with more effectiveness and seriousness, especially in its administrative machinery? Officers charged with the responsibility of resettling affected tenants must demonstrate a clear understanding of the problems involved. These officers must, in spite of the stresses and strains that go with the job, stay composed and in their treatment of this sensitive problem must at all times be beyond doubt and reproach. Sir, I will quote a recent case of resettlement in my constituency to support what I have just said.”
“Sir, I have not the slightest doubt that the Minister for Labour, when considering these measures, will always bear in mind the fact that the P.A.P, has all along been returned on a socialist platform set up to eradicate any form of exploitation and that it will not be tripped over by the apparently over-whelming temptation posed by the need to provide more employment opportunities and to promote industrial growth in the coming years. Neither do I doubt the wisdom of the unionists who need not be reminded that the surest way of destroying any organised trade unionism is to allow the country's economy to fall apart and unemployment to assume proportions of uncontrollable magnitude. May I, however, add that outdated Ordinances, which this Employment Bill will seek to repeal, such as the Clerks Employment Ordinance, 1957, were designed to provide advantages to the white-collar workers over the blue-collar ones who will in the years to come ensure the success of our industrialisation effort. It will, therefore, not only be necessary at this stage to standardise the conditions of service but also to provide incentives in the coming Bills to the blue-collar workers by possibly enhancing their social position and giving them advantages over their counterparts in white-collar employment, for after all, rapid industrialisation is the order of the day. May I also add, Sir, that when introducing the Bill, the Government should always bear in mind that it should encourage its own employees to be exemplary in their attitudes. Hon. Members will agree with me that in the years gone by, employees in the various statutory boards were found most likely to abuse any fringe benefits.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the President's Speech, the Addendum to the speech, and the series of Ministerial speeches provide a clear and adequate analysis of the problems we have to face in the crucial years ahead and the not so pleasant measures we have to face in overcoming these problems. These measures, bold and imaginative, will require more than average effort on the part of everyone to succeed. Our record for the past 2- years of independence should not leave any doubt that both the Government and the people have the will and the capacity, the courage and determination to see through these challenging years and to return triumphant. The Ministry of Labour will have on its hands problems of such a nature that what have hitherto been regarded as unpopular measures have to be taken to aim at changing the workers' and the unionists' attitude towards society at large. To cope with the acute unemployment problem, to streamline the conditions of service, to regulate overtime to enable a wider spread of employment, to leave out certain fringe benefits, to increase productivity and to promote industrial growth, a comprehensive Employment Bill will be introduced. Sir, this is a bold and farsighted move. Our potential investors must be adequately convinced that here in Singapore we have a disciplined labour force and a sound and healthy industrial climate so that they may, after weighing the pros and cons, decide to stake their money with us. I am glad that in this respect, the Member for Bukit Ho Swee, who is also the Secretary-General of the N.T.U.C., has in no uncertain terms declared his support for the proposal for and on behalf of the workers in Singapore. This in itself is a clear indication of the workers' understanding of the problem.”