L. P. Rodrigo
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just ask the Minister whether in the implementation of this law there would arise a situation where a blood test is required but it is not available under the circumstances, and in such a situation should the person concerned be unable at the particular time to produce the required urine, would that constitute a j…”
“On the question of education policies and their implementation, teacher unions cannot afford to posturise or compromise to achieve administrative convenience at the risk of a deterioration in the content of education. Principals of primary schools had their post allowances withdrawn.”
“All our constituents need one badly, and although requests have been put forward by some of my colleagues, including the Minister of State for Labour, who is the MP for Upper Serangoon constituency, we have so far received no response.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head R be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1004*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Hwang Soo Jin and P.”
“Sir, one of the hazards of being on good terms with the Member for Katong is that in allowing him to speak ahead of you on a head of expenditure such as this, you find that there is not much else to say. I quite realise that in a debate, repetition is inevitable.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1003*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Ho See Beng and P.”
The complete record
Every one of 287 lines we hold for L. P. Rodrigo, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 6.
“In convincing the public and the authorities that teachers should receive greater monetary awards, I think that nothing can be more articulate than the achievement of professional expertise which is consonant with the aspirations of the nation. Mr Sia Khoon Seong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs that the best selling point for teachers is for them to demonstrate a sense of professionalism. This was amply demonstrated recently at the teachers' seminar sponsored by the Singapore Teachers' Union from the 27th of February to the 1st of March. The discussions were serious, responsible and intelligent. I do not dispute the question of whether or not the teachers are demonstrating themselves in the right way. My grouse is that the teachers' claims are allowed to be forgotten because of some inefficient officials, particularly the Treasury officials, who are holding up the matter. This is the point I wish to raise. I do not think it is over the rationale of whether the teachers deserve the claims or not. I am afraid this issue is not receiving enough attention from the people at the top, and everything is being left to the inefficiency, very narrow, one-track mind of the Treasury officials. Before I sit down, I just want to remark that the tone adopted by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs seems to be a little different from that of last year when he was sitting next to me.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I refer to the speech made by the Member for Moulmein. He has made the point that there is nothing unchaste about the question of money with teachers. This over-concern has succeeded in persuading even me to believe that there might be a certain unchastity in the teaching profession's preoccupation with monetary incentives. I think the most effective argument in the profession's claim for monetary award is not a relentless complaint against official inattention, but a relentless demonstration of professional expertise. If the Member for Moulmein and the Member for Telok Blangah can assist in moving the entire profession to achieve distinctive standards of performance without allowing an over-concern for prompt attention to monetary claims to cool their ardour, I am sure that the awards, if deserving will be forthcoming.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, actually I am befuddled by all these questions asked by the Backbenchers. I too was present on the occasion when the films were shown, and I thought that the Minister of State had answered quite well all the queries raised at that time, as well as those which have been raised here this afternoon. I do also remember that on that occasion tea and cakes were served!”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Traffic Police do not maintain statistics specifically relating to traffic accidents involving pedestrians and are therefore unable to state the number of accidents involving pedestrians within 100 metres of a pedestrian crossing or overhead bridge. However, there are records to show that for the year ending 31st January, 1971, a total of 38,139 accidents have been reported in which 152 pedestrians were killed and 1,053 seriously injured. The records show that out of the 152 pedestrians killed, three fatal accidents may be said to have occurred within 100 metres of a pedestrian crossing or overhead bridge. The motorist in one of these accidents also died from serious injuries in hospital. CONSIDERATION OF MORE THAN ONE ITEM OF SUPPLY BUSINESS 2.46 p.m. Resolved, "That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the Third Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure and the Second Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971, be taken today." - [Mr Hon Sui Sen]. THIRD SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR FYI 1970/1971 AND SECOND SUPPLEMENTARY DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR FYI 1970/1971 2.47 p.m. Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair]”
“I can certainly assure the Member of that, Sir. ROAD ACCIDENTS INVOLVING PEDESTRIANS (Particulars) 7. Mr J. F. Conceicao asked the Minister for Home Affairs what was the frequency of traffic accidents involving pedestrians within 100 yards of a pedestrian crossing or overhead bridge, and the number of those seriously injured or killed in such accidents for the year ending 31st January, 1971.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, these drivers have their blood and urine tested for alcohol, and they are further tested to find out how competent they are still to drive at that stage. The analysis is undertaken by the Chemistry Department in accordance with the Kozelka and Hine method through a process of steam distillation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think any elaborate training is required on the part of the immigration officers. The presumption is clearly stated, and the officers will exercise their discretion accordingly. Where there are borderline cases, as I say, we treat them in accordance with the method I have described. BILLS INTRODUCED 2.53 p.m. SUPPLY BILL "to provide for the issue from the Consolidated Fund of the sums necessary to meet the estimated expenditure for the public services of Singapore for the financial year 1st April, 1971, to 31st March, 1972", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Finance (Mr Hon Sui Sen);read the First time, to be read a Second time on Monday, 29th March, 1971, and to be printed. SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY BILL "for making Supplementary Provision for the public services for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971", recommendation of President signified; presented by Mr Hon Sui Sen; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Monday, 29th March, 1971, and to be printed. ANNUAL BUDGET STATEMENT 3.00 p.m.”
“Sir, I would say a "borderline" case is one where a person is not clearly a hippie on the basis of the presumption which I have stated, hut at the same time he is not able to avoid the suspicion that he may be a hippie because of his general appearance and mannerisms. It is difficult to give a graphic description of a borderline case, but my Ministry considers and determines every borderline case on its demerits!”
“This foreman undoubtedly had wrestled with his conscience and finally confided to the Deputy Registrar of the High Court that he had made a serious mistake. But what is more important still is the urgent need to ensure that in the last analysis, whatever the system is, justice is in fact done, and as far as I am concerned, even if it is not as lucidly seen to be done as is desired. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] 5.20 p.m. Up to the time that the Select Committee on the Bill first met, I had been persuaded to vote for the abolition of the jury system by my own brief experience of the system, directly or vicariously, and my belief in its unworkability. Having sat in Select Committee on the Bill, the disclosures in the Report which are for everyone to read, merely confirms my conviction that the system as we have it today is not workable. 5.22 p.m.”
“This dissatisfaction presumably surfaced because of the Bill and the existence of a Select Committee on the Bill which provided a much-awaited opportunity for a change of the system, the efficacy of which this juror, at least, had grave doubts. Sir, this is a disclosure which has come in the 143rd year of the practice of the jury system in our country. The lucid details given by the Member for Telok Blangah opposite are sufficient to cause a disturbing disillusionment about the efficacy of the system to which we have subscribed for all these years. Sir, would not our conscience be assailed by the vision of more shocking errors and inability of our jurors in the trials which they have hitherto determined in the course of those 143 years? Are we to gloss over these very disconcerting disclosures with the argument that there is always scope for improving the quality of our jurors, and that we should retain lay participation in criminal adjudication in our system, or that our Judges would be progressively incompetent to decide on questions of fact as they would be removed from the experiences of the common man? This last argument, as far as I am concerned, Sir, appears to imply that our Judges would lose their memory of all social and cultural experiences with the common man immediately upon their appointment as Judges of the High Court. Besides, how removed can any Judge be from the realities of life and from his physical experiences in a society as compact and as exposed to mass media as ours? Sir, I think the urgency of the moment is to prevent a repetition of the kind of grave errors that the Member for Telok Blangah has undertaken to inform this House, particularly the kind that the foreman of the jury in one case had committed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in its passage through the Select Committee, this Bill was put to close examination by the representatives of the Council of the Singapore Advocates and Solicitors Society. In the light of the proceedings of the Committee, a number of the suggestions of the Bar Council have been, in fact, incorporated in the notices of amendments to the Bill and filed by the Minister for Law. The end result of this deliberation, Sir, is the modification of certain basic provisions of the Bill. Two Judges would try an offence in respect of which the penalty of death is authorised by law - a presiding Judge and one other. The decision of the court as to the guilt of the accused in respect of such a charge would be arrived at unanimously. Failure to have such unanimity would bar conviction on the charge but would allow a conviction on a lesser offence and only if the two Judges agree that the facts justify such a conviction. All interlocutory questions would be determined by the presiding Judge. Surely, Sir, it cannot be doubted that these suggestions have been received in the spirit of wanting to make the system work efficiently and effectively, and the purport of the Bill cannot be imputed to be otherwise. Sir, that the jury system has not been working as expected, I think, has apparently the agreement of the members of the Bar Council. This turn of mind came after their members became informed of the deficiencies and errors of the jury system by the jurors themselves in Select Committee. In the case referred to by the Minister, the foreman of the jury gave vent to an expression of acute dissatisfaction with the system.”
“If it does mean an amendment to the Constitution, then, of course, to a certain extent, I agree with the opinion voiced outside that perhaps it might jeopardise the individuals who would not be able to contest this legislation in the High Court. There is one other point which can perhaps be clarified by the Minister. The Bill that is before the House specifically excludes the consideration of evidence by witnesses and individuals by the Council. But what if the Council wish to consider written representations from any source? Would it be permitted to do this? These are points which perhaps the Minister could clarify. 3.44 p.m.”
“Should such eminent people be appointed to this Council, they would be in an embarrassing position when legislation which is suspected of being inconsistent with the Constitution or the fundamental liberties of the individual is contested in the High Court for interpretation after the Council had decided unanimously or by a majority to submit an adverse report thereon to Parliament, and Parliament had thereafter overridden such adverse report by a two-thirds majority. Of course, this will only arise if there is such a spate of proceedings for constitutional interpretation in the High Court that we cannot avoid having the same Judges who had been involved in the deliberation on this legislation also taking part in the High Court proceedings. I am sure that the Minister is quite aware of this possibility, but if he will clarify this point, perhaps it might assist the House. Secondly, I might ask, why is it that a two-thirds majority is required under the Bill to over- ride an adverse report from the Presidential Council? It appears that this would reflect a certain amount of consensus on the part of the Council. But this may raise another problem, for it may be said that such a two-thirds majority over-riding an adverse report from the Council is tantamount to an amendment of the Constitution. By our Constitution we need only an ordinary majority to amend it. I would not be able to answer this question. Would a two-thirds majority of the House over-riding an adverse report from the Presidential Council amount to an amendment of the Constitution?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the multiracial texture of our society gives the Presidential Council a distinct role to play, but it is my feeling that this would depend ultimately on the composition of the Council. It is important to realise that one of the functions of the Council is to act as a body of constitutional interpretation, because, if I am not mistaken, Sir, the Bill before the House describes the functions of this proposed Council as being, first, advising Parliament on matters affecting minority rights and, second, drawing attention to Bills and statutory legislation which, in the eyes of the Council, appear to be inconsistent with the Constitution or with the fundamental liberties of the individual. In respect of the second function of the Council, that is, to advise Parliament that certain legislation when in operation will be inconsistent with the Constitution or the fundamental liberties of the individual, this will require of the Council an expertise which is primarily legal, particularly an expertise in constitutional interpretation. We can say that such kind of expertise will obviously be lodged in very mature members of the legal profession, namely, the Chief Justice and Puisne Judges. At this stage, perhaps I can refer the House to certain statements made by the Minister for Law and National Development when the Report of the Constitutional Commission was tabled before this House in 1966, and reported in Hansard, Volume 25, No. 14. The Minister for Law and National Development did suggest that perhaps eminent people like ex-Chief Ministers. Chief Justices and Puisne Judges could constitute such a Council. I wonder whether this will make the Council operate in the way that is obviously intended.”
“To sum up it may be said that this Bill saves justice from having to precariously tread on the high wire of the summing up and therefore stabilise her image in our society. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“The effects of this Bill are that in any trial of a capital offence, three Judges will make a finding on the facts of the case which up to now has been the function of the jury, and they will proceed to determine the law and return the verdict. By this Bill, therefore, the jury system is abolished. The question which ought to matter is whether this system of trial by three Judges will ensure the consistency of justice which is desired and which the jury system apparently does not assure in this multi-racial, multi-cultural social milieu of the moment. If the function of the jury is limited to making a finding on the facts of the case, why cannot three Judges make an equally just, if not a better finding of the facts? If the Judges' capacity to make a suitable finding of the facts is doubted, what do these critics have to say about the fact-findings of the Judges in civil matters in the High Court and in the subordinate civil and criminal courts? Sir, opposers of the Bill argue that the jury system provides the opportunity for the community to participate in the administration of law and justice. Such participation is negligible. In any case would non-participation of the administration of law and justice in the lower subordinate courts to any extent impair the judgment of our Judges? What about the mass convictions in the subordinate criminal courts? It has never been theorised that such convictions are questionable. In short, Sir, the merit of this Bill is simply the fact that in trials of capital offences, it removes from the functions of the Judge that arduous and complex task of directing the jury on which would usually depend the question of affirming or allowing the conviction in the Court of Appeal.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I associate myself with the views in support of the Bill expressed by the Member for Bukit Panjang. However, in addition thereto I have certain observations to make on the Bill. The question of whether the jury system is an integral and an indispenable facet of criminal law practice and adjudication in our courts today is a question which inevitably involves lawyers. This must be so because the system is basic in the criminal jurisprudence in which the lawyer is disciplined. In the lawyer's eyes the jury system and justice in criminal law are concomitant. They say that if you leave the jury system out of criminal adjudication in the courts, you have impaired justice by so much. The system, Sir, has been practised in Common Law countries for some hundreds of years and in those countries which still retain the system, its operation had not been seriously questioned as to initiate a thorough examination of the system with a view to discovering its efficacy in a given society with varying social values or varying ethnic and cultural responses. In fact, it has been the subject of continuous commentary for the period of 200 years, almost from Blackstone to Lord Devlin, so that now it appears to be hallowed with such an indispensability in the field of criminal jurisprudence that the Bill now before the House is to some lawyers anathema. I regard the jury system as an ingenious and practical instrument of justice of considerable nicety, but depending on what context it is supposed to operate. As a citizen I would look to the jury system for reassuring signs of its efficacy as an instrument of justice in the context of the realities within which it is meant to operate.”
“Sir, if the status is not disclosed at the time of the birth of the child, then the issue cannot be said to be a citizen of the state. I think that is what is in the mind of the Member for Joo Chiat.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think what is in the mind of the Member for Joo Chiat is the status of the child who is born illegitimate and whose parents subsequently do not marry, and whose status as citizens has not been disclosed, because the issue becomes a citizen of the state only if at the time of his birth his parents are citizens of the state.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $1,139,460 for Head 101 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 102 - The following amendments stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong - (1) That the sum to be allocated for Head 102 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 90l. (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 102 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 903.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 101 be reduced by $100. Sir, there is one point of query. If my memory serves me right, I did make a query about the possibility of replacing the present tuberculosis wards in Tan Tock Seng Hospital with new construction. I think the Minister said that there was a scheme to replace these wards. Can I be enlightened by him?”
“Sir, I am not moving. The sum of $15,966,180 for Head 95 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 98 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong --- That the sum to be allocated for Head 98 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.”
“I am not speaking, Sir. Mr Lee Teck Him rose -”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Yeow Chong - (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 83 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 103.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 83 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101. Sir, I note that while there was a vote for $200,000, towards the improvement of Jalan Besar Stadium in the preceding year, there is only a token vote this year. Could I be informed of the plans that are made today to improve Jalan Besar Stadium? My understanding is that the plans are comprehensive and have been completed, but the allocation of $200,000 is insufficient and that is why work on the improvement of the stadium is being held back. I will be obliged for the information.”
“I am not moving. Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 71 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 901. I understand that part of the sum of $82,000 provided for fire prevention equipment against this subhead is to be spent on the new television centre which has already been operational for quite some time. This suggests to me that the department concerned has perhaps, not paid sufficient attention to the question of safeguarding public property against fire, loss or damage during the planning stage and that it has only now come to realise this omission. This apparently reckless attitude on the part of the department is particularly astonishing when one remembers that over the last two years the department has lost more than $« million worth of valuable equipment as a result of fires. Sir, I am also concerned to note that this item is subject to Treasury sanction. Supposing this is not forthcoming, are we to assume that all the expensive equipment and installations will be left unprotected against the risk of fires?”
“In view of that explanation, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Madam Chan Choy Siong and Mr L. P. Rodrigo - (3) That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 403.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am quite satisfied with the explanation and the answer given by the Minister, except for one very important point. I did not impute that poorer people are unclean. It would be simply unthinkable. What I did say was that the conditions of their life tend to attract the application of these laws, which is quite a different matter. But for the life of me, I would never impute that poorer people are unclean or unhealthy. As a result of the Minister's explanation, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi - (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1303 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1081. The Chairman (Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng): Inche Mohd. Ariff is not here. Amendment (3)*, Mr Rodrigo. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong.”
“To date, I have discovered that there are 51 vacancies in the market. For some obscure reason, the Hawkers Department in the Public Health Division has refused to issue licences for these vacancies. I do not know whether they are awaiting what is called a constituency-to-constituency registration of hawkers in markets. I will be much obliged if the Minister can enlighten me.”
“My fear is that they can be easily classified as incorrigibles and attract the application of these laws. Of course, this will make the situation much worse and create hardship for them. The point of this observation is purely to appeal to the Minister always to have this in mind, that laws of this sort usually apply to these classes of people, and to request that summonses for offences under these laws be issued only when his Ministry is really satisfied that the recipients of summonses are really incorrigibles. The next point I wish to raise concerns what I may term the new expose that is going on around town, especially in the centre of our city. I notice that the concrete slabs which have all this time been covering the main drains in the city are being removed, and permanently too. Of course, there must be a reason for this. My first reaction is to ask why we are exposing the bowels of our city to the public or to visitors of our fair city. There must be certain hazards that the Minister is trying to avoid. But if the Minister's fear is rats, I do not see why large numbers of these slabs which cover the drains ought to be removed permanently. I still think that if his Ministry wishes to go on regular sprees of rat extermination, they can still do so without permanently removing these slabs. My simple understanding of city development, Sir, is that the drains in the city are covered. I think this is the development in large cities in progressive countries. Here we have a reverse situation where we are exposing the subterranean affairs of our city to public view. The third point that I wish to raise is a matter which concerns my constituency - Serangoon Gardens. We have a market called Serangoon Gardens Market.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 1303 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001. Sir, on public health, I wish to express my appreciation of the Minister's enthusiasm in wanting to make Singapore a clean and healthy place for all of us to live in and for our visitors to be delighted with the environment. We all want clean and healthy surroundings. Who does not? In order to achieve this, the Minister will have to make laws. This is granted. Laws are necessary. This is all right. Such laws have been enacted and we have seen a lot of teeth in these laws. For myself, I have even found some fangs. This is not all right. I recall the Minister's statement earlier this year that he is determined to make this place clean and healthy. By this time, I am getting worried. My constituency is not a place which is that well off as first impressions seem to convey. Seran goon Gardens appears to be a middle-class area. But, in fact, there are a lot of rural folk fringing my constituency. You can classify them as poor people. My understanding of the application of these laws is that if it becomes necessary, they must inevitably fall upon the poorer classes, because the conditions under which they live are such that they attract the application of these laws. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] 6.53 p.m. I must state that I am mindful of the fact that the Minister intends to apply these laws, should application become necessary, only to incorrigibles. But then the conditions of living of poor people are not of their choice. When daily living becomes a matter of daily urgency, they do not tend to attach much importance to a little dirt around the place, because these are conditions which obtain daily in their lives.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of that explanation, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the answer given by the Minister was rational, but not rational enough. It was rational in so far as breaches of the law are concerned. I have been informed that this has been due to the fact that the lawful parking facilities that are normally accorded to taxi-drivers are being drastically reduced and that, as a result, they are forced to park in the parking lots meant for the ordinary drivers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 1207 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1501*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong Sir, this concerns car parks and I have been asked by the Member for Changi to stress this most fearlessly. The result of the present trend in car parking in the city is the displacement of taxi- drivers from their usual yellow line parking facilities. What makes the situation much worse is that when licensed taxi-drivers attempt to park their vehicles in the paying parking lot, they are told that they may not do so. This not only imposes inconvenience but also hardship upon them. I am asked to try to adduce an explanation for this move. Why should taxi-drivers be urged to be continuously on the move throughout? They will have to stop their vehicles some time. The Member for Changi has also asked me to remind the House that when the people of Singapore were requested to indicate their loyalty to the country, the taxi-drivers came forth with $100,000 for the National Defence Fund. These are values which the country should encourage and recognise. In view of the hardship that appears to be imposed upon the taxi-drivers without any rational explanation, and their response to the National Defence Fund, the Member for Changi would like consideration on their behalf.”
“The other matter which I wish to raise under this subhead is censorship of publications and films. I think it is being carried out by this Ministry. In so far as censorship of publications is concerned, I would like to know who constitutes the censoring body. What is the extent of layman participation in it? What is the proportion of laymen and professional men in the censoring body? Are there also laymen in the censoring body of film censorship? Just to round off my observations, Sir, I come back to the Broadcasting Department. I think this Department should be aware that we have already bulk unemployment, and as time goes on it will increase in size. Whatever efforts have been undertaken by this medium - it is a most powerful medium indeed -an attempt should be made to inculcate in our people a sense of positivism. This is going to be a tall order. I do not know how they are going to go about it. If this medium can inculcate in our people a sense of positivism instead of a sense of negativism, a sense of confidence in their ability to look after their position in life, it might help to make them more creative individually. They would adopt a brighter outlook towards life, and be more confident, instead of reacting to life negatively. The short outcome of it all is that it will invoke in them a very positivistic attitude. I certainly hope the Broadcasting Department will look into this matter.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have a notice of amendment No. (2)*. I think I can take up my subject under this subhead and forgo moving amendment No. (2). * Amendment (2) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 1001 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1006. Much of what I want to say will be underlining the observations of the Member for Sembawang. Generally speaking, Sir, I think the Department of Broadcasting has met the leisure needs of the people in television viewing. Human preferences are multitudinous and so varied that I think it is impossible to satisfy every viewer. But what appears to be the case is that the Broadcasting Department is pleasing a large number of people with programmes like crime thrillers and associated programmes containing no small measure of violence. I think this is worrying. It becomes extraordinarily worrying because at the time when I was applying my mind to this problem, there was reported in our local press the case of Mary and Nomar who were alleged to have strangled a five-year old in a county in England. Then in one of our local cinemas, the Boston Strangler was "let loose". All this was also reminiscent of the assault on a residence in my own constituency in the style and tradition of The F.B.I. series. I think this calls for some thinking in the department. I wonder if there is any sort of a research unit in the Department .of Broadcasting which is constantly applying its efforts to try to satisfy the great number of television viewers with programmes much more congenial and much less frightening. I believe that if some effort is applied in this direction, it is possible to devise a means by which we can try to satisfy our television viewers in a happier manner.”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not quarrelling with the legalistics of the matter if that, in fact, is the rationale behind the legal discrimination. If our female citizen marries a non-citizen, she has to accept the fact that she follows the domicile of her husband. That is quite correct. I think there still exists a moral obligation at least to inform our female citizen that when she marries a non-citizen, he will not be entitled to reside in this country. I think if this situation is made known to our female applicants, it will correct the wrong impression that, as they are citizens of Singapore, their husbands are entitled to reside with them, because I think this impression is very real.”
“It is also opportune, Mr Speaker, Sir, to raise a question under this subhead if the Minister cares to answer it, because I wonder whether it is really relevant to this subject; that is, the rationale behind the law offering a non-citizen female who happens to marry one of our male citizens entitlement to residence in this country. What is the reason behind this discrimination? On the one hand, we allow a non-citizen female who is married to one of our male citizens residence in the country. On the other hand, we do not grant residence to a male non-citizen who marries one of our female citizens. There might be a rational explanation for this. I do not know. But if the Minister chooses to answer, I think this could be an opportune time to do so.”
“Yes, Sir. The answer is substantially to be given by the Minister for Defence. Sir, basically there is an absence of co-ordination between the Immigration Department and the Registry of Marriages. In a way, it touches a matter of the heart. We may have a male non-citizen, a foreigner, in our country for short periods of stay and the more selective of our charming females may decide to tie the matrimonial knot with such a male non-citizen. The result of it is that our female citizen makes an application to the Registry of Marriages for the issue of the necessary licence and the Registrar of Marriages appears to issue it without any inhibitions. Of course, solemnisation of the marriage takes place and the two are married. Then an application is made to the Immigration authorities for residence of the husband of our female citizen who is told - also without inhibitions - "Very sorry. Residence in Singapore cannot be given to him." Of course, this would necessitate a separation between husband and wife. However much it appears that efforts have been made in the past by our female citizen to get her non- citizen husband into Singapore for permanent residence, she is told that that, unfortunately, is not possible because the law is so. I tend to believe that if co-ordination had existed between the two departments, perhaps the Registrar of Marriages might not be issuing licences of marriage in such circumstances which do create hardship. I do not know what is the situation now and I would be obliged if the Minister could inform the House whether this sort of practice has ceased and licences for such marriages are no longer issued by the Registrar of Marriages.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0902 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. * The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr P. Govindaswamy, Madam Chan Choy Siong, and Mr Sim Boon Woo. Sir, I seek your leave to range over the Registry of Marriages if I may and I will not move the amendment+ thereunder because I now wish to raise an issue which is connected with the Registry of Marriages. + The amendment reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 1101 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1121.”
“Yes, Sir. In fact, I got that marked down here also. But I did not send in an amendment to that subhead. Sir, the source must be located somewhere. I think now that the matter has been raised, perhaps appropriate attention could be paid in that direction. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $8,042,410 for Head 0803 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. Head 0805 -”
“I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. But in so doing, it appears that this discreditable source is now located in the Ministry of the Interior and Defence.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0803 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1245. Sir, this concerns good conduct allowance for constables, and what moves me to make this amendment is the unusual nature of this allowance. I would have thought that constables, security officers or whatever personnel are entitled to this allowance would be expected to show good conduct. I do not think there should be incentives for them to show good conduct and receive monetary benefit for so showing. Perhaps the Minister will explain.”
“Sir, that will satisfy me and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. But in doing so and in order to satisfy the non-participant in the debate who said perhaps I did not know this myself, this was confirmed by my visit to the airport for purposes of recreation. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have brought the matter to the attention of the Minister as a result of a discourse which I had with a professional source. The opinion is that it is preferable to have the siting of the fire station on the other side of the runway - on some high ground - which would enable it to command a thorough and comprehensive view of the runway. As the fire fighting unit is at present sited, it is on the near side of the terminal building. In the view of the fire officers in the unit, the intended extension of the terminal building might perhaps cause a blockage. 7.00 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0803 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1081. Sir, this concerns the Airport Fire Officer and the Airport services. I have been informed that the Airport fire station, as it is now sited, is in a dis advantageous position in that it does not command a panoramic view of the runway. With the impressive lengthening of the runway which is to come about to take in such huge aircraft as the jumbo jets, I can well imagine that the present disadvantage will be enhanced. Since this is a matter which concerns the security of passengers, I hope it will be attended to in detail, lf this is the fact of the case - I have reason to believe that it is so - I will be obliged if the Minister will assure the House that he will look into this matter.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3005. This deals with the subject of "Scholarships, Courses and Fellowships". My query is whether courses under this subhead include the in-service courses for teachers that we hear of now and again. I wish to know what is the nature of such in-service courses, that is, whether they are incremental or otherwise. Is there a distinction between the in-service courses and what may be called refresher courses? What is the extent of the refresher courses, if any?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not moving my amendments Nos. (36) and (37) . The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Low Yong Nguan --- (38) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2554.”