N. Govindasamy
Singapore
“Sir, in the hope that the Ministry of Finance will release the funds required for the Telok Blangah community centre within the next six months, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr J F.”
“Member for Serangoon Gardens, would show that numerous criticisms were made in this Chamber. Some of the pitfalls of the education policies were pointed out and they could have been avoided.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am still a little confused. Would the Minister of State categorically state in this House whether the restructured education scheme is on or off? Even the teachers and the principals are arguing among themselves whether the restructured education scheme is on or off.”
“Sir, I have no intention of joining in. The problem here is riot a question of marrying abroad or in Singapore. The problem is still faced by people who were married in Singapore. There is the case of a woman who has been married here for eight years and has four children all living here in a Housing Board flat.”
“Perhaps when the Minister replies he will want to use it. Sir, the woman has been here for eight years. She was married in the Singapore Registry of Marriages. Four children were born in Singapore and they are now living in a Housing Board flat.”
“Sir, the Minister has set a specific number of hours and he says. "Well, if they do their part-time national service in 12 years they will have to do so many hours of work, and if we reduce it to five years, then they must perform the same number of hours of duties." This would mean that they have to go for duty practically everyday.”
The complete record
Every one of 564 lines we hold for N. Govindasamy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 12.
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong: (2) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0408 be reduced by $100. Madam Chan Choy Siong: Sir, I am not moving. The sum of $1,442,310 for Head 0408 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. Head 0501 - Madam Chan Choy Siong(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0501 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Teong Eng Siong, Mr, P.Govindaswamy and Mr N. Govindasamy.). Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Labour, particularly, with regard to the passage of a labour law last year in this House, whether the Government has carried out a review of this Ordinance and the consequent of implementing it, and what benefits have accrued to both management and labour. I have the feeling that, as far as management is concerned, they have been able to make use of this amended law for their own purposes. On the other hand, what we have been able to see that our working class has suffered --”
“As this entails unnecessary difficulty and inconvenience, it may be asked whether it would be possible to amalgamate these two sections so that the traders are not shunted from Fullerton Building to Maxwell Road and then back to Fullerton Building for these permits. If these two departments come under one roof, it would, in my opinion, be much more efficient. It would involve better utilisation of manpower, minimise duplication of work and simplify the issue of Inward and Outward Permits. I am told that in most other countries Import and Export Permits are issued by the Customs authorities. Even in Singapore, the enforcement of Imports and Exports Declarations, the checking of the declarations, the payment of necessary duties, the examination of goods, etc., are done by the Customs authorities in the harbour, airport, etc. Even the issue of these declarations or permits outside office hours is done by the Customs. If such declarations or permits can be issued by the Customs outside office hours, I should like to know why the Customs authorities cannot issue the required permits during office hours. Whatever the reason is, the issue of the declarations would be simplified if it is done in one and the same building instead of different buildings, especially when they are located quite a distance from one another. 7.30 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0408 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*, Sir, from the Budget Speech by the Minister for Finance, it is noted that our entrepot trade as well as internal trade still plays an important role in the economy of our Republic. Petty traders as well as large-scale importers and exporters have played their part in the expansion of our economy. I feel, therefore, that every convenience and assistance given to them will in the end benefit the Republic. Thus, if the volume of their trade increases, the revenue will be proportionately increased. I believe much inconvenience has been caused to our importers and exporters in respect of issue of Inward and Outward Declarations, whether deliberately or otherwise. When a trader wants to import certain goods from abroad, in about three out of 10 cases, he has to go first to the Imports and Exports officer in the Trade Division located in Fullerton Building where I am told he has to get clearance from three different departments, namely, the Imports and Exports Office, the Statistics Division and the Customs Division. Having cleared with these three departments, if the goods to be imported involve customs import duty, he is then required to go to the Customs Office at Maxwell Road to get the clearance and then to go back to Fullerton Building for the necessary permits. In the event of any doubt arising as to whether import duty is involved or not in respect of the goods to be imported, he still has to go to Maxwell Road to get the necessary clearance from the Customs there before he is issued with the necessary permits ultimately at Fullerton Building.”
“Sir, the Income Tax Department is to be congratulated on collecting more money than they anticipated. I believe the revenue of the Income Tax Department was increased by $59.8 million. However, I feel there are areas in Singapore where stricter or more efficient methods of collecting tax can be adopted to further increase the revenue from income tax. Sir, in common with many other countries in Asia, Singapore has this phenomenon - that roadside hawkers in certain selected areas are making better business than even established restaurants. It will be interesting to know how many of these busy hawkers, catering for tourists as well as local people, pay income tax. Take, for instance, the many stallholders doing business opposite the Singapore Cold Storage in Orchard Road, Bugis Street, Hock Lam Street, Albert Street, etc. I am told that the average turnover per day for each stall in such areas is much higher than that in licensed restaurants. It will, therefore, be interesting to know how many of these hawkers do pay income tax. I am fully conscious of the difficulty that the Income Tax Department faces in getting proper tax returns from these stallholders. But with sufficient manpower, however, it may be possible to station an official near selected stalls to record the daily takings and to estimate the profits of the hawkers on the basis of such takings. There may be other methods which I am sure the American tax officials, being specialists in this field, will be able to suggest. The Anti Evasion Unit, if it functions properly, should be able to increase the income tax revenue much more than we have had this year, and the money spent on setting up this Unit would be well worth it.”
“Sir, I am talking generally on Inland Revenue and on the collection of income tax as well.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ho Kah Leong - (9) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0403 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2281.”
“I believe the latest joke is that when one of the officials of the People's Association went to Pulau Blakang Mati to inspect the building and have a chat with some of the islanders, they shooed him off. Sir, can I be told once and for all whether the People's Association is going to build a community centre in Pulau Blakang Mati or not?”
“I was told that no capital outlay involving large sums of money could be approved for this purpose However, with much difficulty I was able to persuade the Bases Economic Conversion Department to release a building, centrally located, for use as a community centre for the island. Two families who occupied this building were persuaded to move out and preparatory work for the conversion of this building into a community centre commenced .I believe the Director of the People's Association and other senior staff visited the site a few times. Tenders were called for. From the activities that went on, the islanders this time were hopeful that at last they were going to have a community centre. However, the last official communication I had from the People's Association regarding the community centre was on 5th June. 1969, when the People's Association requested the Public Works Department to call for tenders. Subsequently, I made numerous inquiries and I was told that the cost of conversion of the building for a community centre would be more than $4,000 and that the People's Association had only approved $4,000. Sir, I had on numerous occasions spoken to the officials of the People's Association, informing them of the special need for a community centre at Pulau Blakang Mati and that a community centre could be started with even less than $4,000 approved for that purpose, since a building was available and work was partially completed. Sir, the People's Association was not impressed with my representation. The islanders are making a big joke of the proposed community centre for which, they have waited for the past five or six years.”
“What happens now, I am told, is that the community centre is expected to organise the coaching on its own and that the People's Association pays for the fees of the coach, irrespective of whether he coaches 10 persons or 30 persons in basketball. If properly organised, money can be saved by combining training and coaching sessions for a number of centres which can be conveniently grouped together. Sir, I myself have seen community centre staff not doing as much as they can do in a number of community centres. They have been criticised for their lack of initiative, indifference, idleness and arrogance by one of their supervisors, as reported in the People's Association news bulletin recently. May I inquire whether this warning given by the supervisor has resulted in any improvement of performance or discipline, or whether the People's Association has taken any steps to improve the situation and, if so, what are the steps taken? I sincerely hope that the Association has not taken the easy way out by forgetting the whole matter. Let us now come to the establishment of community centres, a matter which certainly illustrates another area of lethargy on the part of the People's. Association. Sir, the islanders of Pulau Blakang Mati were promised a community centre by the People's Association about four years ago. A site was selected and marked out for the building of this community centre. I believe tenders were also called for the construction of the centre. However, for one reason or another, to date this community centre has not been built, In 1968 when I was elected Member of Parliament for Telok Blangah, which included Pulau Blakang Mati, I raised the question of a community centre for the island.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0403 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2251. Sir, I feel that the time has come for us to review the policy and functions of the People's Association and the manner in which such policy and functions are being implemented. I feel that lethargy has set in among the officers and staff of the People's Association Headquarters. The community centres in Singapore have done a wonderful job and are continuing to do so. However, I feel that the headquarters of these community centres, that is, the People's Association, is not doing as much as it can do at the moment. It appears that the objective of the People's Association recently has been only to put up shows of one type or another in order to create the impression that it is active or to create a public image for itself. It has not undertaken any project for mass participation. The community centre staff are left to fend for themselves in many community centres. They do not receive much guidance, if any, from the specialist sections in the People's Association, such as the Cultural Section, the Sports Section, etc. The Specialist Professional Units do not offer any guidance or assistance to the community centre staff. The Cultural Section is only interested in organising cultural shows at the People's Association level, but not in helping the community centres with their expertise and experience, with the result that the community centres do not organise cultural activities of their own. The same can be said for the Sports Section. Many community centres are interested in, say, the coaching of basketball. It is possible for the People's Association to organise coaching sessions for a number of centres whose residents may be interested in the game.”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“I would also like to know from the Minister how many industries in Singapore have been assisted by the N.P.C. to form productivity councils or Works Councils. 5.30 p.m. It is my hope that from now onwards, the N.P.C. will be fully responsible for promoting and co-ordinating the productivity movement in the Republic. It should then be able to ensure the proper implementation of the Productivity Code of Practice. It is also to be hoped that it will utilise the Advisory Council that has been set up to keep the N.P.C. in contact with the organisations which it is supposed to serve. At the moment, we have only one I.L.O. expert attached to the Centre, when at one time we had three for helping in the projects organised by the Centre. We understand that under the United Nations Development Programme, a special fund project for the expansion of the Centre has been approved and that more equipment and experts will be made available to increase and expand the activities of the Centre. I hope, with their help, the Centre will serve the purpose for which it was set up.”
“It is, however, to be regretted that the Centre has either failed or has not attempted to convince the employers of the need to set up joint consultative machinery between workers and employers for the purpose of facilitating greater cooperation and promoting productivity. In other words, the training courses have not been matched with practical schemes for putting into practice the principles taught in the courses. Other than the training courses, the National Productivity Centre seems to be preoccupied with such matters as industrial relations, the recruitment of staff for industries, assisting the employers in industrial training programmes, etc., matters which strictly are not related to productivity. The National Productivity Centre seems to have forgotten the fundamental purpose for which it was set up. Certainly it was not set up for the purpose of recruiting workers or assisting in the training of workers for industries. The National Productivity Centre has an Advisory Council consisting of representatives from workers, employers and the Government. This Council was set up in December 1967, and I shall be grateful if the Minister in charge can enlighten this House on the number of times that the Council has met to advise the National Productivity Centre. Sir, I raise this question because my organisation is also represented in the Council and I am told that the Advisory Council exists only in name and it has never been convened to advise the National Productivity Centre. Also in 1968, an elaborate constitution of Works Councils was drawn up with appropriate comments and suggestions from the trade unions and the employers' organisations. I fear that the model constitution of Works Councils still remains a model.”
“It was felt that the implementation of this Productivity Code of Practice will require considerable promotional effort as well as technical assistance, especially in the application of work study, quality control, cost analysis and other modern industrial engineering techniques. To assist in these purposes, the Singapore National Productivity Centre with an advisory board on which workers, employers and the Government are equally represented was established. Incidentally, Sir, the National Productivity Centre in Singapore is the only productivity organisation in this region which was established as a result of trade union initiation. Since the inception of the National Productivity Centre, it has made some, but not substantial, achievements in its promotional effort of setting up Joint Productivity Consultative Councils in the various industries in Singapore. In this respect, I can safely say that the National Productivity Centre has failed in instilling the need and importance of forming Joint Productivity Consultative Councils in all our industries. The National Productivity Centre organises a number of courses in work study, job evaluation and incentives, management techniques, production planning control, office management methods, workers' education and so on. To a limited extent, it provides advisory services. I must express the gratitude of the N.T.U.C. for the co-operation of the National Productivity Centre in organising similar courses for trade union officials affiliated to the N.T.U.C. The trade union movement is also grateful to the National Productivity Centre for the advice we get sometimes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0403 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2125*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Lim Cheng Lock) Sir, on 15th January, 1965, the National Trades Union Congress, the Singapore Manufacturers' Association and the Singapore Employers Federation drew up a Charter for Industrial Progress in Singapore. This Charter and a Joint Declaration made by the three organisations was witnessed by the Minister for Finance and the then Minister for Labour. The National Trades Union Congress and the Singapore Employers Federation recognised that, in order to overcome the initial difficulties of our industrialisation programme, the partners in industry, namely, the workers, employers and the Government, must co-operate with one another and pool their efforts together so as to achieve a continuing increase in productivity and output in all industrial enterprises. It was also accepted by the three partners that higher productivity should result in better wages and working conditions, lower prices for consumer goods, continuing expansion of production, capacity and full employment. It was felt that, in order to translate the Charter for Industrial Progress subscribed to by the Employers Federation and the National Trades Union Congress into concrete action which can produce practical results, a Productivity Code of Practice was also drawn up. The Productivity Code of Practice subscribed to by the Singapore Employers Federation and the National Trades Union Congress provides for the establishment of joint Productivity Consultative Councils in industrial establishments employing more than 50 workers.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo - (3) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0403 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2123.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0403 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2121. Sir, this amendment is moved with the intention of eliciting information from the Minister concerned whether he is aware that there are other clubs and organisations catering for the needs of civil servants which also deserve assistance. Sir, I am all for charity and assistance for deserving organisations. Though this sum allocated for the Singapore Civil Service Association is only $200 per month, it is necessary for us to see that it is well spent. My fear is that the Association will not utilise such allocation to expand itself to serve the deserving civil servants for whom it is supposed to cater. As the Association functions today, it caters only for a small group of civil servants who are regular patrons of the Association. The vast majority of civil servants do not even know of the existence of the Association and the facilities offered by it. I feel, therefore, that the Minister in charge of such associations should take a keener interest in this Association and other clubs catering for the needs of our civil servants in order to ensure the wider participation of Government employees in sports and other recreational activities. It may also be necessary to extend token grants to various sports and recreational clubs of other departments.”
“But the situation can be remedied by having an effective training programme for those Government or public officers who come in frequent contact with the public in departments such as Immigration, Work Permit Office, National Registration, Citizenship, the Housing and Development Board, the Public Utilities Board, post offices and other offices where ugly and unpleasant situations may arise through misunderstanding or failure of communication. Sir, the politeness and tactfulness which we associated with the Government in relation to the public about ten years ago when the People's Action Party came to power has now become less noticeable. I am not advocating for one moment that we return to the methods used by the Government then to instil fear in Government employees in order to exact co-operation and courtesy from such officials when dealing with the public. But I do advocate a systematic training programme for officials to be taught the need for courtesy in dealing with the public in so far as it is relevant to whatever decisions they have to make. It is the invariable practice in Government departments for officers to give a curt refusal to requests or inquiries from the public without any further explanation, thus leaving the members of the public baffled and in the dark. The Staff Training Centre cannot, I feel, do any useful training with only three officials of clerical grade. Either we have a proper Staff Training Centre with the full complement of staff or none at all.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in the course of last year, the Political Study Centre, which was performing somewhat useful functions in orientating the minds of the civil servants in Divisions I and II, was closed down. Perhaps its importance had been reduced as a result of the past good services, or perhaps the new generation of civil servants does not require any political orientation. My point is that the functions of the Staff Training Centre are rather vague. I begin to wonder what kind of staff training can be given by this Centre when it is manned by just one H.E.O., one Executive Officer and one general clerk. By and large, Sir, the civil servants of Singapore deserve praise for their dedication to duty and their willingness to work hard. It is generally accepted that we have one of the best civil services in this region. Our officers are known to be honest, competent and efficient. I have not had any of the experiences that the Member for Delta has. But complaints have quite often been heard of a few Government and statutory board officials for being discourteous when dealing with the public. I admit that dealing with the public especially when one is hard pressed for time can be most exasperating and provocating. Dealing with ordinary people who are not well versed with legislation or government policy and procedure is bound to test the patience of minor officials who come in contact with the public, unless they possess special talent and aptitude for dealing with the public. Such talent and aptitude may not be possessed by all.”
“Sir, can the Minister not use the same yardstick for hawkers plying in the city area and those plying outside the city area? And can he also say whether a hawker in Orchard Road earns just as much as a hawker in the rural area?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as we still have different classes of markets in Singapore, as outlined by the Minister just now, is it not possible also to have different types of hawker pitches, so that the rate for a hawker pitch in Orchard Road or Albert Street will have to be more than that for a hawker pitch in the rural areas where the hawkers do not earn as much?”
“Sir, I know it will not be out of place for me at this juncture to pay a tribute to our last Speaker, Mr P. Coomaraswamy, who has always given us, especially the new Members of Parliament, a helping hand in discharging our duties as Members here. His friendly approach and guidance will always be appreciated by us and we look forward to similar guidance and assistance from you.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, let me join my colleagues who spoke before me in congratulating you on your election to this high office. Sir, in expressing my views, I am sure that I will also be expressing the views of all the Members present here when I say that we have no doubt that the choice of you as Speaker of this House is the most appropriate. Sir, your experience as Deputy Speaker during the past two years will stand you well for the high office that has been entrusted to you. We are aware that your acceptance of this office will mean further sacrifices on your part. Your professional activities as one of our eminent surgeons in Singapore will have to be curtailed. I am sure the House and the people of Singapore will be grateful for the sacrifices that you have agreed to make in accepting the office as Speaker. We are well aware that you will discharge your high office as Speaker of this Parliament most justly and aptly. Sir, in the course of your duties, if you find us Members of the House at fault for lack of understanding of the Standing Orders or making tiresome and boring speeches, I am sure you will bear with us. We are well aware that sometimes some of us ask supplementary questions followed by more supplementary questions. You may sometimes feel like participating in the debate yourself which your high office does not allow you to do so now. Your task is made more difficult by the fact that all of us are Members from one party and, as such, you will have to bear with us, especially the Backbenchers, in sometimes criticising the Government or commending it on any particular issue. With your guidance. I am sure this House will be able to discharge its duties honourably.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill makes several important and desirable amendments to our Income Tax Ordinance. Like the Member for Bras Basah, I am also surprised that these amendments were not thought of very much earlier. For example, tax exemption is to be given in respect of interest derived in Singapore by a non-resident individual. This will encourage him to leave his money here instead of taking it out of Singapore for investment abroad. I am also glad to know that such exemption is to be back-dated to 20th August, 1968. I am also glad to see that the Minister will be given the power to exempt from tax any income received in Singapore from sources outside Singapore. But there is a proviso which specifies that this outside source must come from a country with which there is no arrangement for the avoidance of double taxation. I would be interested to know how many and which are the countries that Singapore has made arrangements with for the avoidance of double taxation. I understand we have such an arrangement with Australia. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are getting closer and closer to Australia in many fields, such as trade and investment. Any Singaporean who has considerable assets in Australia will not bring back to Singapore the income derived from these assets, because if he does so he has to pay income tax in Singapore. Hence, he leaves his assets, whatever they may be, in Australia. What then is the benefit to Singapore? We should be much happier if this particular amendment could be further amended by the deletion of the proviso that limits the Minister's powers of exemption only to countries with which Singapore does not have double taxation agreements. 4.20 p.m.”
“Now that a change of uniform for the police has been enforced, will the Minister also change the uniforms of police cadets in schools who are still using the same old uniforms?”
“In fact, a member of the legal profession in his written submission admitted that if he had committed a crime, he would rather have a jury try his case in the hope that his counsel would either confuse the jurors sufficiently so as to cause them to disagree among themselves, or succeed in setting off an emotional chain reaction by appealing to their pity or sympathy irrespective of the justice of the case. On the other hand, he said, if he were not guilty, he would choose a Judge because, through his experience and training, he would have a greater ability to discern the truth. Sir, I cannot agree with him more after having heard how our, jury system actually functions in practice. The pertinent question to be decided by us is whether jury trial or the abolition of jury trial serves to promote the interest and ideals of justice in actual practice. I am inclined to vote for the second choice and I, therefore, rise in support of the Bill as amended in accordance with the Report of the Select Committee. 5.14 p.m.”
“Sir, you are aware, and as the Minister pointed out earlier, that we need at least a five to two majority to call it a majority decision. The foreman announced that there was an unanimous verdict for culpable homicide and the accused was accordingly sentenced to imprisonment. The interesting point is, we may ask ourselves, what if the voting had taken place differently? If four had voted for murder and three had voted for culpable homicide and if the foreman had announced that there was a verdict of guilty of murder, then the accused would have been sent to the gallows. A grave and irreparable act of injustice would have been done. Another member of the legal profession, who represented the Council of the Singapore Advocates and Solicitors Society, after having heard the recorded testimony of seven jurors, also freely confessed: 'After hearing the tape and reading the transcript that was handed to us, I find the context of the transcript very shocking. Never had I imagined that this was the level of the so-called richer experience and understanding that the juries are being credited with. If this is representative of the whole of the jury system, then I say, Sir, that the jury system is not working at all.' Sir, after having the benefit of hearing some jurors and having read the written representations from members of the legal profession as well as others, I have no doubt whatsoever that the jury system has not worked and will not work properly in Singapore.”
“We were also told by people who had been jurors that one man amongst the jurors can sway the decision of other jurors. Sir, one juror who was so influenced perhaps by the Perry Mason series in our T.V. programmes said that in the case where he was a juror, if it had been tried in an American court the accused would have been acquitted if he had a good lawyer. And this was the very same juror who had voted for a verdict of not guilty. But when he found that there was a tie in the voting, he immediately said to the foreman, "Can I just change my verdict to "Manslaughter"?" Sir, he was convinced the man was not guilty, but on finding that there was a tie in the voting, he immediately decided to vote for a verdict of guilty. The foreman in that case said the juror had changed his mind immediately and the juror himself admitted that it took him about three minutes to change his mind. On his own admission, within three minutes, he had changed his mind from letting a man free to sending him to gaol. Another juror, though she knew that the foreman was going to announce a verdict different from that arrived at by the jurors, disclaimed her responsibility by justifying in her own words:"..if we continued arguing, it would never end." One juror, when asked for her reaction when she heard the incorrect verdict conveyed to the Judge, said, "I think we had done our duty. We had cast our vote and that is that." Sir, an incorrect verdict had been given and this juror maintained that she had done her duty. Sir, in that particular case, as the Minister pointed out earlier, the verdict reached was four in favour of culpable homicide and three in favour of guilty of first-degree murder.”
“We heard that in one case involving special jurors, who were supposed to possess high educational qualifications, the foreman declared the verdict to be unanimous, as the Minister pointed out earlier, when in actual fact there was not even a majority decision. One juror claimed that the accused person should have been acquitted on the grounds of self-defence when neither the prosecution nor the defence ever raised the issue of self-defence, as there was no question of self-defence at all. Another juror admitted that he did not pay much attention to the case. Sir, the language used in our courts is English. We had a special juror who was classified as a special juror because of his educational qualifications and yet who pronounced the word "unanimous" as "universe" and "culpable homicide" which sounded like "cumable suicide". Sir, in the case where the foreman wrongly announced the verdict to the Judge, his fellow jurors did not have any qualms about it but happily went home without attempting to draw the court's attention to the foreman's mistake. One foreman said he was trembling, sweating and was nervous on the day the trial ended. In reply to a question whether he and his fellow jurors were able to follow the evidence, he said about one or two or maybe three did not seem to be able to follow the case properly. A leading criminal lawyer, who also gave oral evidence after hearing the recorded testimony by the jurors, freely confessed that, "I recognise that three out of the seven jurors I heard did not strike me as having the quality for responsible judgment." Sir, if amongst the seven jurors, three did not follow the case properly, I submit it is not worth having jury trials.”
“The Bill as amended now reads as follows: 'Where the two Judges fail to reach an unanimous decision as to the guilt of an accused charged with an offence in respect of which punishment of death is authorised by law, he shall not he convicted of that offence but may, if the two Judges agree, be convicted of any lesser offence of which he could have been charged based on the same facts: Provided that where the failure to reach an unanimous decision as to the guilt of the accused rests on the ground that one of the two Judges has acquitted him by reason of the provisions of section 362 of this Code, then the accused shall not be convicted of the offence with which he has been charged but shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of section 363 of this Code.' In other words, if the two Judges do not unanimously agree on the guilt of the accused, the accused has to be acquitted. With this new amendment, no accused person will be tried twice for the same offence or placed in peril of his life twice as originally proposed in the Bill . Sir, as I have said earlier, the Report o the Select Committee has taken care of both the objections which I raised during the Second Reading of this Bill. Sir, I had the privilege of being a Member of the Select Committee which considered the Bill. After hearing the views expressed by the various persons who gave oral evidence before the Select Committee and reading the representations submitted, I am thoroughly convinced that jury trials are not workable in Singapore. Sir, we also heard oral evidence from some persons who had sat as jurors.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, you may recall that I rose to speak against the Bill on its Second Reading. As a layman, I had certain misgivings and I raised two relevant points to substantiate my objection. The two issues I raised, if I may quote, are as follows: (i) 'Singapore can ill afford the luxury of having three Judges to be fully occupied with one trial;' and (ii) I objected to clause 3 of the Bill which sought to amend Chapter 21, section 178 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Sir, in support of the second point, I also said: 'If three learned Judges cannot arrive at a decision, then I suggest that some doubts have been raised and I feel the case deserves an acquittal, and not another trial before another court, consisting of three Judges of the High Court other than those who had tried him previously.' Sir, the amendments to the Bill as contained in the Report of the Select Committee have, in my view, taken care of the objections that I raised then, instead of the luxury of having three Judges trying one case, now we have the bare necessity of two Judges sitting in one case at a time. In fact, a member of a legal firm which almost exclusively deals with criminal cases has advocated in his written memorandum trial by two Judges instead of three. My objections to clause 3 of the Bill which sought to amend Chapter 21, section 178, have also been met.”
“Sir, I will try. These management corporations are mainly formed for the purpose of maintaining and servicing flats. I would like the Minister to assure us that, as a result of the formation of management corporations, no Housing Board employees will be made redundant. Also, I would like to know whether the Housing and Development Board will be in a position to provide the servicing that they are doing now.”
“This amendment Bill, while it still embodies the principle that the privilege of homeownership is associated with the responsibility of taking charge of the maintenance and servicing facilities through the management corporations by widening the basis for such management corporations, helps to minimise the undesirable effect of the fragmentation of maintenance services. In other words, it prevents mushrooming of management corporations in any one housing estate and, as such, I welcome it. However, I would like to ask the Minister if he can assure the House that, as a result of the formation of such management corporations, the employees in the Housing and Development Board who are at the moment maintaining and servicing the Board flats will not become redundant or, alternatively, would it be possible for the Board to continue providing maintenance and other allied services in the blocks of flats which have been sold to the public by charging the homeowners economic rates for the services so provided. In raising this point, I have also in mind the possibility that gangsters and other anti-social elements may attempt to muscle and cash in on the situation. We are all aware of the racket of swill-collection in the housing estates until the Housing and Development Board completely took charge. Similarly, it has been reported in the press how residents and owners in private housing estates have been held to ransom by contractors who charge extortionate rates for whatever services they perform since other contractors are kept out of the respective estates through fear of the gangster.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the people of Singapore, especially those from the low income group, welcome most heartily the policy of the Government to facilitate the purchase of Housing and Development Board flats through the utilisation of their Central Provident Fund savings. As a result, more and more people have become houseownership conscious and are able to give effect to their desire to become homeowners. Homeownership, however, has given rise to some attendant problems. The maintenance of the blocks of flats purchased by the tenants, for instance, will in due course be entrusted to various co-operative schemes operated by and for the respective homeowners. Sir, at present the maintenance and servicing of Housing and Development Board flats are undertaken by the Board which employs large numbers of workers for such purpose. The sale of the flats under the homeownership scheme and the formation of management corporations to take charge of maintenance, servicing, etc., have resulted in the fragmentation of estates in so far as the Board employees who are responsible for the maintenance and servicing of the flats are concerned. We are all aware of the problems of the rubber estate workers similarly affected by fragmentation of estates in the neighbouring countries. I am afraid our workers in the Housing and Development Board are going to face the same problems as the result of the parcelling out of our housing estates for the purpose of maintenance and servicing.”
“Sir, the Parliamentary Secretary says that we have to offer incentives to attract teachers to attend the special courses in subjects that do not appeal to them. Does he mean that it is only the bonus which attracts the teachers to attend these courses?”
“Sir, is the Parliamentary Secretary saying that only subjects that are "hot favourites" attract teachers to attend these in-service courses?”
“Sir, my supplementary question is also in parts. First, can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education explain why 17 teachers have taken more than one such in-service course? Second, the Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that, as far as possible, those who took additional courses teach the subjects in which they have been trained. Can he categorically state that these teachers teach the subjects in which they have been trained? Third, in what form is the bonus scheme going to replace the incremental credit scheme?”
“Sir, will the Minister at least consider the waiving of these charges for cases which are in receipt of public assistance from the Social Welfare Department?”
“Does the Minister consider the charges of 80 cents and $1.50 for the second and third visits respectively merely to remove a dressing justified?”
“Sir, the question is: will the Land Office accept or just consider the report'?”
“Sir, will the compensation given when Government acquires land be extended to tenants as well as sub-tenants of houses which are affected as a result of acquisition by Government?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe the Enforcement Section was closed down in 1959 as a result of allegations against it. Is there a move by the Ministry to employ vehicle inspectors to see that taxi-drivers do not refuse a passenger's fare if he wants to go only a short distance?”
“Sir, can the Parliamentary Secretary enlighten. me on what the "special circumstances" are before an officer is entitled to a second loan?”
“Sir, it is not a question of exchanging a house. What would be the answer in the case of an officer who having had a housing loan now sells the house with the intention of buying another?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I too have to seek the Minister's indulgence in asking one pertinent question for clarification. Under the Constitution (Amendment) Bill - at page 2 -it is provided in clause (2) of the new Article 52B that temporary High Court Judges can be appointed. Can these temporary High Court Judges hear criminal cases where the penalty is death? If so, do they have the protection provided under the new Article 52F in the Constitution (Amendment) Bill? 3.45 p.m.”
“I would have thought that the replacement of a jury of seven laymen by a panel of three Judges who represent the top of the legal profession would have further obviated the necessity of a second trial. Sir, it is gratifying to know that the Bill is going to a Select Committee and I have no doubt that the Committee, as the Minister has given the assurance, will give every consideration to the constructive suggestions and objections raised by any interested party. 2.46 p.m.”
“We have known in practice in all criminal cases where the punishment of death is authorised by law, that the trial may spread over a number of days and that this Bill, when it becomes law, will have the effect of causing not one but three Judges to be tied up during the course of the trial. Knowing that there is a shortage of High Court Judges at this juncture, it would appear that Singapore can ill afford the luxury of having three Judges to be fully occupied with one trial. Even if we increase the number of Judges, I fear that the Bill will bring about a long back-log of court cases and consequently justice could not be meted out as expeditiously as it should be. Let me now refer to clause 3 of the Bill which seeks to amend Chapter 21, section 178 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Subsection (3) of the proposed section 178 reads as follows: 'If the three Judges of the High Court are unable to arrive at a decision either unanimously or by majority, the court may acquit the accused or discharge him, such discharge not amounting to an acquittal; in either case the accused may be tried before another court consisting of three Judges of the High Court other than those who had tried him previously.' Sir, if three learned Judges cannot arrive at a decision, then I suggest that some doubts have been raised and I feel the case deserves an acquittal, and not another trial before another court, consisting of three Judges of the High Court other than those who had tried him previously. Sir, what happens if the second court is also unable to arrive at a decision either unanimously or by majority? I feel that an important accepted principle is being ignored, namely, that no person should be placed in peril of his life twice.”
“Sir, a pertinent question is, is it solely because this aspect of administration of justice has been left in the hands of seven laymen? Or can it not be, as the Prime Minister once suggested when advocating more equitable salaries for our legal officers in the Government service, that a number of criminals are roaming the streets because of the unrealistic salaries for legal officers which have been responsible for effecting a brain drain from Government service into private practice, leaving, as it were, the Attorney-General's Chambers with the second best? Even though the position may have shown improvement recently, the few good legal officers in the legal service are not able to cope with the number of criminal cases on their hands. It stands to reason that a Deputy Public Prosecutor who has to handle several cases at one and the same time cannot devote the same amount of time and attention as opposing counsel may be able to do in a particular case. Mr Speaker, Sir, when speaking on this Bill, we must not forget that in many countries the trend of public opinion is against capital punishment and this Bill is only applicable to cases in respect of capital offences. The effect of this Bill is tantamount to the facilitation of capital punishment in Singapore. The point I wish to make is that just as there are authorities and learned opinions which have been cited in this House by the proponents of the Bill in favour of abolition of trial by jury, there are equally authoritative and learned opinions to the effect that capital punishment is not a solution to the problem of criminal and anti-social behaviour. Sir, let me now refer to the practical difficulties that we may have to face if this Bill becomes law.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, yesterday we heard the Minister for Law and National Development and my colleagues the Member for Bukit Panjang and the Member for Serangoon Gardens expressing their views as well as their concern about certain portions of the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill. Today we had the opportunity of listening to the Prime Minister himself. All these four Members are from the legal profession and I have no doubt that they are fully conversant with and convinced of what they have expressed in this House. They have quoted authoritative opinions in support of their views. We are also aware that several members of the legal profession in Singapore and the Bar Committee have raised, to quote the Minister for Law, "vociferous objections" to the Bill. Sir, may I express some of the misgivings I have as a layman who has no connection whatsoever with the legal profession. Sir, not too long ago, a Member of Parliament (a colourful personality who is no more with us) in a friendly neighbouring country when referring to another Member of Parliament's interpretation of some law, pointedly stated that just as a person who prescribes medicine without medical qualifications is termed a "quack", similarly, a man without legal training who presumes to analyse legal points is termed a "lawyer burok". At the risk of being disparaged in a similar manner, I feel it is my duty to express the genuine misgivings that the ordinary people may have in regard to this Bill. Sir, the Minister, while outlining the need for the introduction of the Bill, has mentioned that our experiences in the recent past have shown the unreliability of the system of trial by jury where persons who should have been convicted had instead been acquitted.”
“Was there a selection board constituted to select these 2,302 teachers? Did they have any specific qualifications as teachers? Or will the principals' reports on the teachers' work in the classroom, at the end of a certain period of teaching, be taken into consideration in renewing the contracts of the daily-rated teachers?”