Ng Kah Ting
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I ask my supplementary question, may I declare, on behalf of the Member for Kebun Baru and myself, that we are both involved in the building of Montfort Secondary School and Montfort Junior School both of which are Government-aided schools. My question now, Sir, is: when will this take effect?”
“But, Sir, at the end of this debate on the Second Reading and the Bill committed to a Select Committee, I sincerely hope that all those who have the interest of Singapore at heart should come forward and make their contributions, be they critical or ways and means on how better we can improve upon this Bill.”
“But the basic foundation, I submit, and that is, the political stability-honest, efficient and an incorruptible political leadership-is paramount to the future well-being of Singapore, and that is, if we are to continue to enjoy our good standard of living, our good government and of course as an independent, sovereign entity or nation.”
“Sir, I knew that the NCMP would come out and say that-don't mix up the ISA with PPSO because basically it is the same. I say, no. Because in 1958, PAP was not in power. It was the Lim Yew Hock government. That is the difference I am trying to make. So let us not go around in this wild political rhetoric. I understand that.”
“Sir, before I make my observations, I just want to make a couple of points in reply to the Non-Constituency MP, Dr Lee. He said that in 1958 when he was asked to stand as a PAP candidate in Kallang he was afraid of the ISA. I do not think that is quite correct because in 1958, Sir, there was no ISA.”
“We should take advantage of the present political stability to provide for the future. In conclusion, Sir, let me draw an analogy. With Singapore being the No. 1 port in the world, this analogy is not inappropriate.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,870 lines we hold for Ng Kah Ting, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 36 of 38.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to give my full support to this amendment Bill moved by the Minister for Law and National Development. Sir, it is a pity that this Bill should have been tabled today. It should have been tabled much earlier when anti-national elements went on a wild rampage to destroy public property and caused fear and insecurity to the people of the Republic. Sir, the agitators behind such wild mobs are cowards. They remain behind plotting and prodding young innocent school children to agitate against all sorts of amendments introduced in Parliament. Actually, it is a disguise. Some time ago, the Barisan Sosialis decided to take up the political struggle outside Parliament when they called on their Members to resign. To me, this is an evil design. They hope to build up an atmosphere on which the pro-Communists and Communists hope to capitalise and ultimately seize power on an unconstitutional basis. Regarding the riots that have taken place over the last few months, one can easily see that young innocent school children are being used - children who have too low a mentality to distinguish between right and wrong and between what can be done and what cannot be done. One can also see that the real persons behind such acts of vandalism should come forward and not stay behind and merely act as operators. I brand these persons as sheer cowards. They try to provoke our police. I was told that in the incident yesterday outside the premises of the Fourth Magistrate's Court our police officers were not only jeered at but were also kicked with the aim of provoking them into stronger action against innocent children who were being made use of by sinister people behind the scenes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, could the Minister tell me the cost of the railings that have been erected? Mr Barker: I am afraid I have not got the particulars of the cost of the railings, but I will be happy to send them on to the Member for Punggol. FLOODED AREAS (Reasons for, and preventive measures) 17. Mr P. Govindaswamy asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he can state the reasons for the recent floods in areas which were not subject to floods some years back, and what steps will be taken to prevent further flooding in such areas.”
“Sir, I was just elaborating on this point in clause 28 which brings in the question of a period of seven years - a sort of separation before a divorce is granted. I say: no divorce at all.”
“Never mind whether there are any children or not, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Affairs has pointed out. Surely in a marriage there is always the hope of begetting children, and I am very correct here. The other point is: once a divorce is granted, as I have said, the children will suffer and not the parents. If they do get a divorce and go their own way thereafter, they can, after all, look for new pastures! Sir, these are the points I wish to make, and I am strongly against this idea of divorce. A marriage is for good. It is a river of no return. Once you plunge into it, you either sink or swim.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to take up one point on the question of divorce. From the Report of the Select Committee which met several times, we see that other points on the amendment were not raised except this question of how a divorce should be granted. I for one am strongly against divorce. This question centres on two persons. Before a marriage is contracted, the two parties must fully understand and realise the heavy responsibilities of parenthood. The upbringing of their children lies solely with them. If they could not get along together and want to go their own way for their own convenience, then do they or do they not think that the children would be the first to suffer?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we all know that rice and sugar are very important commodities in the livelihood of the people of Singapore. In that respect, will the Government consider ways and means of preserving stable prices for rice and sugar so that the people will not suffer from any reflection upwards or downwards by way of prices?”
“Very true. Mr S. Rajoo (Farrer Park) rose -”
“Therefore, the recommendations of the Commission to embody in the Constitution the protection of the rights of life and personal liberty of the individual, the prohibition of slavery of all forms and of forced labour, the protection against retrospective criminal laws and repeated trials, equality of all persons before the law, prohibition of banishment and freedom of movement, freedom of speech, assembly, association and religion, are all very important characteristics of a true democracy. The fact that the Government will ensure that steps will be taken to incorporate them in the Constitution is another sign that it is practising democracy in spite of the overwhelming majority it has in Parliament. This should dispel the fears of the evils of Singapore having a one-party system. This will be the necessary guarantee to every individual of his rightful place here. However, I must stress strongly that this society will collapse if the people, especially certain sections, continue to exploit this issue in spite of the vigorous steps the Government is taking to ensure a fair deal to all. Therefore, the need for building an organised society out of peoples of varied migrant origins is a heavy task. But I am positive that with patience and tolerance amongst the people, this organised society, built upon multi-racialism, will ultimately emerge and Singapore will be a showpiece, not only in South-east Asia, but also in the world where everyone enjoys equal franchise. Sir, I give my support to the motion as moved by the Minister for Law. 2.55 p.m.”
“In regard to the recommendation for the setting up of the Council of State, it is noticed that the main support for the creation of this Council rests on the fact that there is no effective or responsible Opposition in Parliament. As I have already stated earlier, this surely reflects on the confidence of the people in the Government to legislate honestly, fairly and reasonably in the public interest. Sir, may I also point out that we still have the Select Committees of Parliament which always invite constructive and well-informed criticisms or amendments to measures proposed in Parliament. If the setting up of the Council of State would not only be too expensive, it would, in effect, only serve to delay the passage of Bills. And if the Council is to be set up, it would, to my mind, tend to become somewhat like an Upper House where its composition is made up of non-elected members. They would likely become more or less the Senate, though their duties would be purely advisory. Though the Council would sit in private, still its reports on the deliberations on the Bills referred to them would have to be presented to Parliament. Is it intended that the Council of State replaces the Select Committees which Sit in public to hear public views? However, if its sole function is merely to advise, then I see no reason why it should be so set up, for the Select Committees would serve a more useful purpose as they stand. Next, I refer to the question of protection of fundamental rights and freedom of the individual. Sir, if we are to continue to have democracy, then this question is of paramount importance to all citizens, including individuals.”
“That would come later in the Council. Even the Ombudsman can be fallible, and to err is human. However, with three persons in office, the administration may be slower but it would definitely and positively be surer and more reliable in consequence. For all practical purposes, when one Ombudsman has to conduct investigations and make public his findings, it would be from one viewpoint, from one angle. However, if there is a committee of three, the findings then would be a consensus of or a majority of opinion amongst three, and this would be more reliable. And as the complaints would fall broadly within the two categories mentioned in the Report, I think one man's view, opinion or decision varies with another, and this depends on how the facts are presented; also the emphasis on which the Ombudsman relies before he exercises his discretionary powers, if at all discretionary powers and decisions are subject to investigation by the office of the Ombudsman, as stated in the Report. But I would like to emphasise that there exists in Singapore a department that deals with public inquiries and complaints. The Central Complaints Bureau is, in fact, doing a fine job, for on many occasions I had to refer to this department complaints which I felt should be attended to by it, and I am happy to say that all have been dealt with satisfactorily. Therefore, the suspicion that the complaints would not be properly investigated does not arise. However, if the committee, as I have suggested, is to be set up at all, may I suggest that the members be drawn from people of high calibre and eminence in public administration, and who are not members of any political party, and for that matter, are non-partisans in political affairs?”
“Therefore, this purely reflects the confidence of the people in the Government to legislate honestly, fairly and reasonably in the interests of all concerned. If the existence of a one-party State is brought about, as it is likely to happen, then it is no fault of the P.A.P. nor of the people. It is the will of the people. We must not forget, Mr Speaker, Sir, that there is still the Opposition in this House, because the P.A.P. has not got all the 51 seats. Two hon. Members are absent and their whereabouts are unknown. Why they choose to be so is for them, and them only, to answer. I cannot answer for them. However, I must stress that the P.A.P. wants Opposition, and we the Backbenchers will play this role well. Be that as it may, Sir, we will not abdicate our responsibility and we will continue to serve the people to the best of our ability, come what may. Let me come to the first point, the office of Ombudsman. I refer to the vast powers which the Ombudsman has, as recommended in the Commission's Report. I am inclined to agree to this office, but I would like to make a suggestion. I would propose that, instead of vesting vast powers in one person alone, which would not serve a useful purpose, a committee of three be set up with each taking turns as Chairman and serving a minimum period of, say, three years. Sir, the general belief is that two heads are better than one, and I think three heads well screwed on their shoulders, so to speak, would make the office more formidable and less fallible.”
“We have a President who is a Malay; the Executive comprising the main races of which the Prime Minister is a Chinese; the Judiciary of which the Chief Justice is a Chinese; the Commissioner of Police who is a Eurasian; and not forgetting that the Speaker of Parliament is an Indian; the Army Commander is a Eurasian; and in the Civil Service the heads are made up of citizens of the various races. Sir, I can go on and point out many others. Suffice it to say that it is not and never will be the P.A.P.'s policy to be dictatorial as long as it is entrusted to look after the interests of the nation. I think this is sufficient enough to show to the world that Singapore is truly a multi-racial society, truly practising democracy. We are not like some countries which talk of multi-racialism and yet practise feudalism. Another point on parliamentary democracy is that we still have the one-man-one-vote system. We have the Parliamentary elections once every five years, and whenever vacancies occur in Parliament they are at once filled through the by-elections. Therefore, how can people say that there is no parliamentary democracy in Singapore? I think that these people ought to have their heads examined. The Government is elected by the people, and the only reason I can think of why the people of Singapore keep on returning P.A.P. candidates at the various by-elections, even though they know full well that the P.A.P. already has more than two-thirds majority in Parliament, is that the P.A.P. is the only political Party that can provide a clean and honest leadership and also maintain this progressive society whereby everyone is able to have a happy life.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I take this opportunity to echo the Government's appreciation of the highly commendable Report presented to Parliament by the Constitutional Commission, 1966? I have read and studied the Report thoroughly, and I must say that it is one of the best Reports ever presented. I am, however, particularly happy to note that the Government has given very careful consideration to the Report and that most of the recommendations are acceptable though a few are not, while there are other recommendations which the Government agrees in principle but differs in detail. Therefore, Sir, allow me to make a few observations on the various headings. There are (1) the Ombudsman (or the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration; (2) the Council of State; and (3) the Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the Individual. Before touching on the office of the Ombudsman, I would like to refer to the fears expressed in some quarters that the country is heading in the direction of being a one-party State. According to them, this is not good for a country and would in the end lead to a dictatorship or a totalitarian government. To dispel their fears, may I ask these people one important question? Whether or not the P.A.P. Government is, in fact, practising parliamentary democracy? The Government is essentially democratic socialist and it is, in fact, practising parliamentary democracy.”
“--- or $60,000 to be more correct, then in 1968, 1969 and 1970, Kampong Kembangan will still get a sum similar to that allocated for this year. I am not trying to support the Parliamentary Secretary, but I am just trying to clarify one point. As it stands over a period of years, I am sure that not only the Constituency of Kampong Kembangan but also the outlying areas wilt ultimately benefit. As was said, "Rome was not built in one day." I am sure that all Members will have beaming faces in this House when, after a period of five years, they can stand up and say, "Well, I have done a good job because over this period of years, big rural development projects have been carried out systematically in my constituency."”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to take up one or two points on what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development has said just now. How is the allocation of funds to constituencies arrived at? I believe there is a scheme whereby such allocation of funds is to be extended over a period of, say, six years. Therefore, if, for example, Kampong Kembangan were to be allocated $90,000 this year --- An hon. Member: $60,000.”
“Furthermore, if national service continues for ten years during which time an organised society will emerge, Singapore then will be a changed place where her citizens will not only live in confidence and pride but the Republic will also last as long as time. Therefore, in summing up, I would urge all youths who are liable to be called up to rise at once with one voice and respond to this call of duty to the nation. 3.15 p.m.”
“It is a well-known fact that if a country shows verve, grit and determination to survive, she will not be molested. The stakes will be too high and the price too heavy to pay if we are a passive lot. Moreover, the character of our community is such that Singapore is a rootless society. Her races are of varied migrant origins. Those who came to Singapore more than a century ago did not intend to make Singapore their home and country. But they have, over a period of more than a century, left behind well over two million people who today make up the population of the Republic of Singapore. The rootless and disorganised society of yesterday will thus have to be an organised society of today. This is unique in the history of Singapore. As I have said, we are now independent and I am sure that all will agree with me when I say that there is no place for us to go to if we are told off by a stronger neighbour. Hence the paramount importance of our Republic to organise a society in which there exists a sense of social responsibility and national consciousness. So national service will be implemented in the very near future. I do not think anybody today in Singapore will be against it. More than a decade ago, people did not understand the reasons for such service, and thus the Communists were able to exploit the issue, resulting in the call-up being a failure. Today the situation is entirely changed. For instance, young men and women have responded far beyond expectations by joining the People's Defence Force and the People's Defence Force (Women). I would therefore suggest to the Minister concerned to increase the intake to, say, 50 per cent instead of 10 per cent of the youths to be called up.”
“It has been suggested that Vigilante Corps members be paid a token sum of money as enjoyed by volunteers in the Special Constabulary and the People's Defence Force. I support this suggestion and no doubt the Minister concerned may argue and say that the Vigilante Corps members enjoy a wider range of recreational facilities. But I must stress that the other forces have such facilities, too. Moreover, service in the Vigilante Corps would be national service, too, and I think it is only fair that those who would be required to serve in the Vigilante Corps be paid a nominal sum when they go on duty. Sir, coming back to the Bill in general, we all know that national service exists in almost all countries in the world. It is the fundamental responsibility of every citizen to answer the call of national service, if we do not take the necessary steps to protect ourselves from the enemies of our nation in order to be able to live in peace and security, I do not think anybody, or any country for that matter, can guarantee our freedom, unless we wish to be subjects of another country! I do not think this is what the people of Singapore want! Singapore, being a small independent country, stands on the southern tip of the Malay Peninsula and it is situated in a position of immense strategic importance. Therefore, it is only right and in the interests of the people and country that we must never allow ourselves to be caught unprepared, as what happened in the Second World War when the Japanese invaded Singapore. Hence the necessity of having a body of disciplined fighting force able to rotect life and property and most important of all - the survival of the country -the existence of this tiny island State in this corner of the turbulent world.”
“And for those in the higher institutions of learning, would it not be feasible to group these conscripts and place them under centralised training at a place closer to them whereby minimum time is spent on transport so that no cause for complaint would arise on the question of their studies being hampered or impeded because they have to spend much time in travelling to and from their place of training? This aspect of training, of course, refers to military training for which allowances are paid to cover transport charges and laundry charges for uniforms issued. However, as the Bill clearly states, persons "not being less than eighteen years of age" and who are liable to register under this Ordinance shall be liable to be called up for service in the Vigilante Corps. We all know the usefulness of the Vigilante Corps and the notable work they have done in the past 2« years. The Government, whilst realising the importance of the Vigilante Corps, has seen fit to include service in it as part and parcel of national service. I gather that the Vigilante Corps have been formed at community centre levels and that their duties are mainly to patrol the kampongs and along the shores. These members are doing an admirable job and we have come across occasions when Vigilante Corps members have helped to apprehend burglars and thieves, prevented illegal immigrants and performed a host of public-spirited duties. They are doing this purely on a voluntary basis and this displays a high spirit of social responsibility. It is also manifest that they are not paid any allowance when they go on duty except when the management committees of community centres have to foot the bill for coffee and titbits.”
“According to this Bill, 18 year-olds would be required to serve two years full-time and twelve years part-time. I am glad to note that jobs would be awaiting them upon their completion of the two-year full-time service. This is noteworthy in that it gives security to these youths who will not be unduly worried over employment when called upon to serve the country for two years full-time and ultimately twelve years part-time. However, I would be grateful if the Minister would kindly inform this House how many youths would the ten per cent constitute, and what expenditure would be expended on this matter. Furthermore, would it not be wiser if the Government, instead of calling up the 18 year-olds, extend the age group, say, from 18 to 25? I am suggesting this because, in this way, we would be able to equip our youths with the necessary training by which the development of spirit, bearing and skill would be more beneficial to the country as a whole and in which the spirit of national consciousness would be further instilled. And this would meet the requirement of a small and newly independent nation like Singapore - the preparedness that would ensure the survival and continued progress of the nation. Another point is that we know very well that a good number of these 18 year-olds have left secondary schools and many are pursuing higher education. In this respect, will the Minister concerned see to it that whilst they are undergoing national service, their educational pursuits will not be impeded?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think national service is the necessary preparation through rigid discipline, military or otherwise, of the citizens for duty to the nation. This service in defence of the community undoubtedly can be termed a noble duty. Our Republic, though barely older than two years, has made great strides in the housing and industrial fields, and socially, too, has yet to mould a community of varied racial origins into one nation possessing the spirit of national consciousness. However, our assets are the youths and I think the Government has been wise to note this and exploit it to the country's full benefit. The slogan, "The youths of today are the leaders of tomorrow" is particularly true. Through the youths, we must cultivate national consciousness and other values of social responsibility which are essential and which we desire to instill in our entire community. According to the Bill, national service means service in the Army, People's Defence Force, the Special Constabulary and the Vigilante Corps. It also sets out the age groups to be called up and how long they are required to serve full-time as well as part- time. Amongst the number of important amendments to the National Service Ordinance, 1952, of Malaysia in its application to Singapore is one in which powers will be vested in the Minister who may "from time to time, by notice in the Gazette" call up youths for national service. Therefore, any proclamation for call-up would be done by the Minister instead of the President being required to proclaim it. I shall be glad if the Minister of Defence can explain why such a prerogative will now be vested in him. My next point is about the age groups to be called up.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State of Defence whether he is aware that permission has been sought to permit those wives of Chinese immigrants who have been separated from their husbands who came to Singapore, say, in 1947, to enter Singapore and whether consideration would be given to them?”
“I understand there was a case not very long ago where a civil servant died as a result of an operation. No doubt, Sir, there was no negligence involved. But, sad to say, although his family got some money, they suffered a bigger loss in monetary returns and security. So our civil servants, in the course of their duties, especially those who meet with a fatal accident or who contract a dangerous illness, will not be able to continue to give their expected quality of service. Therefore, Sir, I hope the Minister will consider my suggestion to institute a sort of health insurance scheme for civil servants. 5.00 p.m. Mr Lingam rose -”
“The recent one, Sir. He replied to various supplementary questions in regard to the eradication of the rampant mosquito menace in our Republic. Sir, up till today I am not very satisfied with his answers. He was more or less dodging a direct answer all the time in spite of being faced with a direct question. I hope our Minister today can clarify this matter in regard to the setting up of the Anti-mosquito Unit to eradicate the mosquito menace. Sir, my second point is in regard to our civil service. I think this House will agree with me that our civil service is, in fact, one of the best in this part of the world. I am happy to note that we have one senior civil servant present in this House. The civil servants have rendered loyal and dedicated service, but in the course of discharging their services, some of them have broken down, just as motor-car engines do. Sir, I understand that a number of civil servants, having contracted sickness like cancer and heart trouble, have to go overseas for treatment, not because we cannot treat them here but because the facilities here, I understand, are still inadequate. No doubt, we have the Institute of Medical Research well in hand. Still, life is more precious than wealth. Therefore, these civil servants who are seriously sick will inevitably have to leave our shore to seek treatment elsewhere. Sir, I was wondering whether the Minister will come to the rescue by considering whether or not to provide such civil servants passages to whichever country they wish to go for treatment and also allowances for such treatment. My last point is this. I wonder whether our Government will institute some sort of health insurance scheme for our civil servants.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to take this opportunity to raise three points. First, a couple of days ago we had occasion to hear our No. 2 Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health. I do not know how to refer to him, Sir. The Chairman: One solution would be to refer to either the more recent one or the older one.”
“I will probably speak for five minutes. Sir, I would like to make a few points. My first point is this. I believe it is our intention to hold the Secondary IV (English stream) examination and mark the papers locally. This examination is commonly known as the Cambridge School Certificate Examination. Some time ago, we heard pronouncements about the setting up of a Local Examinations Syndicate, but up to now this has not materialised. I would like to know whether plans are already under way to carry out such a project. The second point is in respect of the way the Primary School Leaving Examination is held. Papers are given to Primary VI students requiring them to choose the correct answer from several given answers. I think this system is not a sound one, because a student who does not know the correct answer can simply make a wild guess. I have heard of cases where students simply cast lots for the answers. I wish to suggest that another system be considered whereby school-leavers in the primary stream will be examined and tested on what they have studied. The last point is this. I suggest to the Minister concerned that the entire school curriculum should be revised. We are a young independent nation and it is our intention to give equal opportunities to one and all, irrespective of race, language or religion. Sir, in view of the changed circumstances and our objective to build a robust and rugged society within the framework of democratic socialist principles, I think the entire school curriculum should be thoroughly revised and that a committee, comprising eminent educationists, be set up so as to work out a new curriculum for all schools. By that, I am sure, Sir, our objectives will be met. 3.30 p.m.”
“I want to ask just one question. Just now our Prime Minister has mentioned that there is a grant of £50 sterling per annum attached to these President's Scholars; for example, those who won other scholarships besides winning the President's scholarship. I think £50 per annum would be round about $425 Singapore currency. So in my view, to win the President's scholarship is, in fact, a high honour to a brilliant student. I was wondering how this £50 per annum would help towards maintaining a student in the pursuit of his studies in a university.”
“That is why you have taken a long time to give each house a number.”
“In view of the Government's intention to provide water facilities to all houses, whether numbered or unnumbered, I would like to know how will the water services be made available to those unauthorised or unnumbered houses? An hon. Member: How are you going to collect your revenue?”
“Sir, on this question No. 14, the Member for Mountbatten has just now raised a supplementary question on whether the Government will continue to provide stand-pipes, and the Minister has just answered that. So I am putting a follow-up question to the answer.”
“My supplementary is on question No. 14. Sir, just now the Minister has mentioned that water facilities will be available to all -”
“Can I put a supplementary question to the Minister for Law and National Development?”
“On a point of clarification. My question was put across because the Parliamentary Secretary failed to give me a satisfactory answer in this respect - his answer states clearly that the Punggol Citizens Consultative Committee will be consulted. So I was asking for an assurance that the Member for the constituency will also be consulted.”
“A supplementary question. Will the Parliamentary Secretary assure me that before any consideration for commencement can be got from the Punggol Citizens Consultative Committee, the Member for the constituency will also be consulted? It looks as if the Punggol Citizens Consultative Committee will be consulted and not the Member for that constituency. An hon. Member: Hear, hear!”
“This could be due to a change of address.”
“Sir, I am sure it is not the Government's intention to inhibit the progress of farming activities in our Republic. Therefore, instead of decreasing the size of resettled land to be allocated, which is not more than two acres, I appeal to the Minister concerned to take a more realistic policy on the resettlement of the farmers. I am sure this House will bear with me if I stress that the farmers in the Republic play an important role in our country's struggle for survival. They toil all day to produce as much agricultural produce as possible to help feed many of our people. They produce large quantities of eggs, poultry, pigs and a good variety of vegetables. By so doing, they contribute in no small measure towards providing these essential commodities for a good part of our population. Lastly, Sir, realising the importance of the role played by the farmers, I would like to appeal again to the Minister for Law and National Development to look closely into this question of resettling farmers occupying State land with a view to increasing the size of land to be allocated, instead of reducing such plots to not more than two acres, so that the farmers will continue to help feed a good many of us not only in this House but in our Republic.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the resettlement of farmers does not affect my constituency, but since it is in the rural area, I would like to take this opportunity to say a few words. Firstly, I fully support the views expressed by the mover of the motion and several of my colleagues on the resettlement of farmers occupying State land. Sir, the Government has been stressing a great deal on the need to increase productivity, but productivity in this context means increasing industrial produce only. However, in my view, the Government has not made a realistic approach towards encouraging our farmers to increase the output of agricultural produce. From what I gather in regard to the resettlement of farmers, the Government has, in fact, allotted them farm land which is much smaller than the farm land on which they had previously farmed. For example, when a farming area is to be taken over by the Government for public development, the resettlement of farmers will inevitably take place, but instead of allocating them farm land of a similar size, the Government, through the department concerned or the statutory board, has allocated to them small plots of land, thereby reducing their scope to increase their farming activities. I am sure this House will agree with me on this point. When an area is required for public development, and resettlement of farmers takes place, the farmers will have to be moved out to new areas. They will have to start all over again before they can carry on with their normal activities and to reap their harvest. Therefore, with the reduction in the size of their farming lands, they will inevitably reduce their farming activities, thereby resulting in a reduced amount of agricultural produce.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just now the Acting Minister for Labour has mentioned only two or three measures that the Government will be taking to provide more job opportunities for our unemployed citizens. I would like to find out whether there are other measures to be taken, so that the number of unemployed could be reduced to a greater extent rather than introduce only some aspects of it, thereby knocking off, say, 30,000, 50,000 or 60,000 of the total unemployed. Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, the main measures by which we hope to reduce unemployment are those which I have mentioned. I can think of no other measures at the moment. But the hon. Member should be well aware that in Singapore we have three big problems. One is Education, the other Housing, and the third Unemployment. I think we can say without boasting that we have conquered the first two problems, Education and Housing. We are now tackling the third problem and we hope that in a few years we might be able to reduce the number of our unemployed. BAR WAITRESSES (Singapore citizens and non-citizens from West Malaysia) 5. Mr Ho See Beng asked the Minister for Labour if he has information of how many bar waitresses in Singapore are Singapore Citizens, and how many are non-Singapore Citizens from West Malaysia.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a supplementary question. I remember at the last Budget session the Minister concerned replied to my question on this mosquito menace. He did mention that his Ministry was going to set up an Anti-Mosquito Unit. Sir, after a lapse of almost 12 months, I am wondering whether this Unit has, in fact, been set up and whether work has been carried out to eradicate the mosquito menace.”
“In fact, I would say that the land value should be reduced to as low a rate as possible in order to allow the Government to continue to provide such amenities. May I, Sir, stress that we do not wish to favour the land speculators who jump at opportunities when Government projects or public projects are carried out in adjacent lands, thereby helping to boost up the land value! We come from the masses and our obligation is to them and them alone. If we allow these speculators free rein, then chaos and financial difficulties would over-run us all and the Government would then have to dish out enormous sums of money to pay for fantastic sums of compensation to those involved. I think those landowners who are rich must be practical. They should be the first to come forward and assist in nation-building and make some sacrifices, for, as the saying goes, Sir, "It is in the giving that we receive." Let me ask them a question. What would happen to them if the country goes down? Where would their landed properties be then? If they would care to look at certain countries not far from us, they would see my point. Sir, as our main objective is to help establish a more equal and just society, therefore, our declared aim is to acquire lands from time to time which will be developed or utilised for public purposes, say, for example, to build more schools, clinics, more blocks of housing flats, more community centres, veterinary extension centres and many others. Lastly, Sir, I would urge those likely to be affected to think well of others so that the declared aims of the Government can be achieved with as little inconvenience as possible.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, firstly, I would like to associate myself with the views expressed by the Minister. Sir, as I see it, this is a piece of legislation which definitely favours the poor man. This is what we the P.A.P. Government stands for - for the poor man. Let me take an example to substantiate my argument. A few years ago when hell broke loose in the Bukit Ho Swee area where thousands of people were rendered homeless by fire, what did the P.A.P. Government do then? Did the Government just merely say, "Well, we will try to rehouse them." No, far from it, not just trying in that direction. But the Government took immediate steps to provide immediate relief to the homeless. Then the Bukit Ho Swee fire site was acquired and plans to put up decent flats with the necessary social amenities were drawn up and at once implemented. Now, if there had not been any fire and had not the Government acquired this site, today we will not see the beautiful symmetry of a clean and healthy location where numerous blocks of flats for the poor exist. I am sure this House will agree whole-heartedly with me on this matter. The Government, on the one hand, acquires land for community use and those who think they would suffer as a result should retune their minds and look at acquisition as a means of allowing Government to continue to provide the poor with decent homes and better social amenities. On the other hand, the Government, with the people's needs uppermost in its mind, would continue to fulfil its obligations, come whatever the obstacles. I am surprised that those affected are asking for more compensation than what is arrived at by our valuers. They should have been happy with what they are to get.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Finance this question: is it because of the disagreement over the control of this amount of Singapore's reserves that is the cause of the breakdown in negotiations?”
“A supplementary question, Sir. The Parliamentary Secretary talks about Government making plans to resettle these people. More than a year has passed and may I ask when will these plans be ready?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a supplementary question. The Parliamentary Secretary has just mentioned that these people are squatters. I beg to correct him. These people are tenants; they pay rent. But my question is: whether and when will resettlement take place?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to ask two questions. First, if the Malaysian troops continue to occupy our barracks at Camp Temasek, how long does our Minister of Defence expect our own troops to undergo inconvenience and hardship by having to live under canvas at Farrer Park?”
“No, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the explanation clearly given to us by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development, I am fully satisfied and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.”
“What I mean is lining the drains with concrete slabs so that public funds are well spent. I hope the Minister concerned will enlighten me on the points that I have raised. Sir, I beg to move.”
“Sir, I am glad to say that there is another $100,000 to be allocated for electrification schemes in rural constituencies in 1966. There is one little complaint I wish to make here, and that is, there is a big scheme in my area which is split up into three phases. One of the phases extends from the 7th milestone Punggol Road right up to 9� milestone Punggol Road and into Serangoon Kechil. This is where I am concerned. In a certain part of Serangoon Kechil, there are some numbered and unnumbered attap houses whose owners have applied for electricity supply. But, unfortunately, the last electrical post that carries the overhead cable stops at a certain place and, therefore, a few houses have to pay for the extra poles. So petitions were made to me and applications were sent to the Electricity Department. The petitions sent to me were forwarded, but up to now, after a lapse of well over six months, nothing has been done. I would like the Minister concerned to enlighten me on this point. Regarding the question of jetties, I would like to know the number of jetties that are to be constructed in the Islands next year. As regards water supply in Track 13 off Punggol Road, requests for water supply were made in 1963 and again this year. The residents have waited for more than two full years for their request to be acceded to, but unfortunately up to date, no water facilities have been made available to the residents in that area. Regarding minor works in kampong areas, as I have suggested just now, when roads are repaired, it is better that we spend a little more money to metal as many of them as possible and to construct some drains within the sum allocated for this purpose. When I say "construct" drains, I do not mean just earth drains which are covered up after a shower.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head D 08 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 004 of subhead 016. Sir, I wish to obtain your permission to speak on the other three amendments standing in my name as well - that is, item 007*, item 009+ of subhead 016 - The amendments are as follows: *(8) That the sum to be allocated for Head D 08 to be reduced by $10 in respect of item 007 of subhead 016. +(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head D 08 to be reduced by $10 in respect of item 009 of subhead 016. ++(11) That the sum to be allocated for Head D 08 to be reduced by $10 in respect of item 015 of subhead 016.”