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 8 of 38.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, does the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications and Information and the Minister for the Environment not realize that the answer, as given to this House, means that the Government is unwittingly encouraging our people to eat outside their homes, and thereby do away with the need to cook their food at home, bearing in mind the question of the imponderable when food has to be stacked in the house and, if it need be, to be cooked in the home?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Hon. Minister for the Enyironment two supplementary questions: one in relation to labour and the other in relation to disposal of refuse? With regard to the question of labour, would he enlighten this House as to how his Ministry intends to overcome such a problem, and whether they are overcoming this problem by the construction of another incinerator plant which will eliminate more labour and be able to dispose more refuse? In this respect, we have to bear in mind that another part of the land in Punggol has been acquired for the purpose of trade refuse disposal.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I further ask, in relation to this problem, whether the Parliamentary Secretary is aware that compensation to the pig farmers - if it is not relevant, Sir, I may be out of order - who have tried to comply with the policy of installing pig waste treatment plants has not been adequate? Dr Lee Boon Yang: Mr Speaker, Sir, the policy of encouraging pig farmers to set up waste treatment plants was rescinded sometime last year, and since then farmers who had embarked on such a programme and had incurred expenses were invited to submit their claims for a reimbursement of those expenses. This Ministry is still in the final stages of coming to an agreement with a small number of farmers who have not accepted in full the offer of payment by our Ministry. I would like to say that, overall, more than 90% of the farmers who have incurred such expenses have already come to an agreement with our Ministry with regard to the quantum of compensation for the cost that they have incurred. Mr Heng Chiang Meng rose ---”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications and Information and the Minister for the Environment, how long it will take his Ministry, ie, the Ministry of the Environment, to consider this implementation plan; when will this plan be implemented, and whether he is aware that the answer he has given does not explicitly cover the main question that I posed?”
“There are avenues of appeal and that is where I suppose, without casting aspersions, Sir, and with due respect to members of the legal profession, they make good money because appeals one after another means more money for them. But are we here to discuss a serious business? We have got a problem in hand. Do we go about tackling this business in the right way? We must not be emotional. He said, "Look, we are tampering with the courts." I do not see anything wrong. Parliament is supreme and Parliament has the right to lay down the necessary prescription if it cures. On that note, Sir, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak.”
“Minister clearly indicate that with the passing of the amendment Bill, will it not incur the Government in any extra financial expenditure? If it does, how much will it involve? Will there be a need to set up more prisons? With due respect, Sir, this will have to be the case. I hope the Hon. Minister will take note. If it is necessary, we will have to come back again to Parliament to further amend the Penal Code so that Singapore can be a more peaceful place to live in. We have more than 2 1/2 million tourists coming here. We have got people all over the place looking at Singapore. We have got so many people living in high-rise buildings and they make use of lifts with no lift attendants. I am quite sure the Police Force numbering, I suppose, less than 10,000 cannot be everywhere doing vertical policing, horizontal policing, on the beat, Koban footpatrol or radio patrol. The number will be hardly sufficient. So what else? Use the big stick. I fully subscribe to what the Minister says. Crime does not pay and it must be seen that crime does not pay. For example, some years back when we were debating on the misuse of drugs when we introduced capital punishment, some so-called liberal Westernized countries said that Singapore was very harsh. We pressed on. A few got hanged. I think Singapore is no more a place for drug traffickers because they know that it does not pay. When caught, their life is gone. Even that, it took us some while. I raised this matter before, Mr Speaker, Sir, asking the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs how many have been convicted and how many have been hanged. He explained to this House that it took a few years: because our legal system is hinged to the British legal system.”
“This is only a matter of sentences. So I have nothing to quarrel about. But I am very concerned, Sir, with Annex B of Table 2. One has only got to take a look at the average sentence, say, for robbery. On the one hand, the maximum prison sentence in law for robbery is 10 years; armed robbery also 10 years. But from 1976 to 1983, the average sentence for robbery is 32.3 months. And the proposed minimum prison sentence is two years. If committed between 7 pm and 7 am, it is three years. I think it is too lenient. We must rid the society of this menace and make a more deterrent sentence. I may be wrong. I stand corrected. When these criminals are sentenced, the Hon. Minister just now made mention that they undergo a period of corrective training or rehabilitation. But I take it that they would not serve the full sentence of two or three years if they behave well in prison. If that is the case, I would insist that if a person is sentenced to three years, he should serve three years and not be let off after 18 months for good conduct. And this is reflected, Mr Speaker, Sir, in Table 4, Annex D. Recidivism or the Relapse Rate by Length of Sentence. For the short-term - it is below 6 months and 6-12 months - the relapse rate is 33.2%. For the long-term - 1-10 years and above, 27.9%. In simple arithmetic, hon. Members of the House, the relapse rate is much too high. I share the sentiments expressed by my good friend, the hon. Member for Chong Boon, when he posed the question on the explanatory note governing the expenditure of public money. It says: This Bill will not involve the Government in any extra financial expenditure.' I have my doubts, Sir. Can the Hon.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in full support of the amendment Bill moved by the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs. First, at the outset, may I say that I am no lawyer, neither am I a student of law. But I cannot agree with the Member for Anson for what he has said pertaining to the right of Parliament to prescribe the necessary laws for the Judiciary to act upon. The Legislature must in the interests of the people and the country prescribe the necessary forms of punishment for the gravity of crimes com mined in which the Judiciary would then decide. Until proven guilty, a person is innocent and when he is found guilty for whatever offences, this amendment is most timely and I give it my full support. The mere fact that we have offences defined and very aptly described in the various Tables which I had the opportunity to take a cursory look, and then a serious look, frightens me, Sir. The sentences are inadequate. From the year 1978 to 1983 every type of offence that has been committed shows an increase. Please bear in mind that today we have more than 70% of our population living in high-rise buildings, in HDB flats, with no lift attendants. I am very alarmed, Sir, for example, in the case of outrage of modesty, 1978 to 1983, over a span of five years, it increased by more than 100%, from 205 to 460. Snatch thefts rose from 490 to 1,057. So I repeat, the mere fact that we have the offences defined by an Act of Parliament which also provides for punishment means that these are matters in which Parliament must lay down the policy for the courts. I grant that the Judiciary is independent of Parliament in this respect and it is with due respect that I make these remarks. The determination of guilt or innocence of an accused person rests in the hands of the Judiciary.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, while those farmers affected would be grateful to the Hon. First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education for his generous reply, I would like to ask him whether other TOL holders of medium-sized pig farms, who are now not affected by this scheme but who may be affected at some future date by land acquisition for development purposes, would also enjoy similar resettlement benefits?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, two supplementary questions. First, out of the 157 graduate mothers who applied under this priority scheme Phase 1A, could the Minister of State enlighten this House as to the number who would qualify to have their third child under this Phase 1A scheme? Secondly, could he also enlighten this House on the number of those graduate mothers who have only two children and who have registered under Phase 1 B with the Ministry, and how many of them qualify under this scheme?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, since only 92 of the 403 students who went to the Ministry for counselling, went for the 'A' level, would the Ministry consider giving those students who have got a better chance to take the 'A' level and then go to the university, more opportunities and encouraging them at the same time? In this respect, what steps are being taken to encourage them, instead of the other way round where more of the students who are not able to secure a place in the polytechnics go to the 'A' level instead?”
“The other point I wish to make, Sir, concerns the publicity that has been made to the pronouncements made by some Ministers that Singapore should develop itself into a brain and services centre. Hence the question I posed. With these remarks, Sir, may I come to some of the clauses in the Bill. While I am in general agreement with Part Ill which concerns the functions and powers of the Authority, I am a little bit concerned about clause 7. This refers to the powers of the Authority. It seems to me that the powers vested in the Authority are excessive and vast. In other words, the Authority has all-embracing powers to deal with matters pertaining to civil aviation. I have no wish to go into the details except to point out that whilst clause 7(2) of the Bill gives "the Minister power to delegate to the Authority any of his functions and powers under the Air Navigation Act or the subsidiary legislation made thereunder", clause 9 (Directions by the Minister) appears to me to be some kind of a safeguard. I do wish to seek an assurance from the Minister that the Authority, when set up, would not go into joint ventures which, on surface, appear to be profitable. This, to my mind, should only be done where there are compelling reasons for the Authority to be involved in such joint ventures and where it concerns only civil aviation matters. Finally, having looked at the other Parts and clauses as well as the Schedules to the Bill, and despite the fact that I am not a lawyer, may I say that the Bill, to my mind, has been well drafted. Hence I give it my support.”
“The modern facilities that Changi Airport has today bear testimony to this achievement and I think both Singaporeans and Singapore are proud of this achievement. Also, I note with satisfaction the efficient service that the airport provides to the air travellers, both local and foreign. Everybody knows that Changi Air- port is a very busy airport and it has become a centre of civil aviation in this part of the world. Having said this, Sir, I must hasten to add that, to my mind, there is still room for improvement at the airport. Without going into the details, unless the Minister so desires, I wish to point out one or two areas where there is room for improvement. One area is the present terminal building. I will zero in to the departure lounge and the unused spaces that also have central air-conditioning. To me, this is surely a waste and I think this Government is well-known for making optimum use not only of Singapore's land but also of whatever limited resources we have. I draw this illustration to highlight the need for optimum use of our resources, especially when the Minister said about the need to build a second runway and also a second terminal building. I hope the Authority, when set up, would look into this question, as it would have sufficient experience in overcoming problems at the present terminal building before proceeding with the second terminal building. Sir, it is also very evident from what I could gather from the Minister's statement that Singapore has considerable expertise in the field of civil aviation. May I ask the Minister to enlighten the House whether such expertise would, if sought, be made available to countries that are interested, with a view to assisting these countries.”
“Can the Minister enlighten the House how would such staff, ie the reduced staff, be able to cope with the three large statutory boards which give employment to some 6,000 to 8,000 employees per board? Sir, just now the Minister pointed out that there will be greater efficiency, if I got him right, in the Authority when established, so as to be able to cater to and meet the needs of the challenges in civil aviation in the foreseeable future. Before I go into the details of the Bill, I would like to ask the Minister the reasons as to why at the moment, Government is unable to ascertain its involvement in extra financial expenditure, as stated in the Bill. Where is the difficulty? Here, I would like to refer to Part VI of the Bill which touches on transfer of assets and liabilities and of employees and which are covered in clauses 20 to 27 inclusive. It is very clear in this part of the Bill, Sir, that Government has to pump in more money into the Authority to complete the second runway and to build the second terminal building. Sir, I am sure the House is well aware of the vast sums of money that Government has spent in the building and construction of the Changi Airport. With the remarkable progress and technological advancement in civil aviation that has been achieved in the last three decades or so, may I say that this is by no means an achievement not without problems. I remember the humble beginnings at Kallang and Paya Lebar Airports. Then there was the extension to the runway at Paya Lebar Airport and the building of the second runway that was aborted and which culminated in the building and construction of Changi Airport.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have listened with a great deal of attention and interest to what the Acting Minister for Communications said just now, when he advanced the reasons for moving the Second Reading of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore Bill. Sir, while I fully understand the rationale for the need to establish the Civil Aviation Authority, I am not very convinced, in fact, I am a little concerned about certain aspects. I would therefore like to seek some clarifications from him. With regard to the establishment of such an authority, I would like to ask him whether there are other more compelling or cogent reasons for this Bill. In asking this question, I note with a little bit of apprehension that the size of the Ministry of Communications will be greatly reduced. As far as I know, there are three large statutory boards under the Ministry. They are the Port of Singapore Authority, the Telecommunications Authority of Singapore which recently had the Postal Services Department merged into it, and the Mass Rapid Transit Corporation. In other words, Sir, those on the staff establishment in the Ministry of Communications have to be transferred to these statutory bodies, thereby greatly reducing the staff in his Ministry. Sir, I would like to correlate here by making mention of the Government's vigorous stress on the need to increase productivity, which has now become a national movement. I am just wondering whether such a move to establish the new Authority could affect the efficiency and productivity in the Ministry of Communications, as a result. Inevitably so, with such a greatly reduced staff in the Ministry.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Minister give an assurance that these flats which have got some defects in construction are safe?”
“On a point of order, Sir. Who at the back said it was Vietnam?”
“To ask the Minister for Home Affairs if he will give the reasons for launching Operation Senjata and an evaluation of the operation, and whether the publicity which accompanied the operation was necessary.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, does not the Hon. Minister for the Environment and Minister for Communications as well as my good friend, the hon. Member for Tanah Merah, agree that this foul air from pig farms does not come from Punggol alone as there are pig farms located elsewhere?”
“(8) That the sum to be allocated for Head V be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead VC-04 Object Group 3310 of the Main Estimates.”
“(14) That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TH-03 Project 8301 of the Development Estimates. (15) That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TH-06 of the Development Estimates.”
“(13) That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TG-02 of the Development Estimates.”
“(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TA-01 Project 201 of the Development Estimates. (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TA-03 of the Main Estimates.”
“(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead PC-02 Project 8103 of the Development Estimates. (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead PF-01 of the Development Estimates.”
“PART-TIME WORK IN CIVIL SERVICE (Scheme for married women) 2. Dr Ang Kok Peng asked the Minister for Finance how successful has been the scheme to encourage non-working married women to work part-time in the Civil Service, and what are the jobs performed by the majority of these pan-time workers.”
“Question No. 1, Sir. The Minister of State of Education (Dr Tay Eng Soon) (for the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is untrue that students who fail to obtain a credit in EL1 but obtain good results in other subjects are denied admission to Pre-university classes, the two Polytechnics and VITB institutes. The Ministry allows students who fail to obtain a credit in EL1 but who have done well in other subjects to join the Pre-university courses. Those who obtain 15 points or better in five subjects, i.e. in EL1 plus four other subjects, are admitted to the 3-year course at Pre-U centres. Amongst this group, those who do especially well in three relevant subjects are allowed to join the 2-year course in junior colleges. At the Pre-U centres, students are given supplementary English lessons to improve their English and two years in which to resit their EL1 examination. The purpose is to give good students who are weak in English as much opportunity as possible to get through the Pre-U course. In 1980, there were 45 such students, out of a total intake of 8,580 into Pre-university classes. In 1981, there were 67 out of 8,040 and in 1982, there were 136 out of 7,717. The majority of such students are able to pass EL1. For the 1980 batch, for example, more than 70% passed their EL1. As for the Singapore Polytechnic, Ngee Ann Polytechnic and VITB, the majority of their courses require only a Grade 7 or 8 in either EL1 or EL2 as admission requirements. Both Polytechnics provide English Language proficiency classes to help their students. The only courses that require a credit in English at these institutions are those that require a high level of language proficiency such as Business Studies and Computer Studies.”
“Sir, will the counter measures enumerated by the Hon. Minister of State not be sufficient to check increases in sniffing?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I must thank the Hon. Minister for his clarification. But the point here still is that inflation cost about $3.27 million. That is inescapable, is it not? Therefore, one last question before I consider withdrawing my amendment. The work will start in November 1983 and be completed in 1985. Will this appropriation of $4 million be sufficient for FY 83? For FY 84 and FY 85, what would the appropriations be, to top it up to $12.886 million?”
“Sir, I am unable to accept that kind of explanation. If the Parliamentary Secretary were to simply say there had been a gross under-estimation of this project, I am prepared to accept and withdraw my amendment. But under the circumstances, it proves my suspicion of $12.886 million against the original estimated cost of $6.5 million. Was it because if the Ministry had asked for $12.886 million, the Finance Ministry would not have given and therefore it might as well come down to a more realistic figure? Or commit the Finance Ministry to $6.5 million, and then when you get things going, say you are short of this, or did not look for this, or we did not gather that and therefore we are committed to another $6.4 million. Is that the position?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will take up the point concerning inflation which the Parliamentary Secretary has pointed out was $3.267 million. Am I correct before I go on, that the inflation is $3.267 million? That would bring me to this question of under-estimation. How can inflation be $3.267 million, please?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JC-02 of the Development Estimates. Sir, this amendment under Facilitation Services concerns a vote for the conversion of the Kallang Theatre into a theatre cum concert hall. The original total project cost is $12.8 million, and for FY 83 a sum of $4 million has been sought. 7.45 p.m. I would like to ask the Minister concerned three simple questions for clarification. What will be the seating capacity and its use after conversion, and the type of performances that will be staged in the theatre? Will these be cultural or purely entertainment oriented? Secondly, I must say that it appears to me that there has been some apparent delay in this conversion project. If so and if my suspicion is correct, may this House be informed of the reason for this apparent delay? Thirdly, is there any escalation in the cost of conversion? I suspect that there is, and if that is the case, was it due to sheer inflation or was it because of an error in the estimates?”
“Sir, I thank the Minister of State for his reply, though not unsatisfactory. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. In the absence of Dr Lau Teik Soon, the following amendment standing in his name was not proceeded with: (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead J B-04 of the Main Estimates.”
“The press also understand their handicap and both sides are working along the right lines. Given time, we should be able to extend our tentacles, if the Member would permit me to use this word, to the various ministries, through the PROs, to take advantage of the media to project the functions of any particular ministry. The Ministry of Culture can play a supportive role. We shall try, within our means, to re-amplify and re-state certain Government policies, or schemes, if we detect any misunderstanding or insufficient explanation being given. I think the Mirror has done very well since its reorganization. It has got a new format, new contents. If Members had read the Straits Times a few days ago, they would have read the article regarding the public affairs quiz organized by the People's Association. If I may just quote the Straits Times, March 15, section 2, page 1: 'Ask the teams which took part last year for their information sources and they will list newspapers, [of course], in particular The Straits Times [of course again], as their daily staple. They also swear by two Government publications, The Mirror and Singapore Facts and Figures. Unputdownable [I do not know whether there is such a word] they stress.' - They cannot put it down. Both publications are by the Ministry of Culture. We hope through different approaches, different publications, to drive home our points to the people.”
“There are people who are too busy with their own indulgence, but we shall try to reach out to as many of the people as we can through our publications, our photo boxes, our newsletters and other forms of publicity materials. Each Ministry has its own little propaganda machinery, not specialized ones, though, but they do have them. The Minis- try of Culture's role is to supplement their efforts. We are very conscious of the publicity efforts of the various ministries, and it is for that reason that we established the scheme of the Public Relations Officers (PRO) in the ministries. We have some difficulties in recruitment. The staffing position of the Division has improved. Unfortunately, this is a very rare breed of people. They should have the right aptitude, the right type of calibre to take on the job. As a temporary measure, ministries have appointed senior officers to double up as Public Relations Officers. This is not the ideal position. The PROs ought to be trained by the Ministry of Culture's Information Division and, thereafter, deployed to the ministries. But even with this lack of what the Member would regard as professionalism, I should like to congratulate these PROs. They have done exceedingly well in spite of their handicap. My feedback is that there has been a great improvement in the ministries' relationship with the press. There is a better flow of information between the ministries' PROs and the media in Singapore. It can be further improved. We have also managed to remove a certain amount of fear the PROs in particular, and the civil servants in general, have of the media. Perhaps the media has projected itself as a formidable monster hounding for Government news. However, the PROs have helped to ease the situation.”
“For instance, the Mirror, the Singapore Bulletin, the Year Book and a number of other publications, are also circulated overseas as this will help, we hope, to contribute towards creating the right impression that Singapore is a place of political and economic stability, and to instil greater confidence and better understanding among the investors because, if they want to invest in Singapore, the first to be consulted would be the banks, their embassies, rather than reading the Mirror or any other publications. But these publications will help to project the proper image to the right kind of people in their own social circle and would enhance our position. We will bear that in mind. We will have to devote the greater part of our effort towards creating the kind of social awareness, social values, and norms which our people should acquire. For instance, on the question of Confucian Ethics or Teaching, we have done our share in translating the very lengthy articles, views, opinions and transcripts for publication in the various media. The most important thing is to project our people - the kind of people that we want to mould - as a disciplined society, a people with the right values. In other words, to establish the basic norms. Performances are but forms expressing the norms. So the publicity effort will be directed to this end. The next question raised by the Member is that we should complement the Ministry of Education, which has a captive audience, so to speak, in the students, and the Ministry of Culture's role is to look after the working people. This is a valid point and we are doing precisely that. But we cannot hope to harness the whole of the population.”
“It must also be understood that the means and the methods of convincing people are a specialized discipline which may not be found in the various Ministries. In fact, this skill is not expected to be among those disciplines required in the discharge of the normal functions of the Ministries. Maj Fong Sip Chee: Sir, I thank the Member for his concern on this aspect of the work of the Ministry of Culture. But I would like to state at the outset that the primary function of the Ministry is to look after the people of Singapore who are, so to speak, our target groups. Now, international publicity, particularly to attract investments and higher technological skills and industries to be established here, is really the function of the Economic Development Board and that of the Ministry of Trade and Industry. They have been very positive and pretty successful over the years in attracting investments and the right type of industries to be established in Singapore. The Ministry of Culture can only perform a supplementary role. In view of the priority of our work, we will have to devote our attention, firstly, to our people right here, at home. We do have certain publications which are directed at the international audiences. However, they are really incidental. They are really meant for Singaporeans.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JB-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, in moving this amendment I wish to seek some clarification from the Minister. This is a very important Head, Information Programme. The objective is, "to publicize and explain Government policies and programmes." Therefore, I would come straight to the point and ask the Hon. Minister the following questions: 7.30 p.m. (1) In view of the new economic direction that Singapore has decided to pursue, particularly the policies on the promotion of external trade and the industrialization programme, has the Ministry drawn up any programme of international publicity to attract foreign investors to establish higher technological industries in Singapore? Such publicity could project Singapore as a country enjoying social, economic and political stability and a trainable workforce ready to acquire higher technological skills. (2) Taking cognizance of the present context of Singapore society and conscious of the cultural, social and moral fibres of our people, ought the Ministry not adopt a more active approach in the dissemination of various values beneficial to our people? (3) Whilst the Ministry of Education discharges its role in disseminating these values through the schools where the students are captive audience, it is the responsibility of the Ministry of Culture to reach out to the working people in this regard. (4) The Ministry does not appear to have done enough in complementing and supplementing the publicity efforts of other Ministries in the explanation of projects and policies of the other Ministries. It is true that the other Ministries may have their own publicity programmes.”
“(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JB-01 of the Main Estimates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, what about the other end of it, i.e. those with higher education?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, is it not true, and I wonder if the Minister is aware, that this particular group of people who regard National Ser- vice as a waste of time includes the so-called intelligentsia, the well educated?”
“(12) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead ME-02 Project 8101 of the Development Estimates. (13) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead ME-02 Project 8102 of the Development Estimates.”
“(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead M D-02 Project 8113 of the Development Estimates, (10) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead M D-02 Project 8120 of the Development Estimates.”
“(11) That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead NG-01 Project 8101 of the Development Estimates. The sum of $2,387,730,820 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $1,647,199,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates, Head M -”
“Sir, may I know from the Hon. Minister of State how often are these traffic counts conducted, and when was the most recent traffic count conducted for this stretch of road?”
“Sir, in view of the small class size and the additional facilities that are being provided in aided SAP schools, would the hon. Minister of State of Education consider giving them enhanced capitation grants for them to meet the higher recurrent cost?”
“(13) That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead LE-01 Object Group 3310 of the Main Estimates. The sum of $1,152,444,500 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $567,967,400 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.”
“(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead LD-01 Object Group 3310 of the Main Estimates. Encik Wan Hussin Zoohri: (10) That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead LD-02 Object Group 2510 of the Main Estimates.”
“Does the Ministry feel that the annual youth festival has outlived its purpose? The Minister of State, Sir, is shaking his head. On that note, I am willing to give a listening ear.”
“Sir, I fully share the sentiments expressed by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Minister for Culture because I too see no valid reason why these three items, (5), (6) and (7) under Object Group 2610, Extra-Curricular Activities, are not given any provision. The sums for last year, as I can see, Sir, only amount to about $65,000. But what I am saying is that the Ministry owes this House a full explanation, not only enlightenment but an explanation as to why these three items have been taken out.”
“Sir, can the Minister of State enlighten this House which are the five aided-schools that he has mentioned have moved into new Government schools?”