S. Dhanabalan
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification. I said in my intervention on Tuesday that the general election is the right forum to determine the electorate's support because it puts the issue in a total and correct context.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with hindsight, of course, we can be very wise. But since one of the three islands was excluded, it was a substantial reduction in the scope of works. The assessment then, which I agreed with, was that if you called for a re-tender, you would get a substantially reduced tender.”
“To the extent that we can, we should work with countries that have a common interest, to come together and form economic groupings targeted at trade liberalisation. We have started this process within ASEAN under the AFTA Scheme. Economic linkages in groupings like APEC are also growing in significance.”
“Mr Speaker, all these questions make a lot of sense when the events are finished, and you look back. But the officer looking at the case at that time had to deal with the facts as they were at that time.”
“ASEAN countries agreed to publish all the Inclusions and Exclusions lists, as well as the full list of actual tariff reductions. The ASEAN Secretariat had since followed up and released, as scheduled, on 1st November 1993, the publications showing these lists.”
“Kallang Theatre was closed for five months in 1992 for cyclical maintenance and upgrading costing $3 million. This included a major upgrading of the toilets, recarpeting the auditorium, rewiring and repainting.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,635 lines we hold for S. Dhanabalan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 28 of 33.
“If equality of distribution of earnings is to be realized, and such equitability only exists in the dreamlands of Utopia and we squarely face the universal truth that inequality prevails everywhere, be they in communist or capitalist countries, then let us not strive in search of such Utopia. We narrow the gap in earnings. We enhance the earnings of every group so that, relatively speaking, everyone, every group receives more benefit than what he receives previously. Therefore, Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the fact that democratic socialism, which is our ideology, has already demonstrated that equality of earnings though cannot be eliminated but can be narrowed, it is better that we shoulder the responsibility of sustaining this ideology. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, in order to achieve this objective, we should ensure that we do not implement policies that will blunt the spirit of endeavour and creative action in order to enhance the nation's wealth. We have heard the Member for Geylang Serai talk about the limitations which hinder distribution of earnings in that manner amongst workers and small employers by criticising the ill-effects of the Skills Development Fund to the small entrepreneurs. The second point, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that we should do this by ensuring that it does not alienate the lower strata of society from the mainstream of national development. These two factors should be our responsibility. In addition, it is our duty to preserve the bond and spirit of consultation between trade unions, employers and government. This tripartite nexus must be preserved because it is only through this mode that we can protect workers from exploitation.”
“So, although I am unlucky, because I can only afford to stay in Britain for three months, yet I have a much clearer picture of events that occurred between April and July last year. If the Member's son had been communicating with him, surely he must have been informed that it was not just the coal miners who went on strike between April and July last year. When I was there, nurses, teachers, postmen, bus drivers, train drivers, all downed tools. All this happened in three months. This is the type of industrial relationship advocated by the Member for Anson as a means whereby workers can earn more rewards in order that inequality of earnings can be remedied. I request the Member for Anson to think very carefully. If the one-year strike in Britain has resulted in the coal-mining industry suffering a loss amounting to billions of dollars, what would happen if our bus workers went on strike for one year? I am sure he is not inconvenienced because he moves around in cars. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is in the interests of Singapore to create a mature society that can enjoy enhanced and more equitable earnings. But these increased earnings must be based on the principle that each is rewarded according to his contribution to the economy of Singapore. We should uphold this principle. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not in our interests to give hand-outs to the people by way of social security or food because this will render the soul of the recipients sluggish, and they will become utterly dependent on charity. What is worse, Mr Speaker, Sir, this will create a crutch mentality and in the long term the recipient will lose his self-respect as a human being.”
“The Member for Anson has alleged that this Parliament does not mirror the wishes of the people to air their views freely. Is the presence of two Opposition MPs in this House today not the result of the decision of the people taken last December to voice their views freely? Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member also looked at the equality of distribution of a country's wealth from the point of view of the relationship between the trade unions and employers. He alleges that the trade unions in Singapore have become the tools of and are under the shackles of the Government. This is not a new allegation and it has been bandied about ad nauseam. However, what I wish to point out to this House, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that from the remarks made by the Member for Anson, it is obvious that he advocates Whitehall and Westminster type of trade unions, without the slightest consideration for Singapore's different cultural and environmental factors. Therefore, it requires a totally different approach. However, he is confident that the problem of unequal earnings in Singapore, Mr Speaker, Sir, can be resolved by clothing our National Trades Union Congress with the coat worn by the Trade Union Congress. I think the Member for Kuo Chuan has smothered well the arguments of the Member for Anson, when he stated that during his two-year stay in Britain, strikes occurred with its attendant ill-effects. I may not be fortunate enough to be able to stay for two years in Britain; and much more unfortunate when compared to the son of the Member for Anson who was in Britain for many years. I am sure he has been in contact, by lefters, with his son.”
“I think, Mr Speaker, Sir, the fact that so many Members spoke about the lot of these people in the lower strata of society does not mean that what they talked about was pre-arranged. MPs of the ruling party do not sit together to discuss who should say what. Their comments, which have been made spontaneously, are a manifestation, are solid evidence that we are caring, and that is the PAP. Mr Speaker, Sir, to come back to the "Ideals, Interests and Responsibilities" issue, names like Plato, Karl Marx, Lenin, Mao, Abraham Lincoln, Rousseau, John Locke, Jeremy Bentham, James Mill and many other thinkers are not unfamiliar to us. These men have studied the problems of distribution of wealth of a nation. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, although we may be impressed by the idealistic ideas expounded as to how the distribution of wealth to the people could be effected, the fact remains that there is a vast gap between the ideal and its implementation. The two factors are two different things altogether. Therefore, since we have seen many analyses concerning unequal distribution in this country, I am equally concerned. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an oddity to me to hear the views put forward by the Member for Anson who looks at the distribution of earnings of this country from two angles. Firstly, his view that this Parliament should become the sounding board of the nation. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think there is no need for the Member for Anson to mince his words. We have seen how several Parliaments in Latin America, in Africa, which claim to be genuine Parliaments, in fact Parliaments in the West claiming to be genuine Parliaments that reflect the people's aspirations, have failed to attain the objective of distributing more equitably to the people the wealth of the country.”
“Member for Bukit Merah has made a deeper study into the issue. He raised the question of how the distribution of wealth in the country could be made more fair, more equitable. I support their views. In fact, I am also attracted to the view expressed by the Member for Kampong Ubi who concentrated his discussion on the fact that the majority of those in the 15-20% less fortunate group are Singaporeans of Malay descent. And I agree with his firm stand that while efforts at giving assistance, cooperation and encouragement and efforts to create a positive environment, should be made in order to help this group, they should be made without bringing about a Malay community with a crutch mentality. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Bo Wen, whom I have known for a long time, has used a part of his life-time to study and carry out research on the lot of these people in the lower strata of society and has served them in order to improve their lot. He has spoken in greater depth and has more strongly reflected the desire that attention should be given to this group. And I noticed that the debate shows that talk about the ruling Party being uncaring about the lot of the less forunates, and talk that the ruling PAP is an elitist party, a party that supports the capitalists, that supports the rich, are mere lies, just empty talk. Who says the PAP is not a party for the common man, for the man in the street? I agree with the view of the Member for Ayer Rajah that the PAP is still a party and a government that gives priority to the common man. So, Opposition Members in this House should not claim that they are the genuine champions of the less foilunate group.”
“5% of the voters registered their unhappiness or dissatisfaction with the measures that had been taken by the Government. Now, the new generation leaders have decided to take the luxury ship Singapura into a dock, drain the dock of water and study the ship's hull to see which parts have been damaged. Mr Speaker, Sir, many holes can be seen on the ship's hull, although the holes have been covered by little molluscs. Mr Speaker, Sir, this brings my discussion today to an important topic, one that involves the questions of the "Ideals, Interests and Responsibilities" of a government. A clear understanding of these "Ideals, Interests and Responsibilities" among all Members of this House, including the two Opposition Members, is very important. This is because history has shown that there have been strong and powerful governments which wanted to take their ideals to extremes, to a level of ultraism, to such an extent that in the process they forgot about the national interests, they forgot about the responsibilities that they had to discharge. And so, those governments were destroyed. Not only governments but also whole civilizations have been destroyed because of the failure to realize the barriers that separate "Ideals, Interests and Responsibilities". Mr Speaker, Sir, after hearing the debate on the President's Speech for four days, I have found that seven out of 10 speakers have either directly or indirectly touched on the lot of the 15-20% of Singaporeans who are less fortunate, and various proposals have been put forward on how to remedy the situation. The Member for Teck Ghee has suggested that the Singapore cake be enlarged so that every section of the people will be able to enjoy a slice of the bigger cake. In fact, the hon.”
“If I may expand on the analogy of the ship, with your permission, Mr Speaker, Sir, we will see that on the upper decks we have entrepreneurs whose life is rather well -off - perhaps it is not so well-off now because of the economic slow-down. By the side of the ship are lifeboats which are also beautiful and of the luxury class. They are the skilled workers from abroad, owners of multi-national companies (MNCs) who are able to quickly lower the boats and leave the ship called Singapura if the ship is threatened. On the upper decks of the Singapura are the professionals and the small businessmen, while on the lower decks are the skilled and semi-skilled workers, the nurses, the peons, salesmen and the lower-paid government servants. Mr Speaker, Sir, the results of last December's elections have shown that people in the lower rungs of society who form the lower decks are the people who are most easily affected by any adverse situation. They are the people who will be the first to feel the pinch and the pain, especially when the ship called Singapura is grounded on a sand bank or hits a reef or is caught in a narrow channel. There have been lessons, Mr Speaker, Sir, about the time when the captain on board the ship was unaware that the lower pans of the ship had begun to corrode. He kept sailing the ship. There was a captain who suggested that we build the hold of the ship in compartments so that if one compartment leaks, the whole ship would not sink. Otherwise, if there are leaks in the ship, in the long run the ship would still sink slowly, taking down with it everybody and everything on board. I make this analogy, Mr Speaker, Sir, because in the December general elections 12.”
“Every time the wind changed direction, the course had to be altered and the vessel's bow had to be aimed at a new objective. Whenever there was no wind, the crew would row with full vigour. And the canoe called Singapura moved on. And we moved from an entrepot port to a sea of labour- intensive industrialization. When there was little wind in the sea of labour-intensive industrialization, the canoe was directed at the sea of high-technology industrialization. In making preparations for it, we equipped the crew with special training: we instilled in them the discipline to work hard, we made them aware of the importance of having good work ethics, and we upgraded our capabilities as a financial, communications and information centre. So, Mr Speaker, Sir, from a humble, poor canoe that can easily rot, propelled with nothing else but manual strength and steered by clear thinking, we had a sailing boat and then a schooner, and now we have a well-endowed vessel, propelled by the latest gadgets and managed by computers and the bgst brains from the 16 points of the compass. We get the fuel from investors that we have attracted here and we pump oxygen in the form of skilled workers who are prepared to work hard. We create healthy and constructive labour-management relations. And the ship is managed by a group of young captains who are most capable of running the luxury ship. Behind them is a very skilful old captain who knows full well what types of waves are coming, where the reefs lie and where the dangerous currents are. To ensure that the luxury ship called Singapura would be able to continue its voyage free of any threats, we have our armed forces which can thwart and ward off any threats against the ship.”
“And we are now preparing to face new challenges and shoulder new responsibilities. Continuity in political leadership has been prepared for and with the emergence of a new echelon of leaders who are ready to shoulder new responsibilities, this process will go on. The process of transfer of leadership has begun and we can no longer look back or take a step backwards. The foundation for continued economic growth and development towards a higher level, in the form of such infrastructure as roads, wharves, buildings, a modern communications system and a financial and information centre, has been laid. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Ayer Rajah who moved this motion is a Member who is well-known for his critical attitude and frankness. He has chosen the analogy of the kidney transplant. The Member for Teck Ghee has chosen the bus as an analogy and other Members have used many other analogies. For instance, the Member for Kaki Bukit has used the analogy of a soccer team. The Member for Bukit Merah, who is not here today, Mr Speaker, Sir, chose the analogy of the bicycle to describe Singapore. It seems that I cannot avoid using an analogy myself and I would like to choose the analogy of the ship, and I call that ship, the Ship of Singapore - not TS Singapura - but the ship, Singapura. Singapore can be compared to a ship that has valuable cargoes which have been loaded into it, stage by stage. At first, we only owned a small wooden canoe that drifted in the sea. That smail canoe, in the 1950s, was propelled by sheer determination and the energetic spirit of refusing to stoop to iii-fate that awaited ahead, taking its direction from the stars in the sky and steered by leaders who knew which direction the canoe must take. Singapore in the 1950s was wisely steered.”
“With determined and courageous leaders, bold in making decisions and responsible in making changes and modifications, that dream will become a reality. The President's speech, inter alia, touched on our desire to form what is called the Singapore character that the people want and to attract the young, who will be responsible for the nation in the future, into being involved in the process of development. Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to put those aspirations in their proper perspective by briefly outlining our history, current issues and future challenges so that we would be able to align the action taken to the situation that will arise at that time; because if we want to give substance to our development efforts, we must realize our limitations in the future. Sir, the era of do-or-die struggles in facing crisis after crisis to determine whether we would float and survive as a political entity here or sink in the violent turmoil of history that would leave us severely shattered, the era of a cancerous nation beset with the problems of unemployment that led to communal strife and riots or a nation at peace, the era of a political entity beset with poverty and haunted by a crippled economy in which the people live in squalor shackled by unemployment or one with the people having a proper roof over their heads for shelter, good food, clothing and education, have passed. With firm, farsighted and resolute leadership and endowed with a strategic location, a rather stable regional political situation, we have built up Singapore from the ashes of disunity and the threat of destruction into what we see today. Now, problems pertaining to employment, education, accommodation, food and clothing, which are our basic daily necessities, have been overcome.”
“36 am Encik Yatiman Yusof (Kampong Kembangan)( In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to support the motion of thanks to the President moved by the Member for Ayer Rajah. Sir, the President's speech and the Addenda to the speech clearly put on record the objectives that can be achieved by this Government. The goals are high, noble and meaningful. They are meant not only to maintain what we have achieved but also to improve upon it. More importantly, it spells out the Government's intention to give special attention to the less fortunate - the 15-20% in the lower rungs of our social ladder. To me, the President's speech and the Addenda are important for three reasons. Firstly, they give a vision of the pattern of society; the tempo of life that Singapore will be undergoing, with its own rhythm, in 15 to 25 years' time. Secondly, they reflect the Government's determination to raise the standard of living of the people through improvements in the physical and social infrastructure so that a mature, upright, strong and cohesive society will emerge that will be able to march forward with confidence towards the year 2000 and beyond. At the same time, the society, Mr Speaker, Sir, will be aware of its capabilities. Thirdly, they clearly draw up the course of action to be taken to turn what we regard as a dream into a reality for the next generation. Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to comment on the course of action that has been drawn up and stress the need for mental and attitudinal preparations to be made, so that there will be the correct anitude and mentality, before the longer-term programme is implemented. We have set out our goals. They are very high, but they are not impossible to achieve.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That, not withstanding the Standing Orders, the debate on the motion for an Address of Thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered at the Opening of the First Session continues on Friday, &h March 1985 and, if not concluded earlier, be brought to a conclusion at 12.30 pm at that day's sitting. Mr Speaker, Sir, the President's speech and the debate on it has aroused considerable interest and many Members have indicated that they would like to speak. It appears that not all of them will have an opportunity to speak in the debate if we were to finish the debate today. At the same time, Sir, the Minister for Finance has asked that he be allowed to deliver his Budget statement at 2.30 pm tomorrow. Since we have the morning, we can use it profitably to finish the debate and wind up the debate on the President's address. Thus, I am moving this motion. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the debate on the motion for an Address of Thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered at the Opening of the First Session continues on Friday, 8th March 1985 and, if not concluded earlier, be brought to a conclusion at 12.30 pm at that day's sitting. PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS Debate on the Address (Fifth Allotted Day) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question (1st March, 1985), 'That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:- 'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.".' -[Dr Tan Cheng Bock]. Question again proposed. 11.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present, under Standing Order 33, to move a motion to enable the debate on the President's speech to go on till 12.30 pm tomorrow?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of order. It is not relevant to the original question that was asked in the Order Paper.”
“BILL INTRODUCED ADOPTION OF CHILDREN (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Adoption of Children Act (Chapter 43 of the Revised Edition)" presented by the Minister for Home Affairs and Second Minister for Law (Prof. S. Jayakumar); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS Debate on the Address (Second Allotted Day) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [1st March, 1985], 'That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:- "We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.".' - (Dr Tan Cheng Bock) Question again proposed.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That, at future sittings of this Parliament - (a) questions for oral answer addressed to the Prime Minister shall be taken at 2.30 pm and the provisions of paragraph (2) of Standing Order 21 shall apply mutatis mutandis if any such question is not fully answered or reached by 3.00 pm; and (b) such questions shall be excepted from the provisions of paragraph (2) of Standing Order 86. Mr Speaker, Sir, as the revised times of sitting of Parliament now stand, Questions for Oral Answer by Ministers are taken between 11.00 am and 12.00 noon. This MeanS that if there are questions addressed to the Prime Minister, he has to be here during this period to answer questions. The Prime Minister's work schedule is such that he will find it more convenient to answer questions addressed to him at 2.30 pm. Questions addressed to the Prime Minister may be answered by Ministers in which case, questions would be taken at 11.00 am. But there will be instances where the Prime Minister may want to be personally present to take questions, in which case, he will find it more convenient if these are taken at 2.30 pm. Sir, the Prime Minister has asked if the House agrees that he be allowed to take questions addressed to him at 2.30 pm. As the motion stands, half an hour is allowed for questions addressed to the Prime Minister. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That, at future sittings of this Parliament - (a) questions for oral answer addressed to the Prime Minister shall be taken at 2.30, pm and the provisions of paragraph (2) of Standing Order 21 shall apply mutatis mutandis if any such question is not fully answered or reached by 3.00 pm; and (b) such questions shall be excepted from the provisions of paragraph (2) of Standing Order 86.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, with effect from this day's sitting - (a) every sitting of Parliament shall begin at 11.00 a.m. and the moment of interruption at each sitting shall be 4.30 p.m.; (b) unless Parliament otherwise decides, upon a motion which shall not require notice, every sitting shall be suspended at 1.00 p.m. and shall be resumed at 2.30 p.m.; and (c) references to 3.30 p.m., 6.30 p.m., 7.00 p.m., 7.30 p.m. and 7.45 p.m. in the Standing Orders shall be substituted by references to 12 noon, 3.00 p.m., 3.30 p.m., 4.00 p.m. and 4.15 p.m. respectively. Mr Speaker, Sir, at the last sitting of Parliament when I moved the motion to sit at 11.00 a.m. today, I explained the reasons for this change in time. I do not intend to repeat the reasons. All I want to say is that we will have to have some practice with these revised times. In the light of our experience we may have to change and we may also have to change these times for particular meetings of Parliament. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, with effect from this day's sitting - (a) every sitting of Parliament shall begin at 11.00 a.m. and the moment of interruption at each sitting shall be 4.30 p.m.; (b) unless Parliament otherwise decides, upon a motion which shall not require notice, every sitting shall be suspended at 1.00 p.m. and shall be resumed at 2.30 p.m.; and (c) references to 3.30 pm, 6.30 p.m., 7.00 p.m., 7.30 p.m. and 7.45 p.m. in the Standing Orders shall be substituted by references to 12 noon, 3.00 p.m., 3.30 p.m., 4.00 p.m. and 4.15 p.m. respectively. PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS Debate on the Address (First Allotted Day) 11.04 a.m.”
“To produce the kind of programme that we envisage, SBC will need time to edit and summarize four to five hours of parliamentary business into a 30 to 45-minute programme. Under the present Standing Orders, the House rises at 8.00 pm or 8.30 pm if there is an Adjournment Motion. This gives no time for SBC to edit and produce a programme to go on the air between 9,00 pm and 10.00 pm. It is therefore necessary for sittings of Parliament to be changed. It is proposed that Parliament sits from 11.00 am to 1.00 pm with a break from 1.00 to 2.30 pm for lunch; sittings will resume at 2.30 pm and finish at 4.30 pm. If there is an Adjournment Motion, sittings will carry on to 5.00 pm. Sir, we may have to modify these times in the light of actual experience. When we are more certain about the most suitable time, we can change the Standing Orders.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order No. 1, at its rising today Parliament do stand adjourned till Friday, 1st March, 1985, at 11.00 a.m. and that at the sitting on 1st March, 1985, the moment of interruption shall be 4.30 p.m. Mr Speaker, Sir, this motion is to change the present sitting times of Parliament in the first instance for the meeting on 1st March, 1985, but I shall be giving notice for a motion to change the sitting times for future sittings of Parliament. This change is necessary because we intend to give television coverage of Parliamentary sittings. Parliamentary proceedings will be recorded in full and every evening of the day when Parliament sits, a 30 to 45-minute programme of the day's business will be telecast by SBC. These telecasts will be in English and in Chinese, The general public have been informed about Parliamentary proceedings through the press and through SBC newscast. Except for ceremonial occasions, like the President's Address this evening, the people do not have a direct visual and aural impression of Parliamentary debates. When it is possible for TV to bring events occurring in remote places under very difficult circumstances right into the living room, Parliament cannot continue to ignore taking advantage of TV to communicate with the people. Parliaments in other parts of the world have already started using television. Television coverage will inform Singaporeans not only of the content of Parliamentary proceedings but also the cut and thrust of debate or the lack of it. Reading speeches in cold print is not the same as actually seeing and listening to an argument or an idea being put across. The printed word cannot convey the sincerity, passion and quality of the argument.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek your consent and the general assent of the Members present, under Standing Order 33, to move that, at its rising today, Parliament do stand adjourned till Friday, 1st March, 1985, at 11.00 am and that at the sitting on 1st March, 1985, the moment of interruption shall be 4.30 pm.”
“There is a clearly perceptible change in the complexion of this, the sixth, Parliament compared to the fifth Parliament. We have in the Government benches 24 new Members. We have also two Members from the Opposition parties, the first Opposition Members to be elected in a general election since 1963. To all Members I can do no better than to repeat the advice of the previous Leader of the House, and I quote: "No Member will stray from the straight and narrow path if he always lets his conscience be his guide." Members should speak their minds freely, having the courage to agree and disagree without playing to the gallery. Ministers and office holders expect the most rigorous examination of their policies. They will have a ready ear for suggestions and constructive criticism. They do not claim infallibility. But Members must expect that we will give no quarter in defending policies we believe to be vital for our nation's well-being. It is my pleasure, on behalf of the older Members, to extend a warm welcome to all the new Members. We look forward to their maiden speeches and to their future contributions to this Parliament.”
“May I, on behalf of the Members of this House, extend to you our congratulations on your re-election as Speaker. Sir, you have by now been elected for the fifth time as Speaker of Parliament. You are now in your 1&h year as Speaker, the longest of any Speaker of our Parliament. I do not see your record being broken for a long time to come. You have presided over proceedings in this House and ensured order, decorum and fairness in our business. You have helped in ensuring that debates shed light and not merely generate heat. Some may say that this makes for a dull Parliament. Parliamentary debate is a serious business. We are here to explain, probe, question, defend and criticise laws and policies. What we do here affects the daily life and fortune of our citizens to an extent that many of our citizens may not realize. Thus, while wit, humour, anger (real or feigned) all serve to liven up debate, Parliament is not an institution to provide entertainment. You have been greatly instrumental for upholding the high prestige and distinction of this House. Sir, I cannot let this occasion pass without a few words about the Member for Tanglin who was Leader of the House for 16 years. He has quietly and with a deceptively casual air been a firm Leader of the House. At the last meeting before the dissolution of Parliament, he; asked: "Have you not had enough of me as Leader of the House?" Well, the Prime Minister has heard his hint to want to step down as Leader and I now find myself as the Leader. We shall miss Mr Barker as Leader of the House, but Members can rest assured that he will continue to give us the benefit of his experience and wisdom. It is not by chance that I asked for him to be seated next to me.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not going to answer his first question because I have repeated more than once what the circumstances were. As to his second question, unlike the Member for Anson, the Ministry does not comment on newspaper reports based on reporters' speculations on drafts which were leaked in Manila. The official report was not out until the 24th of October. It was true. Has the Member read the Agrava Report? May I ask him - have you read the Agrava Report?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sorry. We are not here to educate the Member for Anson. If he does not read the newspapers, he is not aware of what was happening in Manila. I think he was not aware because he has never shown any interest in events in the Philippines until he read a report in the Straits Times on the 13th of October, which was based on a draft report and which referred to the information that we had provided the Philippine Embassy here, The very next day, without waiting, he rushed to the nearest phone, I think, and telephoned in a statement saying that he intended to raise this question of the Government. He never showed any interest in the Philippines before, and if he does not know what the circumstances were in the Philippines before Aquino arrived in Manila, then I am afraid this House is not the place where he is going to be educated. He should go and read the newspapers for himself.”
“I have stated clearly what the circumstances were. Surely, circumstances will vary from time to time.”
“Mr Speaker, this is really getting us nowhere.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I find it difficult to explain in any simpler language than what I have said. I have already explained very clearly why and what the circumstances were that led us to giving this information. He says his job is to ask questions. I am quite aware, Sir. One fool can ask more questions than a thousand wisemen can answer. But what is his line? He is trying to imply that there was something underhand about this information that we provided. If that is what he is implying, why does he not say so? I have got an answer to that.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid I cannot explain to the Member in anything other than simple English. I thought I was quite clear. I said we were not asked, and I gave the reason why we gave the information - that it was normal courtesy, since the Philippines is a friendly country, to provide such information in the light of the fact that there was considerable speculation about his arrival in Manila. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member is pursuing a line where he is implying that there was something nefarious to what we have done. If so, he should state so.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, nobody asked us but at that time there was considerable speculation as to when and how Senator Aquino would get into Manila. Since the Philippines is a friendly country, information about the arrival and departure of Aquino was passed on to the Philippine Embassy as normal diplomatic courtesy.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on 19th August 1983, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs informed the Philippine Embassy that it had information that the late Senator Benigno Aquino had arrived in Singapore on 16th August and had already left on the morning of 19th August by Pan-Am bound for Hong Kong, San Francisco and Los Angeles.”
“The proposed merger of the newspaper publishing companies in Singapore was neither directed nor initiated by the Government. When the idea was mooted by the publishing companies, the Government raised no objections. The merger makes sense. The two publishing houses will have to spend $20-30 million a year for the next few years in a long and fierce circulation war. This does not include the capital expenditure of over $50 million on duplicated plant and equipment which will be incurred by both sides. Its outcome will be uncertain. Singapore may at the end of the day still end up with only one newspaper in English and one in Chinese. In April 1982, the newspapers were restructured to ensure the long-term viability of Chinese newspapers and to upgrade the standard of journalism in English newspapers through competition. The objectives remain unchanged. The merger has guaranteed the long-term survival of the Chinese newspapers. The profit made by Lianhe Zaobao within the Singapore News and Publications Limited (SNPL) will be spared the cost of the circulation struggle. The Government still believes that Singapore will be best served by having more than one English newspaper. SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT UNIT 10. Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam asked the Minister for Finance and Minister for Trade and Industry what are the functions and responsibilities of the Social Development Unit and what is the amount of money that has been expended on the work of the Unit since it was set up.”
“You misled the residents of Blair Plain.”
“Yes, Sir. Question put, "That the hour allowed to the Prime Minister for his speech be extended by another 60 minutes."”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the one hour allowed to the Prime Minister for his speech be extended by 60 minutes.”
“Tomorrow, Sir. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Mr S. Dhanabalan]. Adjourned accordingly at Nineteen minutes to Seven o'clock pm.”
“Don't flatter yourself. You can't believe it, can you?”
“Sir, I will ask SBC to consider the suggestion.”
“Sir, it has nothing to do with censorship policy. I think it was purely a decision by SBC based upon consideration on whether it will have an audience. Initially they came to the conclusion that there would not be a sufficiently large audience. But with the start of Channel 12, we have been able to assess more accurately the audience for serious programmes. Yes Minister, for example, may be of great appeal to Members of this House but in general terms it may not be of much appeal to the man-in-the-street. Most of them would not be able to follow a lot of the dialogue. But all the same, SBC has acquired this programme as well as Mind Your Language which, I think, it has already completed the run.”
“The Member may not like the idea of News being interrupted by commercials. I can quite understand because it is something that we are not used to but SBC is very careful in not allowing commercials to break into the major news item. Basically we are trying to divide the News into the hard news and what we call soft news and between the two there is a commercial break. Regarding the Member for Kaki Bukit's comments on improvement of Malay drama, this is something that SBC is constantly paying attention to improve the quality of local drama production, and we do get people from overseas, from Indonesia or Malaysia, in the case of Malay drama, to train. As you know, SBC has set up a training school and quite a vast sum of money has been spent in setting up and staffing this training school. Trainers from outside Singapore, BBC, NHK, Indonesia or Malaysia, have been brought in to improve the production of various local programmes and these include the Malay drama. Improve plot and presentation - yes, of course, that is what we are trying to do. We hope that over time Members will see. sufficient improvement, if not to satisfy them at least to make them grumble less.”
“There may be three minutes of commercials before or after a programme. So the maximum over one hour is 15? minutes, ie, 25%, which of course is a lot for commercials and people may get the impression that they watch more commercials than the programme if they sit through a programme containing 15 minutes of commercials. But this is the maximum and very seldom is this maximum reached. It is reached only during the peak times, which is 7.00 pm to 10.00 pm, just before festivals like Christmas or Chinese New Year. Even during these festival periods the average per hour during peak time of commercials is only about seven to eight minutes. It is about 13% in an hour. Peak time during non-festival periods it is even less. But of course this is the average between 7.00 pm and 10.00 pm. If the most popular programme is sometime between 8.00 pm and 9,00 pm, then there will be more commercials in the 8.00 - 9.00 pm programme than in the other programmes. But still it is subject to the maximum that I mentioned. The trouble is, of course, if somebody is watching a programme, he sees many commercials that it registers and stays in his mind whereas at other times when he watches a programme with few commercials he just does not remember. What sticks in the mind is the irritation of frequent commercial breaks. But there is a limit and SBC tries to keep to its limit. Commercials in the News programme. As you know, the English and Chinese News has now been divided into basically two sections and there is a commercial break between the two. It does not in- terfere with the News and the commercial break does not really exceed two minutes and so far SBC has found this commercial break to be a highly well-paid commercial break. This revenue will be used to produce better programmes.”
“The Member said that he felt that when he watched the show in the theatre the fighting scene was 10 minutes. I think time is very relative, Sir. I do not think he looked at his watch. Probably the scene was so dull that he felt that it was 10 minutes long but the actual cut was only three minutes and SBC just summarized it. Probably it showed the start of the fight and the end of the fight without the in-between. So there is no discrepancy. It is quite normal to have a different standard for films shown over TV and the same film shown in the cinema. As for the Hong Bao Show, I have already explained the general policy towards the telecast of such shows. Members must be aware that SBC just cannot take along its cameras and record a show. It requires a lot of preparation. It requires a lot of extra lighting. What is sufficient lighting for a normal show is not at all sufficient for a TV recording on film. It requires a lot of planning. In the case of the particular show that the Member mentioned, I think SBC's judgement was that the live audience for such a show was not there. In fact, If the live audience was there, I think sponsors would have come up quite readily to pay for sponsorship of such a show. Regarding commercials, of course, this is a perennial complaint and somehow SBC has got to balance the number of commercials and the quality of programme. Less commercials mean less revenue, less revenue means poorer quality programmes. So we cannot have more revenue, better programmes and less commercials. It is not compatible. But somewhere, a balance has got to be struck. In fact, in the case of commercials, there are some very clear guidelines. The maximum period of commercials allowed within a programme of an hour is 12 minutes.”
“In the case of performing talent, a number of SBC programmes, for example, the Variety programme that is telecast five times a week, Live from Studio 1, does in fact use mostly local talent and many of the performers have become quite well known as a result of exposure through this programme. The management of SBC, as any good management, must be aware that communication with the staff and the schemes to motivate staff are very important. SBC is a service organization and more so than organizations that produces some tangible products. It is very important to have the right morale and the right esprit de corps in the organization to be able to produce good programmes, and unless the Member is specific about some failings in communication between the management and staff, I really cannot be more specific in my answer. The Member for Telok Blangah talked about the dearth of good Malay programmes. I think I have already touched on that. Then he talked about the double standards of censorship. He said that there is a dual standard of censorship - one standard for films in the theatres and another for television, This is quite normal. In fact, there is a double standard. Usually films over TV are subject to much more stringent criteria, even for the same film. And this is not peculiar to Singapore. Even other countries have the same approach because TV programmes come right into the homes and are viewed by the family as a whole. Therefore, very often, programmes that are telecast over TV are subject to much more stringent criteria. On the particular episode he quoted, The Golden Swallow fighting scene, I was informed that in fact the cut was only three minutes whereas the impression given was that the cut must be about nine minutes.”
“The lighting was meant for people in the theatre and not for a TV recording with the result that the stage was very dark and one could only see ghostly figures moving around and rather thin reedy music. SBC, in fact, had to cease those broadcasts. And the kind of films that SBC is able to get from some of the other Asian countries is unfortunately of that type, even though they were pro- duced for TV. So if we want to maintain a high standard, we have to depend at the present moment mostly on films from US and Europe. But SBC is constantly trying to get programmes from other sources for Channel 12. The Member for Geylang Serai also raised the question of SBC staff development, and he emphasized that local talent must be given adequate recognition. I do not know whether, when he talked about local talents, he meant performing talents or whether he meant just talent in the general sense of administration and production and so on. But whatever the case may be, of course, SBC tries its best to encourage local talent and to try and use local people wherever they are available. But, as I have pointed out in the past, SBC's primary duty is to produce good programmes, and if this requires recruiting people from abroad we will do so. Wherever local talent is available, we will recruit, train and use local talent. But we must not get our priorities mixed up. SBC is not set up to promote local talent. SBC is set up to produce good programmes to telecast to Singapore audience - educational and entertainment programmes - and if this requires SBC to recruit people from overseas, whether they be performing talents, production or other talents, SBC must be free to do so.”
“In the case of Malay films there is a specific problem, there is just not enough films; whether it is for Channel 8, 5 or 12. The number of Malay films that are being produced every year in Malaysia is very few and, in fact, before November 1983, we could not even really present one film a month without repeating the films. Now SBC has tried to tap the Indonesian market. Films are available but we have to be careful in our selection of films and SBC has been able to telecast more Malay films. So the question of Malay films is rather special. I do not think it is just whether we can get good films for Channel 12. It is a general problem and as and when we can get good films, we will telecast them. Apart from that, I want to take this opportunity to also explain about Channel 12. Apart from films, programmes in other languages or programmes covering other cultures, whether it is Chinese drama, or Chinese music or Indian drama or music, or Malay drama or music, or other Asian programmes, are difficult to come by in quality, both technical and content. I do not want to mention names but we have tested out programmes from various other countries and some of them are really atrociously bad, in terms of presentation. And they just cannot be presented on SBC, if we want to maintain a high standard. 6.15 pm Some of the Members have seen an attempt by SBC to present an opera that was presented locally by the New York Metropolitan Opera Group and SBC tried to film it and telecast it and those who watched it must have noticed how poor the standards were because the lighting was poor.”
“But having said that, when there are particular issues which require to be explained to, say, a Malay audience, we do have a special forum; but of course not as often as some of the Members would like. Again, I must point out that whenever we have these small forums and discussions, they will eat into the other times allocated for Malay programmes. While Members in the House may be very interested in serious programmes, whether it is Malay, Chinese or English, I think we must realize that the general audience in Singapore, the man-in-the-street, may not have the same kind of interest that Members here have in such serious programmes. So to some extent we have also to take into account the audience size for different types of programmes. All the same I do take note of Members' suggestions and I will ask SBC that whenever particular topics come up, we should require explanation to the Malay audience that they should organize seminars or forums. The Member for Geylang Serai raised the question of Channel 12, why it is only in English and whether there is any success in getting programmes in other languages. I think we have explained both in Letters to the Press as well as over Feedback programme on TV and other media to explain why Channel 12 has to depend so much on English programmes. For Channel 12 programmes, the basic criteria is the quality of programmes both technical and content. Unfortunately such programmes are available mostly from the other Asian countries, and some will be screened over Channel 12 over the coming months. We have acquired some Indian films. I think we may also be acquiring some Chinese films, I do not know, But as and when we acquire good films, we will put them over Channel 12.”
“Sir, may 1, first of all, thank the Members who have made very complimentary remarks about SBC. I am sure the staff in SBC would be most encouraged and we also welcome constructive criticisms which will help SBC to improve its programmes; and whatever the Members have pointed out by way of shortcomings and possible improvements, we take it in good spirit. I would first like to take points made by a number of Members about the Malay programmes, the quality of Malay programmes and the call for more Malay programmes of an educational or informational nature. Sir, the first thing to note is that we do not have unlimited time. There is a certain amount of time allocated for English, Chinese, Tamil and Malay programmes. The mix of programmes, even though we have some very good cooks in SBC, cannot really satisfy all palates. If we have more programmes which are serious, eg, forums, seminars, discussions, it will have to mean less entertainment programmes. In spite of this, I must point out that almost 40% of Malay TV telecast time is taken up for informational and educational programmes. This includes, of course, News and occasionally Forums. We do not schedule regular forums and discussions because even with the English or Chinese language broadcast we find that it is very difficult to get people who can discuss a problem in an interesting way and also put across the points in a convincing way. This again goes back to the point that I made previously that we just do not seem to have people who are able to hold the audience before a camera or a mike. And as I said, it may be all to the good because we are just people who are more action-oriented rather than speech-oriented.”
“Sir, I am sure SBC will always welcome contributions from the Ministry of Finance. And at an appropriate time when we do ask, I hope that the Members of this House will support such request. As far as SBC telecasting BEST programmes is concerned, this again comes within the problem of who is to bear the cost. SBC, of course, is prepared to telecast but the cost has got to be borne by somebody. And it is important for good accounting that different Ministries cost carefully whatever programmes they have in mind. If such costing is not done and SBC or some other Ministry not directly related to the activity of the Ministry has to bear the cost, then I think it can distort the assessment of the cost-benefits of a particular programme. All the money whether it is SBC, Ministry of Education or the Ministry of Labour, comes, of course, from a common pool. But it is important that the common pool be allocated according to the functions of different Ministries, When this is sorted out, SBC will be more than prepared to telecast BEST programmes.”
“As the press statement from the Ministry of Culture issued to the public at the time when the decision was made stated, we in fact had a committee of four professional engineers to determine the structural soundness, and unfortunately this committee came to the conclusion that the structure is sub-standard and unsound and does not meet the generally accepted safety factors. I think Members will all agree that under such circumstances it would have been impossible for any responsible government to keep the Theatre open. Any accident would have resulted in a loss of lives which would far exceed anything that Singaporeans have experienced so far including the cable car accident. In addition to the conclusion on the structure of the Theatre, the construction of an elevated eight-lane expressway just in front of the Theatre which will, in fact, eat into quite a bit of the Theatre's present grounds will create such a noise and pollution that the Theatre in fact would become quite unsuitable for staging performances. All the same, Sir, I do take seriously the Member's suggestion that something must be done to retain some reminder of the Theatre as a historical landmark in Singapore's history. We are prepared to make a study to determine the feasibility of preserving the facade of the Theatre. This will, of course, have to depend not only on the engineering and aesthetic aspects but we have also to consider what other alternative uses the site can be put to. If it is not possible to preserve the Theatre facade, we have to find some other way of commemorating the Theatre. Sir, I think I have covered all the points.”
“If the organizer wants such events to be covered in full, either live or recorded, then they will have to get sponsors to meet the cost of both production and air time. In the case of the Ching Gay procession, that is what they did. It is really a question of poor audience size, and whether SBC should undertake the telecasting of such events which cannot be supported by commercial revenue. As I have said, there are events which, in any case, SBC will give extensive coverage even though commercial revenue cannot be obtained because of other over-riding national interests. The Member also asked about SBC turning to the Ministry of Finance for further allocation to buy programmes of an educational nature. In fact, 25% of telecast time is for educational and information programmes. The SBC is able at present within the existing framework of distribution of time for different types of programmes to meet the cost of such educational programmes on its own. 5.45 pm The Member raised one other point on the National Theatre. Sir, it is true that the National Theatre is more than just a building. It was a very important part of nation building and it was one of the first projects in which all members of the public from all walks of life participated. And it forms an important milestone in the building of our national spirit. It is indeed regrettable that we have had to close the Theatre and later demolish. It was not an easy decision to make and it was only made after very careful consideration of the safety and other relevant aspects.”
“The problem arises when we have public events which do not enjoy a sufficiently large audience to attract commercial revenue, or we have public events which are not suitable for commercial sponsorship. Examples of the first type, that is, those which are of national significance, will be events like the National Day Parade and National Day rallies and special speeches by the Prime Minister and so on. They are either not suitable for commercial sponsorship or in some cases they may not even have a large audience. But in such cases the SBC, as one of its functions, will provide full or extended TV coverage and meet all the expenses. There is another category of events which is not of national significance but which evokes national pride or support, crucial national policies. An example of this would be the SAF display. In these cases, the organizers meet the production cost and air time and, in some cases, the organizer is able to obtain a sponsor or sponsors to meet the cost of production as well as air time. In these cases, if the organizer is not able to find sponsors to cover the air time cost, the SBC has been prepared to help by finding sponsors. But there are still other types of events, like the Orchard Road parade or the Ching Gay or the Dragon Boat race, which do not come under any of these categories. They also do not command a large audience because, as I have said at the very beginning, if such events command a larger audience, then there is no problem because we can always get some commercial sponsors. These events will, of course, be covered by SBC in the normal way over its news programme or some magazine programme. But extended live or recorded telecast of such programmes cannot be justified.”