S. Rajaratnam
Singapore
“There are two already there! BG Lee Hsien Loong: Well, we see the future before us. The proposal to have a 4% interest rate on HDB loans without a corresponding drop in CPF interest paid on the deposits is the first step to raiding the reserves.”
“This concern for the 15-20% was taken up in the President's Address by the new Cabinet. Many of the new and older MPs who preceded the Member for Queenstown have spoken eloquently and constructively on this subject. Quite a few had come forward with suggestions on how this goal could be achieved and it is constructive criticism.”
“Just two minutes. So the Member for Queenstown ended his vision of the future in what I thought was an apocalyptic note, and I would like to quote, I hope he does not deny this: 'Water [he said] can carry a boat but it can also sink a boat. Respect the people and attend to their needs at all times and the people will carry you far.”
“You will have time. You will be here for four years, five years. Do not worry. If you are serious about alleviating the lot of the less fortunate, then the politics of envy and hypocrisy is the surest way of ensuring that this goal is not reached.”
“It is incredible. He wants us to set the example that he wants to follow, to prove that he is a man who is prepared to render service. He can put us to shame (i do not think he will) by just voluntarily, one-sidedly, unilaterally, as a man of principle, sacrificing $3,000. That is nothing. it's peanuts to him.”
“May I finish my speech? - and which has the distinction of being the first political party in this country or in any other country which has been brought to a state of bankruptcy by a politician.”
The complete record
Every one of 375 lines we hold for S. Rajaratnam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 8.
“I will wait until they have finished speaking.”
“That is one of the cushier jobs which everybody wants, besides being a school attendant or a school sweeper. These are very popular jobs. But unfortunately there are not enough schools or hospitals to accommodate them all. 5.45 p.m. I would therefore suggest that the best thing is that the M.P, concerned should advise his constituents on the employment opportunities available in Singapore rather than that the officers in the Ministry of Labour should do this, because it would be misunderstood that they are uncooperative.”
“I do not know whether that is a feasible or wise suggestion. I am quite sure that some M.P.s will get up next time and ask me why is it that somebody wanted to register for a job as an amah and the application was turned down and a week later there was a vacancy for an amah's job. We cannot plan these things. Everybody is registered. You never know. There might or might not be a job for a white-collar worker. In fact, I am not quite sure about amahs. According to my information, there is a great demand for amahs.”
“These people have therefore rejected offers of jobs or have told the Exchange, "Look, I am still on the register but I would like something that meets my conditions of service." Therefore, they may take that as insufficient attention being paid by the Employment Exchange to their particular needs. Another reason might be that there Is no law to compel employers to make use of the Employment Exchange when vacancies occur in their establishments. As a result, employers prefer to find their own candidates, and not necessarily through the Employment Exchange. So since the beginning of this year, we have amended the law in regard to national servicemen. On the whole, I would say that, as far as I can gather, if applicants have the skills and if the jobs are there, there is no delay and the people are immediately found jobs. But in the case of white-collar workers, I agree - it is a lesson that white-collar workers should take very much to heart -- that there is less demand for them. If they go to the Employment Exchange and if they are offered jobs as factory operatives, suggest very strongly that while they are still young they should take these jobs which are offered to them.”
“I do not know why the salary has been reduced. Probably the incumbent has not reached the appropriate scale or perhaps a new person has taken over. That notwithstanding, we are satisfied that there is no complaint.. With regard to the Member's primary question why there is a long delay in informing people who have been registered with the Employment Exchange, unless I know of~ specific examples, it might be so. But it is not generally true that there is a long delay, especially in view of the considerable shortages in various fields of skills. For example, I understand domestic servants, chauffeurs and persons with this category of skills are snapped up the moment they register. I am told that these are the categories of vacancies which are provided jobs, if not on the spot, then almost within a day or two: firemen, turners, carpenters, masons, dispatch riders, drivers, welders, fitters, pressmen, gardeners, mechanics, boilermakers and so on. But it is true that there is one category of people for whom there is delay simply because nobody wants them. These are the white-collar jobs, especially the clerical section, where there are too many registrants and too few jobs. According to the statistics provided to me, as of 31st December, 1970, there were 8,854 persons registered for white-collar jobs, while in the whole of that year only 182 such vacancies had been notified to the Exchange. The other reason might be that very often people are offered jobs but the applicants have refused them for a variety of reasons. Some of them say that the place of work is too far from their homes, or the nature of `the work is not to their liking, or the salary offered by the employer is not enough.”
“These are some of the measures that the Government are taking. In the past, the problems of industrial accidents were rather neglected in the Labour Ministry's work largely because industrial expansion was rather slow and we were able to cope with these problems in a somewhat leisurely fashion. But since the last four or five years, the very rapid growth, plus the level of skills that our workers are now acquiring, makes it more imperative that greater attention and seriousness should be given to preserving the health and safety of our workers in Singapore.”
“As the Minister of State has just indicated, fundamental amendments are going to be made to the Factory Ordinance. The Bill is practically ready. As far as I know, it has gone to the Attorney-General and once he has vetted the legal aspects of the amended Factory Ordinance, it will come before this House. I cannot give Members the details, but the amendments will provide for stiffer fines for any infringement of the required standards of safety. The amendments will also introduce higher standards of health and welfare required to be provided by employers. Personally, I think one of the areas where high rates of accidents take place is in the construction trade, primarily because of the rapid expansion of this sector of our economy. 5.00 p.m. The Member for Sembawang does not believe in experts. But I fortunately do, because I would rather trust experts than one who claims that he is not an expert. Anyway, a group of people - I do not know whether the Member would consider them as experts but they, I believe, do know about safety regulations - from the National Productivity Centre, the National Safety First Council, the National Trades Union Congress, the Singapore Employers' Federation, the Singapore Manufacturers' Association, the Singapore Medical Association, the Society of Occupational Medicine and the University of Singapore (Faculty of Engineering), have considered this problem and submitted a report largely at the behest of the former Minister for Finance, now the Minister of Defence. They have suggested the formation of a council of industrial safety and health. On the whole, I think, in so far as is humanly possible, their recommendations would probably halt and reduce the alarming rate of growth of industrial accidents in Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will first enlighten the Member for Sembawang. I think he has asked the right question - What are the causes for the rise in the number of industrial accidents? The first reason is the number of factories, which has increased from 3,963 in 1969 to some 4,050 in 1970. The number of machines, steam boilers and other machines involved has, therefore, correspondingly increased. So has the work of industrial employees. I think the figures I have been given indicate that there has been an increase of 22,700 industrial workers during the past year. The frequency of the rates of accidents is about the same. But the fact is that because a larger number of workers are involved, the number of accidents in the factories has tended to increase as compared with 1969. In the year before last there were 1,270 industrial accidents, and in 1970 the number was 1,525. The number of fatal accidents increased from 29 to 36. I agree with the Member for Sembawang that preventive measures can be taken by the Government. But one shortcoming in previous years was the lack of sufficient factory inspectors. However, this year the Ministry has made good this shortcoming and some 27 additional posts have been created in the Factory Inspectorate Section. These new posts, when filled, will enable the Ministry to carry out more frequent and thorough factory inspections. The second reason for the increased number of industrial accidents is that both the employers and the workers themselves have not taken care to observe the factory safety regulations that now exist. I have forgotten the figures, but a majority of the accidents were due to the workers themselves neglecting to observe the safety rules that they were supposed to observe.”
“Sir, as regards when the mission will be established, I can give a fairly reassuring answer to the Member. We hope to establish it some time before June. As to who is likely to be the Ambassador, I think that must remain a top secret. It is the convention that the receiving country should first be told about who is going to be the Ambassador, because if they do reject our appointee, there will be no embarrassment caused all round. So I would suggest to the Member that some time before June he should read the newspapers very carefully, and I am quite sure the secret will be disclosed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Special Make-up Allowance was introduced in August last year with the object of compensating home-based officers whose wives were working in Singapore. Therefore, when they were posted overseas they lost that portion of the remuneration which their wives were enjoying. This necessitated more allocation of funds. At the time the Special Make-up Allowance was created, we were not quite sure how much would be involved. And my Ministry, being rather cautious about these things, did what the Ministry of Finance generally disapproves of. We over-estimated the amount required by a considerable figure. We have learnt from bitter experience since the implementation of the allowance last year, and it is now possible for us to make a more accurate estimate of the amount required. Hence the provision of $21,000-odd for the ensuing year. In fact, at the moment we have only two officers drawing this Special Make-up Allowance, and this explains the drastic drop.”
“But if Britain and other countries which also supply arms to South Africa are intent on supplying arms, I do not see what we can do about it except to express very strong moral opposition to their action.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I thank the Member for Sembawang for suggesting that we should be flexible in our foreign policy. In fact, some people think that we are too flexible, with the result that they do not know what our stand is. This is not a bad position for a country to be in in these very difficult days. In regard to his question whether we intend to set up more foreign missions, the policy of the Government has always been to establish a foreign mission only when there is considerable financial and political justification for it. I think the only foreign mission we might establish this year, in addition to the 13 or 14 missions that we have now will be in the Soviet Union, in view of the fact that the Soviet Union is going to be a factor in this part of the world. I would like to assure the Member that it is possible to have friendly relations with other countries without having foreign missions. In some instances you are more likely to have less friendly relations with countries by having foreign missions there. The Member might know of this if he had read the recent history of this part of the world where foreign missions were burnt down. Therefore, it is not necessary to have foreign missions just for the sake of having friendly relations with the countries concerned. You should only have foreign missions when substantial interest is involved. In regard to the British arms sale to South Africa, of course we are opposed in principle to it because it infringes the United Nations resolution on this matter. We ourselves have condemned it especially when the arms are used for the furtherance of apartheid.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we are prepared to consider anything, but I cannot tell the Member at the moment what the result will be. ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1971, TO 31ST MARCH, 1972 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [1st Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 2.48 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not aware of what the question is!”
“Mr Tay Boon Too asked the Minister for Education whether it is the present practice of his Ministry to consult the union of a teacher before disciplinary proceedings with a view to dismissal are instituted against him, and, if not, whether consideration will be given to adopting this practice. The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Mr Speaker, Sir, disciplinary proceedings with a view to dismissal are regulated by the Public Service (Disciplinary Proceedings) Regulations in the case of teachers in Government schools and by the Schools Regulations and Grant-in-Aid Regulations under the Education Ordinance in the case of aided-school teachers. The Public Service Commission is the final authority for the former and the Director of Education for the latter. In both cases there is no provision for the union of a teacher to be consulted before action is taken. The extreme penalty of dismissal is not exercised lightly. It is resorted to only when the offence is severe enough to justify its imposition and when there is sufficient evidence after thorough investigation. The Ministry is of the view that the present regulations provide adequate safeguards against a miscarriage of justice, and there is no reason for changing them.”
“Mr Speaker, I repeat that the principle of the Central Provident Fund is saving. Buying a house is another way of saving - providing for yourself. But to allow the C.P.F, deposits to be used either to pay property tax or to sustain yourself conflicts with the principle of the C.P.F. IRON RAILINGS ON ROAD-DIVIDERS (Measures to discourage use by pedestrians) 3. Mr Tay Boon Too asked the Minister for Home Affairs if he will consider measures to discourage pedestrians from climbing over the iron railings erected on road-dividers wherever a pedestrian overhead bridge nearby has been provided for crossing a road. The Acting Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Mr Speaker, Sir, there are at present 23 pedestrian overhead bridges in the Republic. In order to encourage pedestrians to use the bridges when crossing the roads, iron railings have been erected on road-dividers under ten of these bridges, and the P.W.D, has plans in hand to erect railings under the remaining bridges. Besides erecting these fence-type obstacles to discourage persons from crossing the road at random, police personnel are posted at overhead bridges, especially during the road safety campaigns, to persuade pedestrians to make use of the bridges. There are no provisions in the law at present to enable the police to take action against persons who cross a road where an overhead bridge has been constructed. We may have to consider a law for the control of jay-walkers. DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST TEACHERS (Prior consultation with teachers' union) 4.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, owner-occupiers of Housing and Development Board flats are already favourably treated in that they are allowed to use their Central Provident Fund deposits towards an initial down payment and monthly instalments on their flats. It would defeat the essential purpose of the Central Provident Fund - which is savings - were this advantage to be extended further to enable contributors to use their C.P.F, deposits towards payment of property tax. To allow them to withdraw money for this purpose would be conceding to Housing and Development Board flat owners an advantage not enjoyed by other property owners who may be equally hard pressed in regard to payment of property tax.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think no Foreign Minister ever gives any direct answers to questions which are not necessarily in the interest of Singapore. The Member will agree that any answer that I give should not be in the interest of the People's Republic of China, but in the interest of the people of the Republic of Singapore. So my answer is that we recognise that the seat now occupied by the representative of Nationalist China should be occupied by the representative of the People's Republic of China. As to who really represents the people of China, I have never been there; I have never consulted the 700 million people of China. So it is not for me to say, and it is not for the Member to say. In regard to trade links, we have lots of trade links. Goods are coming here from China. They have a bank here. I think that is concrete evidence that whatever the theory might be, in practice there are considerable trade relations which, may I add, are by and large to the advantage of the People's Republic of China. They sell to us more than they buy from us, which is not a bad situation to be in for even the People's Republic of China. CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND DEPOSITS (Payment of property tax on Housing Board flats) 2. Mr Cheong Yuen Chee asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Labour if he will consider introducing amending legislation to allow owner-occupiers of Housing and Development Board flats who are unemployed or in straitened circumstances to utilise their Central Provident Fund deposits for the payment of property tax on their flats.”
“In regard to trade again, if the Member will go around Singapore, I think he will find that a lot of trade is going on with China. He can buy goods from China. I think we have a perfect understanding on that score. Even American tourists come here and buy cheap goods from China. In regard to our stand in the United Nations, as I have already said, we are for the admission of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations. There are some 140 nations who have different views, and therefore this question has never really been decided on a straightforward yes or no.”
“I think the Member is aware that in regard to trade between countries, the question of recognition does not enter into the picture. We do trade with the People's Republic of China despite the fact that it does not recognise us. Similarly we do trade with the Taiwan Government despite the fact that it does recognise our existence. So I think trade has nothing to do with the question of recognition. In regard to our attitude towards the People's Republic of China in the United Nations, if the Member will read the back numbers of newspapers, he will see that we have made our position clear -that we are for the admission of China to the United Nations. But, unfortunately, in the United Nations this question is not decided on its merits. There is a lot of political manoeuvring going on. So the questions are invariably phrased in such a way as to compel us to take sides on what are essentially big power political struggles in the United Nations. So we always say that in principle we are quite prepared to support, as we have, the admission of China to the United Nations. Once having decided on that, we shall consider the question of the status of Formosa.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, though I agree with the hon. Member that rapid changes are taking place in Southeast Asia, there appears to be no change as yet on the part of the People's Republic of China towards the Republic of Singapore. Members of the House are no doubt aware that the policy of the People's Republic of China towards Singapore is that it does not exist as an independent state and that it is, as far as it is concerned, a part of what the Chinese Government refers to as Malaya. This being so, I do not see how Singapore could consider a "more realistic reappraisal of relations" with a country which, for reasons of its own, considers that the State of Singapore does not exist. However, the policy of the Singapore Government has been, as has constantly been reiterated, to be friendly with all governments which are ready to be friendly with it. But it is extremely difficult to be friendly with a government which appears to believe that the State of Singapore does not exist.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I presume that what the Member for Kampong Kapor wants to find out from me is whether it is prudent for the Government to go into the hotel business. Sir, anything that the Government does is always prudent. In this particular case, this is a hotel-cum-training centre. If we have to provide some 10,600 persons who will be required to service our fast-expanding hotel industry by 1972, then it is necessary that there should be some systematic training of staff. And this hotel - it is to be called Hotel Premier - is mainly for training people. We are not going into competition with the private hotels. I mentioned this project to some of the hoteliers and they were quite grateful that the Government is undertaking the task of providing a school and a hotel where potential hotel staff will get in-service training while they are on the job. At present, they are trained and have to learn their business in established hotels which sometimes do not add very much to the prestige or the efficiency of the hotels. Therefore, there is no question of Government going into the hotel business. After all, there are only 30 bedrooms in this hotel. In fact, far from offering competition to the private hotels, this hotel will enhance the efficiency and possibly the profits of private hotels.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, no wise Minister ever reveals his inner thoughts! But I must congratulate the Member for Kallang, for I think he has stumbled on the real reason for the precipitous decline in the allocation of funds to the panel members and referees appointed to hear Industrial Arbitration Court cases. The first reason is that there has been a decline in the number of cases that panel members and referees are appointed to hear. Since January 1968, there has been a decline in the number of disputes and other matters referred to the Court. This can be attributed to sustained industrial peace prevailing in the Republic, the enactment of the Employment Act, and amendments made to the Industrial Relations Ordinance, including the wider powers conferred on the President to constitute the Court alone without panel members. I may also mention that six of the panel members are public servants who are, therefore, not eligible for the allowance under the Industrial Relations Regulations, 1960. The second reason is that in the Court's budget proposal relating to this matter which was submitted in October 1969, account was taken of the distinct possibility of the closure of the Second Court, which, in fact, took place in January of this year. As for the speculation by the Member as to the fate of the First Court. I will allow him to speculate.”
“If he can prove that he has attended a school here for 12 years, an identity card will be issued to him. Mr Speaker, Sir, that is why I am very chary of listening to one advocate's case. I must also listen to the other side. When you investigate a case, you will find that it is not as clear-cut as it is sometimes made out to be. But if the Member can send me the facts, I will have the case examined and apply the broad principles which I have enunciated to it. Under the National Registration Act, persons holding Malaysian identity cards are exempted from registration.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am always reluctant to make a pronouncement on cases brought before me when I do not know all the facts. Only one side of the case is presented. So I would not like to make any judgment on the cases instanced by the Member. But I shall state the broad principles on which we issue identity cards. First, they are issued only to lawful permanent residents within Singapore. Therefore, a child who has attained the age of 12 years must prove beyond doubt to the Commissioner of National Registration that he has lawfully resided in Singapore before a Singapore identity card can be issued to him.”
“I understand the Ministry has in operation a scheme for, the rehabilitation and retraining of disabled persons. This is provided for under subhead 2007 of Head 0601. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Inche Abdul Aziz Karim and Mr Hwang Soo Jin - (5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1103.”
“I hope it will be possible for us to do so and convince the authorities, who are in a position to dispense these things, of the urgency of this problem.”
“This matter is tied up with industrial diseases and so on, a point raised by the Member for Kallang. This is also tied up with the Ministry of Health, because this is the medical aspect of industrial health. With the assistance of the Ministry of Health, the Industrial Health Unit was set up. I think, in 1967. However. I understand that the work of the Unit has been confined to very narrow limits, largely owing to inadequate resources. 7.00 p.m. The inadequacy of resources to man the Public Health Unit is reflected in the recent recommendations made by Dr Cressol, an I.L.O. expert on occupational health. He has advised that the Unit should consist of one senior medical officer one industrial hygienist, two industrial health inspectors and two staff nurses. It is hoped that in time these personnel will be made available so that systematic efforts can be made in ensuring the health and well-being of our workers. As regards the other aspects of industrial safety, I have only one point to add. In the estimates for 1969 the Factory inspectorate had six posts of Inspectors of Factories. As Members have mentioned, two of these inspectors are still undergoing national service. Of the six inspectors, one holds a degree in Chemical Engineering. His duties are to enforce the provisions pertaining to industrial hygiene. However, it should be noted that in the estimates for 1970 the Government has approved the establishment of an Industrial Health Unit. As far as my Ministry is concerned, it is true that, with other preoccupations and not allowing for the rapid development of our industries, this particular aspect of the problem has not been given much attention in the past.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in regard to the question of prevention of industrial accidents, first of all, let me say that the Ministry endorses much of all that has been said. Since the last few years - and there has been no doubt about it - the number of industrial accidents has been increasing at an alarming rate. According to my Ministry's figure for last year, the number of accidents rose by 48 per cent over the previous year. It is not only a question of having sufficient inspectorate staff and qualified personnel to enforce legislation to bring about safety in manufacturing and other industries, but it is also a question of educating workers. I am told that in a large number of factories there are certain rather elementary and primitive rules on industrial safety, such as wearing helmets or goggles and so on, which are constantly disregarded by workers. Sir, this is also a matter of educating the workers. Therefore, as I said earlier, the Ministry has sought the assistance of two experts from the International Executive Service Corps, and they have made recommendations to reorganise the Factory Inspectorate. These recommendations are now being studied and consideration is being given to the question of creating a post of Chief Inspector of Factories. I would like to assure Members that the problem of industrial safety is occupying the minds of the officers of the Labour Ministry. Within the limitations of an extremely small and inadequate staff, the Factory Inspectors have tried to maintain at least the minimum safety and health standards required in the factories. The safety programme recently launched by the Ministry has to be widened so as to ensure that safety education reaches all levels of both management and workers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as I know, the criterion of first come first served constitutes the basis for selection of persons registered with the Employment Exchange. Where there might be deviation from this principle is when employers notify the Exchange that they need certain vacancies to be filled on an urgent basis. 6.30 p.m. Selection of registrants is done from among those who happen to be at the Employment Exchange at that time. However, such instances of on-the-spot selection, I understand, are few and far between. Very often when employers ring up and say that they want a man immediately, the employers are generally told that it would be better if they could give the exchange advance notice so that they can select a more suitable one from their register. I would also like to assure the Member that the Manager of the Employment Exchange supervises the Exchange, and carries out checks from time to time to ensure that the principle of first come first served is being followed. I do not know whether there is any deviation from this principle, but if Members do, come across instances where there is a deliberate deviation from this principle, I shall be glad to look into such cases.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as a Minister who also happens to hold more posts than he normally should, I begin to see the point of the argument put forward by the Member for Kampong Kapor. It is simply that a man should not be made to do more than one job and, if he is a Permanent Secretary, he should not be over-worked. This is a problem which we face not only with Permanent Secretaries but at many other levels of government. It is no use promoting somebody whom we generally feel is not yet ready to take over the responsibilities of a Permanent Secretary. Therefore, for the time being, we have to make Permanent Secretaries do more than they normally should. This is a problem which the Minister for Finance has already indicated - that the private sector today can offer far more than just a Mercedes Benz to people with ability comparable to our Permanent Secretaries. And objection has been taken to offering a Mercedes Benz to them. Therefore, it is very difficult to retain men in the civil service of sufficient maturity and who are leaving to take up jobs elsewhere. This is a problem of which we are not unaware. We do not want Permanent Secretaries to do more than they should, or to be a kind of general factotum, doing far too many jobs. We agree with the principle that a man should not be over-burdened with too many responsibilities. But it is a matter of finding the digits to take over some of the responsibilities. That is not as easy as it sounds, but when such people are available, I can assure the House that every encouragement will be given to them to take over these responsibilities.”
“The factory inspectors have also established closer links with the Public Utilities Board electrical inspectorate to ensure proper inspection of electrical installations in factories. The co-operation of the fire prevention officer is also sought to ensure the taking of adequate measures for extinguishing fires. In fact, we have organised a national safety seminar to spread the idea of industrial safety. A newsletter was published by the Factory Inspectorate to disseminate knowledge of how to prevent industrial accidents. Two executives from the International Executive Service Corps were invited to advise the inspectorate on modern methods of accident prevention. An inspector was sent to the United Kingdom for further training on the problem of industrial safety. As the building construction industry contributed the largest number of industrial accidents in the past year, we had meetings with representatives of the Contractors' Association to discuss safety problems in building construction.”
“First, I will deal with the point about the proposed swop between Malaysian citizens who are working in Singapore and Singapore citizens who are working in Malaysia and have lost their jobs as a result of the withdrawal of work permits. I think a swop is not a feasible proposition for a government to enforce legally. First, it is a very immoral policy. It is immoral to deprive one man of a job because somebody else has lost a job elsewhere. But what I would suggest is this. Perhaps somebody from my Ministry could make some mutual arrangement and persuade the firm here to transfer a Malaysian citizen who is willing to go. Regardless of whether the person is a Malaysian citizen or not, once he has worked in Singapore, I think he has contributed something towards Singapore and I would not like to say to him, "Now, buzz off, I want to bring in a citizen from Singapore who has lost his job." But if some kind of arrangement could be made and if all the parties concerned are agreeable, then maybe my Ministry could act as an intermediary, but we will not enforce such a policy on either the employer or the worker concerned. In regard to industrial accidents, as the Member has rightly pointed out, this is a problem of increasing concern and importance to Singapore, especially as the pace of industrialisation has accelerated. The following steps have been taken by the Factory Inspectorate to cut down on the increasing number of industrial accidents and to induce a greater awareness of the need for industrial safety. More stringent inspection of factories is being carried out. Factory owners are warned to take the necessary safety precautions to ensure industrial safety in their premises.”
“This figure as of today is below the average earnings of workers in Singapore. In 1968 the average earnings of workers in Singapore, according to a sample survey, were about $180 per month, whilst in 1969 they were about $183 per month. If the average monthly earnings of the worker exceed $200 per month, then legislation may be introduced to increase the maximum benefits payable. 6.00 p.m.”
“Yes, Sir, In regard to the point raised by the Member for Anson, I think I have already given the facts. My Parliamentary Secretary has a head for details, and he has drawn my attention to the fact that it is not $4.55, but $4.75 per day. So that is not quite correct. As regards a minimum wage, I think many of the Left-wing trade unions and the more radical ones do not want a minimum wage. Once you have a minimum wage , that becomes the wage. The Finance Minister has indicated that perhaps we can get over this major fear or inhibition we have about what will happen in 1971. As you know, from the end of this year or the beginning of next year, the British withdrawal will be so fast that about 30,000 or 40,000 people will be without jobs. If we cannot find jobs for them, all this economic progress that we have made will be set back, and providing jobs for as many people as are going to be unemployed will be a big problem. Until we have stabilised the situation. I think the policy should be to allow wages to find their own levels in a dynamic situation where unions will not be interested in minimum wages but they will say, "We will get as much as the economic system can bear without disrupting it." That is the reason why I think we will not consider implementing a minimum wage, nor will it be wise for trade unions at this juncture to press for minimum wages. The other point, I think, was in regard to workmen's compensation. This question has been raised on several occasions. It is the view of the Government that the current scale of workmen's compensation provided under the Ordinance is adequate. This is because the maximum benefits payable on death or permanent disability are based on an employee's earnings of $200 per month.”
“This is one of the hard facts of life. So it is no use saying that because it benefits the employer, therefore, it must be bad for the workers. It is not necessarily so. That is about all I have to say on this particular subhead.”
“It is a matter of opinion whether it would be better that a few workers could not get a bit more bonus and have to work without any magical rise in their incomes (does this mean that the labour laws have adversely affected them?), or whether it would be better that 15,000 more people now can have work. We say that the maximum good for the maximum number is the better objective for Government to pursue, than the maximum benefits for a small number. You can also see that, in terms of investment, again before the labour laws were passed, the total flow of investments was about $184 million in 1968. But the year after the implementation of the new labour legislation, it shot up to $550 million. You can say, "Well, this only benefits the capitalists", and so on. But supposing we have not passed these new laws, then not even $10 would have been invested. So this extra investment means more jobs for more people. Let us not work on the basis that capitalists are philanthropists. They will invest money where they can get profits, e.g., when a foreign capitalist or a local entrepreneur invests $100 million here in Singapore, he may make 20 per cent profit. But this is the difference - if he had not come in there would have been no jobs for anybody. There would be no factories and no expertise. That is the price we have to pay. But if you want foreigners to invest here, they will have to make money, and they come here only to make money. So they put up factories here. It may be that they will set up an oil refinery, something which we cannot do. If we had not promised them profits, then there would be no oil refinery, meaning no work and probably also no profit for the entrepreneur. Profit for the entrepreneur means more work and enhanced income.”
“As I have said, we do relax and have been relaxing in so far as we feel that we can permit non-citizens to work here without affecting the interests of our citizens. This is especially so at this time when there is a labour shortage. We grant more and more work permits to people who are non-citizens, especially if they are skilled or semi-skilled. They should have no difficulty in getting work permits. One Member also asked whether we would be prepared to allow skilled workers like hairdressers to work in Singapore, if they are non-citizens. I do not know whether there is a shortage of hairdressers, but if there is, I am quite sure we are prepared to consider the issue of work permits to such people. The Member for Delta made the point that with the introduction of the new labour laws allegedly to the advantage of the employer, the standard of living of the worker has been seriously affected. I think this kind of generalisation does not take into consideration the main purpose of the modification of our labour laws. When we introduced these new laws, we made it quite clear that these limitations on the freedom of trade unions of workers were made for a wider purpose, i.e., to increase as quickly as possible the base of industrialisation, and therefore economic expansion. In those terms, it again depends on how you see it. For example, before the introduction of the new labour laws in June 1968, there were 1,586 manufacturing establishments employing 74,800 workers. One year after that, the number of factories increased from 1,586 to 1,716, providing jobs for 89,804 people instead of 74,800 people. That means an increase of something like 15,000 jobs for people who otherwise would not have got any work.”
“I do not know of the particular case, but if the officer in the Citizenship Registry had reason to believe that there was something improper, that the birth certificate was obtained improperly, then he would naturally take back the red identity card and give him a blue identity card. He had the perfect right to do that. If the aggrieved person felt that something had been improperly done, he could have appealed to the Ministry or to the Minister himself. In view of the fact that Government has announced that we are prepared to invite skilled workers from Hong Kong and elsewhere to come and work here, and after a period they would be considered for citizenship, I was asked why that privilege should not be extended to our blue identity card holders. I would like to say that the same privilege will be extended to non-citizens, that is, blue identity card holders, if they are skilled; or if they show that they have the necessary capacity, we will give them citizenship. I think another Member asked why Singapore blue identity card holders who go abroad temporarily have to surrender their identity cards. 5.45 p.m. I would like to say that a blue identity card holder who goes away temporarily need not and should not surrender his identity card on leaving Singapore. He only needs to surrender it when he leaves the country permanently to go elsewhere. That is when he withdraws his provident fund and so on, and decides to cut his roots in Singapore permanently. It is only then that his blue identity card will be withdrawn. I think those are the main points in regard to citizenship, as far as my notes go. There is one other matter - whether we would relax conditions in regard to the issue of work permits.”
“I do not know the particulars of the case. If this did happen, the person concerned has the right of appeal in regard to any withdrawal of citizenship. Whether he has done so or not, I do not know.”
“I am coming to that, Mr Speaker. I will go on to some of the specific points that have been raised. A point was made about minor citizenship certificates having been withdrawn. The number of such cases from the beginning of 1968 to the end of 1969 was 291. We have since then given sympathetic consideration to cases where there has been genuine error - they failed to take the oath of allegiance through ignorance and through bona fide mistakes. We are prepared to consider such cases where there have been genuine mistakes. There is the case raised by the Member for Alexandra. I think it is about two persons having two birth certificates. Let me state here that obviously when people have two birth certificates, one of them is a spurious certificate. We cannot take a rather lackadaisical attitude towards people who use forged documents, because it is an offence in any case. However, where it can be shown that there was genuine grievance as far as the child is concerned, the innocent party, through false representation, then I think we would be prepared to reconsider the case. If there is collusion, we cannot afford to allow it to pass.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I gallantly say this: there is an English saying that when we refer to the male, the term also embraces the female! Prof. Wong Lin Ken rose -”
“Some of us were not born here. My father was not born here. What I want is a citizen who is prepared to contribute something to the betterment of Singapore. Madam Chan Choy Siong: Then how about the females?”
“No, no. These are people, as I said, who are permanent residents, people who have no other place to go. If they are prepared to volunteer for national service, then once they have completed their national service, they will be allowed citizenship. If a man who is a non-citizen is prepared to die for the country, then he is worthy of citizenship, because he is more reliable than some who are born into citizenship. Of course, let us not be too patriotic about this. Most of us were not originally Singaporeans. Our great grandfathers came here and settled down. They built this society.”
“By "skills" I do not mean people who are able to sweep roads and so on, because we have plenty of our citizens who are able to sweep roads. By "skills" I mean people who are able to contribute, directly and immediately, talents to Singapore in certain fields in which there is a considerable shortage. So, if you have a skilled carpenter, a furniture maker - skills for which there is a demand - I can assure you that in those cases the applications for citizenship would be considered favourably. On the other hand, you may have an applicant who is going to be a liability to Singapore. For example, one who comes and asks, "I want social welfare aid. I am a citizen. I have six children. Please give me aid." I know of one or two such cases. It is not that I am indifferent to the hardships of a non-citizen, but as a member responsible for the administration and government of Singapore, I cannot allow my sentiments to jeopardise our bigger responsibility. There is another way, apart from skills and so on, in which younger people who are non-citizens can acquire citizenship. I think the Minister for Defence will back me up in this: that if any non-citizen who is a permanent resident in Singapore volunteers for, national service, he will be given citizenship at the end of his national service. That is a test of citizenship: you are prepared to die for your country. What I am saying is: do not lower the standard of your citizenship. All the stories I have heard are, "Yes, he cannot hawk and so on." I am not unsympathetic to it, but that is not the standard required for citizenship. Therefore, if you do not base your citizenship on a high standard, then I do not think you are going to get very far. Mr Low Yong Nguan rose -”
“If it is worth $100, do not treat it as if it is worth only 50 cents. Therefore, we say that anybody who becomes a Singapore citizen must be an asset to our society. And we say that we will give citizenship as of today to anybody who can contribute to the economic well-being, the cultural progress, the social progress of our society because we need them. They all will get citizenship. That is why the number has increased. I know of a few cases - I am not saying it applies to all those who do not have citizenship - who want to get citizenship because they can get cheap Housing Board flats and because they can get free education for their children. Some of them openly say so. Some of them say, "Look, I want citizenship because otherwise I cannot educate my children, because I have to pay for their education." 5.30 p.m. If people of this type want to become our citizens, then I say in the long run Singapore society will go to pieces. These people should go somewhere else. I am not saying that some of the cases that some Members have mentioned are not worthy of sympathetic consideration, but we must balance them against this major principle. First, we want citizens, in the present circumstances prevailing here, who will become an asset to Singapore, especially as Singapore is going to be subjected to so many pressures in the years ahead. If the community cannot stand the strain, then it will break up, like many other societies in this part of the world. People will pack up their bags and move off somewhere else. However, we are prepared to consider applications. There may be instances where the bureaucratic machinery is sometimes over-cautious in dealing with cases of individuals who satisfy the requirements, i.e., they have the skills.”
“It is not in the policy but in the application of the policy that we give ourselves considerable flexibility. Where a year ago we would have said "No", hereafter we may say "Yes" in the same circumstances. Let me give Members some statistics. For example, in 1967, we approved 8,948 applications before we were told of the bad news of the accelerated British withdrawal. Once that news was announced, we decided to be very strict about citizenship. So in 1968, only 3,768 applications were approved. However, since then the economy has been picking up, and in 1969 we approved applications equal to what had been granted in the previous two years. In 1969, 11,325 applications were approved. So you cannot judge your policy on the basis of those who come and complain to you, those who did not get their applications approved. Those who have got it do not come and congratulate you. So if you judge Government's policy by two persons who, rightly or wrongly, complain to you and you are not aware of the others who are satisfied, then you may go wrong in assessing our policy. Let me state the principles on which we give citizenship to non-citizens, largely to blue identity card holders. First, depending on circumstances, the principle is this - that every non-citizen who becomes a citizen must be an asset and not a liability. Anybody who advocates making non-citizens citizens is being very foolish, if those people become a burden to you and to society. And he is not being a good citizen either. So the first principle is that every citizen who joins your ranks must have high regard for your citizenship. Do not cheapen it. Some of us may be lucky. Maybe we do not deserve citizenship. But at least pay some regard and respect for your citizenship.”
“But the British Government has very firmly rejected this. They modified a principle of English jurisprudence because they have to face harsh realities. Therefore, listening to some of the points of Members, I have the impression they believe that the grant of citizenship on the basis of humanitarian grounds is a matter of right or an obligation. It is not. I did say so in 1968 and harsh things were said about my Parliamentary Secretary that he was stubborn and so on. He was not being stubborn. He was carrying out a policy. I said that the grant of citizenship is a matter of privilege and not of right. Why do we insist on standing firm on this policy of going slow in granting citizenship to non-citizens, largely to blue identity card holders? It is not because we are not unmoved by some of the stories that we have heard. There are hardship cases here. There are hardship cases outside of Singapore. Once you change laws, you have to stand firm. We have to judge the interest of our citizens against that of non-citizens. If conditions were different, we would like to satisfy both. If conditions were different, we would be quite prepared to grant citizenship not only to blue identity card holders but to any other people whose position deserves sympathetic consideration, like refugees from other countries. That is, if conditions were different and if we could absorb them. But so long as we cannot, our primary responsibility is to our citizens. However, let me give a few statistics. Most of the Members have talked as if we are hard-hearted and we never make any concessions. We have said, and the Parliamentary Secretary has said, that we will review the situation from time to time. It is quite true that we do it from time to time.”
“Then instead of being harassed about citizenship, you are going to be harassed about jobs, but with this difference. This time the man who harasses you can vote you out of office because he has citizenship. Whereas now he cannot. The main reason is that it is our duty to protect the interests first of our citizens. I am a Member of Parliament, too, and I have the same difficulty. As a Member of Parliament, I disapprove of what the Minister for Labour is doing. But as the Minister for Labour, I must follow a policy which I think is in the long-term interest of the country. Popularity is not always the surest way to success. I note that time after time, my Parliamentary Secretary especially has been harassed for the best part of the year on this question. And as Members of Parliament, it is your duty to do all you can to relieve pressure on yourself by bringing pressure to bear on the Government to change the laws on citizenship or any other law. Before I deal with some of the specific points made by Members, let me outline once again the general approach of the Government in regard to citizenship. First, you should be clear in your own minds that the grant of citizenship is a privilege given not because somebody is in trouble or because there are sad stories about individuals. That is not the criterion. Even the United Kingdom is very strict about citizenship. Once you are a British subject, you are a British subject forever. That has been the tradition of English jurisprudence from time immemorial. But now in the light of harsh realities, they have had to modify that principle. As you know, it happened in the case of certain British subjects in the former colonies who wanted to get back to Britain on the grounds that they are British subjects.”
“No, Sir. Mr Lee Teck Him resumed his seal.”