Sia Khoon Seong
Singapore
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Code LD 1500 of the Main Estimates. Earlier, I stated that the morale of the teachers is dependent on their conditions of work.”
“For one thing it must be clear to the parents that the Day School is not just another name for a day care centre. Neither does the Day School scheme diminish parental role and responsibility in the moral upbringing of their children. Children can and will do just so much during school hours.”
“I must urge the Ministry of Education to allow as many serving non-graduate teachers as possible, who have the ability and qualifications, to join the degree programme and attain graduate status. Those who have proven their worth in the service more than deserve the opportunity to further themselves.”
“I have not finished. Of course, the underlying reasons for the teaching of Religious Knowledge are always valid since time immemorial - to teach man to be good. After all, our moral education basically wants to achieve that. Since 1959, not just 1982, the underlying reasons for moral education have always been the same.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to ask the Minister of State, is it not true that prior to 1982 Religious Knowledge was also an optional subject? Prior to 1982, all along Religious Knowledge was taught as an optional subject. In 1989, we are going back to pre-1982. The mistake in 1982 was to make RK compulsory.”
“With the introduction of caning for traffickers and employers who employ illegal immigrant workers, I am quite sure it will act as a strong deterrent to them from doing so. With the passing of this Bill, employers and traffickers will now find it not worth the while to take risk in employing foreign workers illegally.”
The complete record
Every one of 624 lines we hold for Sia Khoon Seong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 13.
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to comment on the Minister's reply in respect of the 13th month payment. If I heard him correctly, he said that the 13th month payment is a wage supplement. By that, it would mean that it is a form of a deferred wage which is paid to a public employee at the end of the year for his 12 months of service. I would presume that interpretation to be correct. If the 13th month payment is a wage supplement, and if my interpretation is correct, I wonder whether the Minister would reconsider his earlier decision not to pay public employees who retire prior to 31st December of any year. I feel it is only fair that they ought to be paid this wage supplement. If a public employee works for 10 months or 11 months in the year, surely he is entitled to that portion of the 13th month payment on a pro rata basis. I hope the Minister will consider this point because this has given rise to a lot of unhappiness among civil servants. Having put in years of dedicated service, just because they happen to retire one day short of the full year in the year of retirement, they are deprived of such a wage supplement, as the Minister calls it, which is due to them. On the other hand, public employees who resign after a very short period in the civil service enjoy the 13th month allowance because they choose to resign after the 1st of January of the following year. This is the kind of situation that gives rise to a lot of discontent. Civil servants who have served the Government loyally during their whole life are in the last year of retirement not given what is due to them. On the other hand, those who have not shown any loyalty know how to put in their resignation at the proper time and so enjoy the benefit of the 13th month payment.”
“In view of the Minister's explanation, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Messrs Ng Kah Ting and L. P. Rodrigo - (10) That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead CAA 4002.”
“Yes. This problem must be viewed in the correct perspective if we want to get down to the core of the problem and to rectify it. Otherwise there will be only shadow boxing and there will be more dissatisfaction and more malaise because we have not been able to get to the core of the problem. There will be no improvement, but there will be greater dissatisfaction and demoralisation.”
“This is one of the frustrations of the journalists' union. We all want to see an all round improvement in the standard of our journalists, doctors and others in our society. There is a positive way of getting things done and there is also a very negative way of looking at it. But 1 think the Ministry of Culture can do something about it. If the Minister were to exercise a greater influence on the authorities of the newspapers, perhaps they might be persuaded to show more interest towards this aspect of the newspaper operation, namely, professional improvement of the journalists. 4.30 p.m. There is also the question of working conditions. Like anywhere else all over Singapore - the civil service and all places of work in the private sector, dissatisfaction always creeps in and people get demoralised. I think we have seen this in all strata of our society. We have to have the same approach. The people have to be made happy, and if there are grievances they have got to he removed. I can speak from experience. The journalists' union, as I said, is affiliated to the NTUC. Its officials often come to the NTUC for advice and guidance with regard to their problems, and it is not just a question of dollars and cents. There has also been this desire on the part of the journalists to want to improve themselves. They are quite conscious of the need to improve their professional standards. Although there may be black sheep among them, most of them want to be good journalists.”
“Sir, I wish to take issue with the Minister over the first point vvhen he answered the Member for Anson, and that is over the question of journalists. He mentioned about Members' speeches being published in full, and so forth. What is wrong with the MPs' speeches being published in full, if they are good? Is it not important that their views are expressed? In fact, their complaint is that they have not been given that much publicity. Coming to the question of the standard of journalists, it is very difficult to put the blame on the journalists. 1 know this from the journalists' union, which happens to be an affiliate of the NTUC. Their members feel terribly disgruntled, dissatisfied over the fact that the managements of newspapers do not encourage their journalists to improve themselves. Many of them want to improve them-selves professionally and their status. But if the policy of the management is commercially oriented, where very little attention is given towards the development of the standard of journalists, what can the journalists do about it? What harm is there for the Ministry of Culture or even the Minister himself to call up the managing directors of the news-papers occasionally to discuss about general opportunities for the journalists to improve themselves and about standards of iournalism in Singapore? Are these eflorts being made? Are the managing directors of the various news-papers being persuaded to give the sort of attention that they should give towards professional improvement of journalists in Singapore? This matter has nothing to do with control of the press. 1 think this has not been done. I think the managing directors and the people who are in charge are more concerned with the day-to-day administration and the profitability of the newspapers.”
“Sir, I must take strong objection to that inference because so many' situations could arise. He cannot expect the MP to go round his constituency every day: the constituents will get fed up with him. The MP does go round his constituency during elections or national campaigns. Between such periods there could be movements of people. There could be people moving from Chua Chu Kang into Anson for example. Chua Chu Kang residents might not know the MP for Anson, because they, probably know only their MP, Mr Tang See Chim. By and large the constituents know their MPs. There could be the odd cases where the constituents claim they do not know their MP. So to give the impression that the constituents do not know their MP is wrong just because of a few ocid cases. What is required i.s probably posters of MPs at the community centres so that when people visit the community centres they can have the opportunity, particularly if they are new residents, to see who their MP is.”
“I hope to hear of a very good progress report - that everything is going fine, and that we will be able to meet the target date much earlier. I hope that will be the kind of answer he gives. Of course, the Minister is always confident. This is one big challenge ahead of him, and with his usual confidence, perhaps he will make it.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, unlike the Member for Anson, I feel that the Mass Rapid Transit System is absolutely vital at this stage. It was stated in the President's Address at the opening of this session of Parliament that the MRT would only be introduced in the late 1980s. I think that is rather too slow a pace, particularly now when a squeeze is being tightened on car owners, more and more people can be expected to commute by public transport. Earlier on, the Minister did show a lot of confidence over the improvements envisaged in the SBS operations. While I am not trying to say that I do not share his confidence, I think the problems in three years' time will be greater than the problems today, as far as the demand for public transport is concerned. It is like the dog chasing its own tail. True, there will be improvements in the SBS operations. But will the improvements be effective or sufficient enough to cope with the increased problems that are going to be faced because of the heavier demand for public transport? As I said earlier, with the squeeze now being tightened on car owners, we can expect more and more car owners commuting by public transport. On top of that, every year thousands of school-leavers are joining the ranks of office-workers. They will also help to increase the demand on public transport. That being the position, I am just wondering whether we could not quicken the pace to get the Mass Rapid Transit System introduced, if not by this decade then, at least, in the early 1980s and not in the late 1980s. Sir, I would like the Minister to inform this House of the latest position regarding the second phase of the Feasibility Study on the MRT.”
“If the proposed capital gains tax is imposed on stock and shares transactions which are resold within a period of, say, six months or a year, it will not affect the genuine investors. In that way, a capital gains tax should not be objectionable except to the professional speculators. 3.20 p.m.”
“They do not evade paying taxes, like so many hawkers and some crooked businessmen who know how to cook up figures to avoid paying their full taxes. I am not taking issue with the Hon. Finance Minister over the increased taxes. What I venture to do is to propose to him that next time if he wants more money, he should look into the Stock Market. I am not suggesting to him that he should use Government funds to speculate on the Stock Market and increase the State's revenue through profits derived from speculation. What I am proposing is that he should consider introducing a form of capital gains tax for business transactions of shares in the Stock Market. Look at the huge fortunes some of the speculators have amassed for themselves in the last two months. All they do is to pick up the telephone and dial the number of their favourite remisiers and speculate. What possible harm could a capital gains tax do to the Stock Market? One possible argument against it is that it will dampen the activities of the Stock Market. I am quite conscious of the fact that the Stock Market has a vital role to play in the economic life of our State. It provides opportunities for genuine investors both big and small to invest their savings, which in turn helps to stimulate the economic growth of our industrial and manufacturing sector of our economy. But what we have seen in our Stock Market activities in the past two months, for example, and on some previous occasions, was not anything like that, it was just sheer speculation and gambling. A tax on their "winnings" as an additional source of revenue may curb speculation but not investment.”
“Should not the Government, as a model employer, remove the existing ridiculous ruling on retirement that Government employees who joined service before 1st July, 1956, should retire at the age of 55? Why should they retire at 55 when those who join after that date can retire at the age of 60? Surely what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander. When you remove that ruling, you will be able, by a stroke of the pen, to retain the services of old public employees whose skill and experience are most valuable at a time when everything is done not only to attract but also to prevent the brain and brawn drain into the private sector. It is possible that a few may still want to retire at 55 years of age. Give them an option to do so. And in the private sector the Government may achieve the same result, as intended by the proposed tax concession, by ensuring that short-sighted or antisocial employers do not get rid of experienced, skilled workers at the top of their respective wage scales before or on attaining the age of 55 years simply for the sake of some monetary savings. The Hon. Finance Minister, in his Budget statement, referred to the marked slow-down in the rates of growth of revenue since financial year 1973. In the coming fiscal year, recurrent expenditure is expected to increase by 6j% as against a growth of only 5% in revenue. He proposed to collect an additional revenue of $41.5 million by way of increased taxes on tobacco, liquor and cars, as he considered them as "not basic to life for the average family". Basic or not basic, the consumers of such items would have to foot the bill for the increased taxes from their hard-earned money. Many such consumers are no more than just ordinary wage earners who work hard and pay their taxes dutifully.”
“The production manager and supervisor, who apparently have not much say in the hiring and firing of employees, are the ones who have to solve the problem. But since they probably depend on the goodwill of the personnel manager for their own job security and promotions, they also prefer to keep their wisdom to themselves. In the public sector, the prospect for an employee on reaching retiring age to continue working is just as grim. The civil service ruling on retirement age has to be strictly adhered to. True, in some cases, extension of service has been allowed, but on a temporary basis subject, of course, to the ritual of annual medical examinations. So in the end, who are the people beyond 55 years of age likely to benefit from this tax concession? Only the Lien Ying Chows, the Tan Chin Tuans, the Runme Shaws, the tycoons, the big towkays and the not-so-big towkays are likely to benefit from the tax concession because, as bosses of their own concerns, they can continue to work beyond the age of 55 years until they literally drop dead. And the irony is that such people do not need such tax concession as an incentive to continue working. There is no better incentive than that of personal profits. I am quite sure the Government has never intended to devise tax concessions to benefit such people. If they do benefit from it, it is purely incidental and not deliberately intended. How then, may I ask, is the Government going to achieve the objective of getting our skilled and experienced people to go on working beyond their normal retirement age just by offering the tax concession to such people as announced by the Hon. Finance Minister? Will it not be more desirable and effective to raise the official retirement age of 55 to 60 for a start?”
“The Minister has got hold of the wrong end of the stick. For many workers, particularly those who are organised into trade unions, the problem is that of getting work rather than being persuaded to work after the age of retirement. Singapore workers generally want to continue working after reaching the age of retirement because the retirement age at 55 years is ridiculously low in the present context. With better standards of health and of living, people at that age are still hale and hearty, and feel fit to continue working, not just only to maintain their economic status, but also to avoid the boredom of doing nothing. But they are prevented by their employers from continuing to work after attaining the fixed age of retirement. In the private sector, the reason is plain economics for the employer. In fact, an employer may not even wait for the employee to retire but retrench him before he has reached the top of his salary scale. The employer retires an old employee at the top of his salary scale. With the same amount of money he can employ three or four young inexperienced employees at the bottom rung of the salary scale. This is sometimes done without consideration of the value of the skill and experience of the old employee. The reason is simple. The personnel manager of a firm who is in charge of hiring and firing of the staff wants to show his general manager how much money he can save for his company if he retires or retrenches off an old employee and recruits a young employee. As the personnel manager is not in charge of production and is not concerned with production efficiency and schedules which depend so much on skilled and experienced employees, the problem he creates has to be solved by others.”
“Finance Minister would have been given more accolades if he had made some announcements of further incentives for people who support or contribute towards the support of their aged parents and grandparents. After all, there was so much fanfare in the President's Address at the opening of the present Session of Parliament of Government's intention to encourage people to look after their aged parents and grandparents. Or is the Hon. Finance Minister waiting for a more propitious moment to make such announcements? Let me come to his not-so-very generous offer of tax concession for people capable of working beyond 55 years of age by increasing their earned income relief from the present $1,000 to $2,000 for those between 55 years and 60 years of age, and to $3,000 for those more than 60 years of age. According to him, from our experience of the various aspects of economic development during the past few years, it has become apparent that it is extremely desirable from every point of view that our skilled and experienced people should be encouraged to carry on working beyond their normal retirement age. Then he went on to say that such people will need to spend more money on medical attention to stay healthy and fit for working. Hence, the tax concession is proposed for such people to make it worth their while to continue working after the age of retirement. Let us now examine his tax relief proposal to see whether such tax concession would in effect achieve what the Hon. Finance Minister hopes to achieve, namely, getting our skilled and experienced people to go on working beyond their retirement age. In my opinion, and with due respect to the Minister, if there is any problem about working after retirement, it is not the problem of persuading retired persons to work.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, 1974, as we know, was a year of economic crisis for non-oil producers among the industrialised countries and the developing countries of the world. The energy crisis, exacerbated by the sudden quadrupling of oil prices, had a crippling effect on the economies of the industrialised bloc and the third world. The oil consuming nations suddenly had to grapple with a grave economic crisis. Forecasts of zero, and even minus growth rates of GNPs of industrialised nations were made. Amidst this grim scenario of economic crisis, the Hon. Finance Minister, in his annual Budget statement on 3rd March, 1975, announced that our real rate of growth in 1974 was 6.8%. This is certainly a satisfactory economic performance, particularly, when our economy, which is a trading and export-orientated economy, is very much more susceptible and vulnerable to changes in the pattern of global economic activities than practically every other country. Even the most vocal critics of Government could not grudge the Government the compliments for the satisfactory performance of our economy in 1974. Only prudent management and sound planning coupled with able, determined political leadership and courage could have made possible such an achievement. Let me join in with the many voices that offer congratulations to the Hon. Finance Minister and his Cabinet colleagues on their past year's performance and express confidence of witnessing our country's continued success under their stewardship. Having said that, let me hasten to add that I am not without any criticisms regarding the Government policies and the annual Budget statement. The Hon.”
“In Singapore, I think it must be understood that in the last decade or so we have attained very impressive objectives - we have brought about integration, bilingualism (and even multi-lingualism in some cases) patriotism, loyalty to the country. These are objectives which other countries took decades to attain. In Singapore, in one decade we have achieved them with a greater measure of success than many other countries. These are the achievements that do not appear in the press and are not publicised. These are the achievements that cannot be measured tangibly and are often forgotten. But the misdeeds of a few are often publicised. Therefore, the attention that is drawn to the misdeeds and to the failures is always highlighted more than the attention drawn to the successes that we have achieved. What I want to say, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that we must keep on correcting the faults of the few. We must make every effort towards improvement. We must make every effort towards qualitative development in our educational system, and we must never slacken in all these efforts.”
“This has been disseminated to teachers without the Ministry doing anything about it. But we did it. I am not saying that the Ministry does not concern itself with such problems. It probably does. But it has got so many other matters to look into, that it probably gives top priority to some other things and less priority to others. But the point I want to put across is that teachers on their own, under the leadership of the various teachers unions, are consciously making attempts to fulfil their tasks as nation builders, as educators, and as people who fill in the gap as parents when the children are at school. This is seen to not only by the Singapore Teachers Union but also teachers unions led by my fellow colleagues in this House and other teachers unions. But then, with all the best intentions and with all the best efforts, when one carries out a task where human beings are involved, one cannot expect perfection. With all the best intentions and with all the best efforts of the educational authorities in England, in America, and in various other advanced countries in the West where considerable amount of care, attention and money have been spent on education, yet hippies, streakers and what have you hail from such countries. Is it because efforts were not made towards achieving desirable objectives in their educational system? I think nobody could say with conviction that these countries had never spent considerable time and energy, money and effort, towards attaining desirable educational objectives, and yet such things happen. That goes to prove that in the field of education every time an achievement is made, other problems arise.”
“In every day of the 200 school days a year, there has got to be a flag raising ceremony where thousands of young children pledge their loyalty to Singapore. Surely once in a while there could be moments when children become fidgety. But this does not mean that throughout the year the flag raising ceremony is not properly conducted. In any situation where human beings are involved, one cannot expect perfection. If, as the Member has said, he had witnessed a flag raising ceremony, it was probably done by chance. But there again it is rather too sweeping an instance for him to generalise. Sir, I share the sentiments of the Member for Jalan Kayu over his desire to attain desirable objectives in our context of a multi-racial society of generation gaps, of parents who desire to have nothing but the best in the educational pursuits of their children. I wish to tell him that there could be a few black sheep, but the vast majority are very conscious of the various desirable objectives that should be attained in the execution of their tasks as teachers, not only in the academic or educational field but more important still in the attainment of a national objective of building a truly Singaporean society, multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-cultural and Singapore-orientated society. This is being consciously carried out by the teachers. As regards mental health of school children, surely it is a very important aspect. I wish to tell the Member that the Singapore Teachers Union conducted a seminar in co-operation with the Singapore Mental Health Association, and we had various papers advising teachers on the pitfalls that they would meet if they did not handle the children carefully, and that they should be conscious of the importance of mental health of children.”
“Sir, I thought Members would rest satisfied with lashing their criticisms on the conduct of bus workers at this session of Parliament and spare the annual ritual of flogging the teachers in public in the current sessions of Parliament. But I was wrong, and I will humbly make an attempt to defend the teachers. I must thank the Member for Henderson who has understood the problems of teachers and is an eloquent champion of the cause of teachers. The Member for Anson, I must confess, has got a very efficient network of intelligence to enable him to find out what went wrong in the various Ministries. I think he found out about what went wrong with the Hawker Inspectorate, the Emergency Unit of the Ministry of Health, and also in schools where teachers did not mark the composition books. It could be true that there were one or two teachers who did not fulfil their duties. But one swallow does not make a summer. One teacher who did not do his work should not give the impression that the whole lot of teachers did not mark composition books. The system in force at present, with supervision by headmasters and inspectors, does not allow teachers by and large to get away scot-free if they do not mark the books. Teachers, at least the overwhelming majority of them, definitely have a conscience and a commitment to fulfil their obligations. Sir, I am also a little bit surprised at the very wild allegation made by the Member for Sembawang that flag raising ceremonies are not properly conducted. That would imply that principals and teachers are not conscious of the seriousness and the solemnity of such occasions. I wonder whether he had attended such ceremonies because, if he had not, then it is a rather wild allegation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with the Minister that in a situation of free enterprise, the question of price fixing is determined by the position of supply and demand. But here, it is not a simple question of supply and demand. I think it is a question of excessive manipulation. In the other areas like the prices of basic commodities and so on, the Ministry of Finance has set up an Anti-Inflationary Committee to deal with them. This excessive manipulation has helped to inflame the inflationary situation in the prices of houses. In consistency with the recent policy of Government to fight inflation, which must also include housing, I wonder whether this matter could be referred to the Anti-Inflationary Committee set up by the Ministry of Finance.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I certainly go along with the previous speakers over the need to increase the efficiency of the Complaints Bureau by the increase of adequately qualified staff. But I think the Complaints Bureau will never be able to compete with the press simply because complaints to the Bureau are not made public and the complainant does not get the satisfaction of seeing his complaints expressed publicly. The medium of the press, however, gives him that satisfaction because to the complainant nothing is more satisfying than to see his grouse aired publicly. But talking about complaints, Sir, I wonder whether we have got a Complaints Bureau in Parliament because I believe the reporters who have got to work from 2.30 p.m, till 8.00 p.m, are not supplied with tea. They are experiencing great difficulty in getting tea around the vicinity. Perhaps to make them happy and to ensure that they are properly refreshed, it is only decent that we supply them with tea.”
“Or in six months' time, and this would be a further drain on our foreign exchange as we have to pay more for the import of colour TV sets. I think colour television is a necessary form of entertainment. It is much more attractive than black and white. It is one way of keeping the people at home so that they would not waste their money seeking entertainment outside their homes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I share the sentiments expressed by the Member for Jalan Kayu over the need to be thrifty. But, as I have pointed out in the Budget debate on Friday, people are beginning to wonder whether it is now worthwhile to save. As I have said, the new-found philosophy seems to be "spend and enjoy now, die later", simply because of the depreciation of the real value of money. In Singapore, whether it is this year, next year or ten years later, we must keep up with the times. We must have colour television. It is better to have it now, because if a colour television set costs $1,000 today I think it would probably cost $1,500 in two years' time.”
“But my conscience will not be clear if praise is due but not given. I wish it to be placed on record that the part he played is recognised particularly by the former STC employees who secured continued employment. I have no doubt that they will share with me the sentiments I had expressed. This is the little comfort I hope the Minister will have to help him in the tough time ahead of him.”
“You will recall, Mr Speaker, Sir, I paid the Minister a compliment yesterday for his eloquence. Today, after listening to his statement, I must say that he is also a strategist. The restriction of use of private cars during peak hours is a fairly controversial matter. But then to introduce it after a lot of grouses from the bus commuters would put the private car owners in a spot which makes them very difficult to grouse, because they will not only be taking on the Communications Minister but the bus commuters as well. I would like to go along and see that this scheme works, for the simple reason that if this does not work worse things will come. I would just like to say one thing about what the Minister said in the first part of his statement concerning his concern for the welfare and the well-being of the bus workers. I would like to take this opportunity, because I have never had an opportunity publicly, to bear testimony to the statement that he has made. I, together with my colleagues in the leadership of the former STC union and the Minister were very much involved in the funeral rites, so to speak, of the former STC, and the question of the plight of the bus workers in the former STC. I had the opportunity to witness the concern and plight these workers were in when they were faced with the prospect of retrenchment. For the Minister to put pressure on the Chinese bus companies to ensure their continued employment, I think, was something which nobody could see hut which meant a great deal to those workers and their families. I know the Minister will have a hard time dealing with the transport problems in Singapore. He will have brick-bats thrown at him and I would probably join others in throwing brick-bats at him on things that are not right.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, like the Member for Katong, I am also impressed by the rebuttal given by the Minister to criticisms by Members of this House concerning the bus service. It is difficult to take him on a debate because of his considerable ability and his eloquence in putting across his point of view. I think we accept the fact that in this spirit of reorganisation, teething problems are bound to arise and therefore time must be given to see the successful fruition of whatever reorganisational plans there are in this bus transport system. But I wonder if I could get some kind of indication from the Minister as to the period of time that we have got to wait. I did say in my remarks that there are already signs showing the success of the introduction of this supplementary transport scheme. These are good signs. Will he be able to roughly guess the period of time that we have got to wait before we see a vast improvement in all the reorganisational plans? Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, sitting here in the last few days and hearing Members speak on the bus service issues, there appears to have been many useful suggestions. But at the same time we seem to be repeating ourselves all the time. I feel that it is beginning to look like the `Watergate Affair' - plenty of noise. Where are we going to? I think, in all fairness, the Minister has just given a very strong assurance that there is a determination to make good and the union has given their promise. I mean, let us be fair. If we go on harping the same old point, we are going to demoralise the whole lot. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!”
“The development of management expertise, from the long-term point of view, is a necessary adjunct to an efficient transport service. Public confidence, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, over the handling of the bus problems in Singapore has been shaken simply because there have been frequent changes and shifting of policies. Commuters, being human, do not like to find themselves having to adjust and re-adjust to frequent changes of timetables and bus routes. I would therefore urge the Minister to minimise the changes in bus routes, time-tables, etc., and to make such changes only after very careful planning and assessment of the impact of such changes. To be fair to the Minister, since the introduction of the supplementary transport scheme, the bus service has improved. As a matter of fact, a letter was published in the man-in-the-street column of a local paper yesterday expressing satisfaction over the new arrangement.”
“The present management of the SBS, which is nothing more than an unholy alliance of three parties drawn from three former bus companies is accustomed to running small operations and is not used to running a bus transport service on a scale of the SBS. What worries me is that, with all the public criticisms levelled against the SBS and the inability of SBS to run a viable business and to provide at the same time a cheap and comfortable service demanded by the travelling public, we may just witness the collapse of another bus company in Singapore. The present management personnel of SBS are just ordinary businessmen whose motive is to make money. Most businessmen like to do business with good profit returns and without being subjected to public criticisms and Government constraints. The management of SBS is subjected to Government constraints such as the rate of profit returns, etc., as well as public criticisms. It may not survive under such hostile conditions and may decide to fold up. The wish of the Member for Kallang to attend the funeral rites of SBS may just come true. As the lyrics of a popular song go: "What then, my love?", I wish to ask the Minister, "What then, Mr Minister?", when the present SBS management gives up the ghost, so to speak. There will be a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth at the Communications Ministry, and also at the Labour Ministry because the bus workers will be concerned over their jobs. I would therefore earnestly urge the Minister to treat, as a matter of priority, the question of developing the necessary management expertise and personnel in his Ministry as well as assisting in the development of such expertise and personnel in SBS, as a necessary precaution to abort any possibility of a total breakdown of the transport service.”
“Thank you, Sir,In the past few days, I have listened with great interest to the spirited exchanges of views in the diatribe between the Minister for Communications and the Member for Kallang over the pros and cons of nationalisation of the SBS. To my mind, the problem of providing an efficient bus service does not hinge on the fact whether it is run as a private monopoly or a public concern. Running a complex operation to meet the increasing demand and higher expectations of service by commuters calls for (1) well-qualified management personnel, (2) well-paid and contented bus drivers, conductors, mechanics, and so on, and (3) sufficient number of well-maintained buses and a host of other things, to ensure the most efficient running of the bus service. All these must mean additional cost. The question is: what kind of service do we want, and how much are we willing to pay for the efficient service and comfort that we expect? And the important question is: how is this additional cost to be met -by the commuters or by a subsidy from the Government? The Government has already made known that it will not subsidise the running of the bus service. The Member for Kallang has promised the Prime Minister yesterday that he will move a motion on the public transport system in Singapore. I will therefore reserve my comments on whether the Government should or should not subsidise public transport when Parliament meets to discuss the motion that the Member for Kallang intends to table before this House. In the meantime, let me add my bit of confusion to the already confused state of affairs in the public transport system. The former STC collapsed simply because of poor management. The SBS might also collapse one of these days simply because of lack of management expertise.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, since previous speakers have taken their "bus rides" under the Head of the Minister, I wonder whether I may be allowed to join the "bus ride" as a passenger.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the point raised by the Member for Jalan Kayu has not been adequately answered. I believe what he wanted to know is why has there not been a corresponding increase in staff, percentage-wise at least, in the Factory Inspectorate as compared to the increase in the staff dealing with workmen's compensation. However, in his earlier reply to the Member for Sembawang he has indicated that the reason for this was that the Ministry of Finance had rejected the request of the Labour Ministry for an adequate increase of staff in the Factory Inspectorate. My question is: in view of the concern which Members have shown over the persistently high accident rate in industry, will the Ministry of Labour make another attempt at it, this time expressing the concern and sentiments of Parliament? And we hope that the Ministry of Labour would have greater success in persuading the Ministry of Finance to grant the additional staff.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to point out to the Minister of State that the CPF savings are, in fact, the money of the CPF contributors themselves.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am not a spokesman for the Ministry of Finance, and neither do I intend to be a spokesman on their behalf because, whatever they do, it is very difficult to defend their policy. But what I have just pointed out is some sort of an illustration of the policy of the Ministry of Finance. It sometimes looks a bit queer to the ordinary layman.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs has avoided answering directly the first question of the Member for Telok Blangah. The question was: if the Government needed premises, why does it not use its own premises, instead of renting them from others? But as a layman who understands the working of the Government, especially the Finance Ministry, may I offer an explanation to satisfy the Member for Telok Blangah? I think the Ministry of Finance works from this angle: if a Ministry can get more financially in return as a result of whatever arrangement, then it will do so. The Finance Ministry probably found it could get more financially in return from renting its comparable premises to the public than it had to pay to Colombo Court for additional premises that the Foreign Ministry required. Maybe that is a more relevant answer to the Member for Telok Blangah's question.”
“Sir, in order to make this Committee more effective and more representative, will the Minister consider expanding this Committee to include representatives from interested parties, like CASE, and possibly Members of this House, such as the Members for Katong and Potong Pasir? Mr Hon Sui Sen: Mr Speaker, Sir, if they feel that they can make some contribution, we would be prepared to co-opt them on matters in which we think they would be of help. But generally some of the measures which are being discussed may relate to legislation or may relate, in the case of measures for control of money supply, to what may be confidential until they are made public. I do not think it would be possible in all cases to bring them into this Committee. SUPPLY AND SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY BILLS (Business Motion) Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the second and third readings of both the Supply Bill for the financial year 1st April, 1974 to 31st March, 1975, and the Supplementary Supply Bill for the financial year 1st April, 1973 to 31st March, 1974, may, in that order, be proceeded with immediately on the conclusion of the proceedings on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1974 to 31st March, 1975.-[Mr Hon Sui Sen]. MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1974 TO 31ST MARCH, 1975 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [1st Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.30 p.m.”
“There is another area in which Government can do something to assist some of the wage-earners, namely, increase the tax reliefs for personal income and for the maintenance of wife. This matter has already been eloquently raised by other Members in this House. If the Government accepts inflation as a fact, then it should also accept the fact that the existing tax concessions have become unrealistic for two reasons: reduced real value of money and rising cost of living. 5.37 p.m.”
“The Government should seriously consider upping the interest rates of CPF savings and deposits with the Post Office Savings Bank. Perhaps the Government should consider paying 8 per cent interest for CPF savings, 8 per cent interest for Post Office savings for the first $1,000, 7� per cent interest for the second $1,000, 7 per cent interest for the third $1,000 and 6 per cent interest for any subsequent amount. For the CPF and the Post Office Savings Bank to pay much less than what the banks and the finance companies pay at current rates ranging from 9-1l per cent for savings would suggest that the Government is taking undue advantage of the savings of workers, even though such savings are utilized to finance or subsidise Government in all its development projects, which also equally benefit the rich tycoons. I am not suggesting that my formula is the most feasible and justifiable or that the Government is not doing anything. The Government may have better formulae or other solutions in the pipeline. But what I am saying is that the need to fix more realistic rates of interest must be recognised. First, to check the erosion on the will of the ordinary people to save, and secondly, to protect for their future enjoyment the fruit of their savings as far as is humanly possible. The rich and the not-so-rich can invest their savings in properties or in stocks and shares and earn handsome returns. But the middle income and the lower income groups have not the means to join the club of property owners or investors. Their total wealth, apart from the Housing and Development Board flat, consists of some meagre deposits in banks, finance companies or the Post Office Savings Bank.”
“More and more persons in the ranks of the trade union movement are coming round to the view that though wage adjustments are necessary and useful to offset an increasing cost of living, particularly for the lower income group, the more important thing to do in the long-term view is to ensure employment for the maximum number of people and to devise effective means for the restraint of price manipulations and unreasonable hikes. It is in this context that I welcome the recent moves taken by the Finance Ministry to curb profiteering and unwarranted price hikes. The Finance Ministry should have acted much earlier, but nonetheless, it is better late than never. I only hope that these recent thunderings of the Finance Ministry to warn unscrupulous traders and others are not just pre-budget debate gimmicks to placate Parliament, but are genuine efforts that will be sustained and further strengthened to prevent any inflationary tendency from being exploited and worsened by profiteers and other social parasites. The depreciation of the real value of money, as the result of growing inflation, has a deleterious effect on the will of the people to save. More and more persons are beginning to doubt the age-old practice of saving, when one dollar yesterday is worth more than one dollar today or tomorrow. More persons are thus inclined to spend their money now rather than save and see the diminishing value of their savings. Their philosophy seems to be "spend and enjoy now, die later." There is no incentive to save. To make things worse, Government gives a miserable 5- per cent interest for their CPF contributions for which no interest is payable in the year of contribution. The Post Office Savings Bank pays 4� per cent for savings.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the Hon. Minister for Finance. Singapore, like other countries, has recently been hit painfully by the problem of growing inflation. There is only a small consolation in the fact that the effect of inflation here is less severe than in many other countries. But the problem of coping with the wildly rising cost of living remains for the ordinary wage-earner in Singapore a big headache, as much as for wage-earners all over the world. For him, the prospect of living in privation and want is becoming, if not has become, a reality. Unlike the merchant, the petty trader, the pig farmer and the hawker, who have raked in handsome profits, often through profiteering, the ordinary wage-earner has become the sole victim of this growing menace of inflation. Unlike the pig farmer, the hawker and other self-employed persons who are able to jack up prices of their goods or services to keep pace with inflation, many of whom have now joined the ranks of the upper- middle income group, the wage-earner finds his real income shrinking and the value of his hard-earned savings diminishing. This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is the core of the problem of inflation in Singapore and elsewhere in the world. This is not the fate that a wage-earner would like to have, less so his trade union and his government. There is no magic solution to this problem. Wage increases merely serve as a temporary relief to try to help him to maintain his present standard of living, only to be out-stripped time and again by spiralling increases in prices of commodities. It is only to be expected that there will be heartaches and hardships in this period of rising cost of living for the wage-earner, his trade union and his Government.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on the basis of equity, will the Minister for Finance consider allowing pensioners, who had retired prior to the implementation of the recommendations of the Harvey Commission in 1969, to consolidate the then cost of living allowance into the basic salary? If so, these pensioners would then be able to recompute their pensions based on their last drawn salary revised to incorporate their former basic salaries and cost of living allowance, just as though it was one consolidated salary? Just to refresh the memory of the Minister, before the Harvey Commission's recommendations were adopted in 1969, there was a basic salary and a cost of living allowance. After 1969, the basic salary and the cost of living allowance were consolidated into one single basic salary. Therefore, the last drawn salary of those pensioners who retired before 1969 would be only the basic salary, and those who retired after 1969 would have the last drawn salary as the basic salary plus the cost of living allowance. There is this difference. On the basis of equity, will the Minister' consider allowing those pensioners who retired before 1969 to recompute their pension?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has not answered my points.”
“Even if I concede that such transfers may and do take place, there is no reason that the officers so affected cannot be accorded whatever special monthly allowance may be payable under the scheme for so long as they are required to perform administrative or special functions and to observe the same working hours and other working conditions as their office colleagues in the administrative or executive service. I now refer the Education Minister to the Ministerial Statement of his colleague, the Finance Minister, on 16th February, 1973 in this House in which he stated that a Merit Increment Scheme for civil servants will be introduced and that the upper timescale will be revised from $l,700x50-1,850 to $l,700x100-2,000. 2.45 p.m. In the Education service structure, there are nine salary scales, the highest of which is the scale of $1,700x50-1,850. A teacher who starts at the bottom of the Education service will have to secure eight promotions before he can expect to be placed on this scale. This scale is identical and corresponds to the upper timescale. It is only logical that revision of the upper timescale must result in the revision of this scale. The introduction of a Merit Increment Scheme by Government is to retain and to attract the best in the civil service. I am sure Members in this House will agree with me that the need to retain and to attract the best in the Education service is just as crucial and vital as the need to retain and to attract the best in the other sectors of the public service. Unless the Education Ministry has strong objections to granting increments to teachers, I urge the Government to reconsider its decision and not to create a "Cinderella" out of the Education service.”
“I am of the view, therefore, that all officers in the Education service, whether performing teaching or administrative duties, should be accorded an opportunity to opt for a payment of a special monthly allowance in lieu of a greater medical leave eligibility. In respect of the revised scheme on annual leave eligibility, the decision of the Government to exclude persons in the Education service seems to be based on the assumption that all persons in the Education service have no annual leave eligibility and that, as such, they cannot opt for any reduction in their annual leave eligibility to qualify for the special monthly allowance. I agree that such an assumption is accurate and justifiable in respect of the majority of the persons in the education service. There is, however, a minority of persons in the Education service who are attached to the Headquarters in the Ministry of Education. Such education officers have the same hours of work and similar annual leave eligibility as their colleagues who are in the administrative or the executive service. I am of the view that these education officers who are accorded an annual leave eligibility by reason of their administrative or special functions should be permitted to opt for a special monthly allowance in consideration for a reduced annual leave eligibility under the scheme. While an objection may be raised against the inclusion of such officers in the scheme on the ground that postings to the Headquarters of the Ministry are not of a permanent duration and that the officers so posted may sooner or later be transferred back to teaching duties in schools, in practice the possibility of officers who have been assigned administrative or special duties being transferred back to teaching duties, is very remote.”
“Under the revised scheme, in respect of medical leave eligibility, all public officers can opt either for the maximum medical leave eligibility under the old scheme without any monetary allowance, or for a reduced leave eligibility plus a monetary allowance equivalent to ten days' pay. The full medical leave eligibility is a nominal benefit of which a very small proportion of public employees have availed themselves to the whole extent. As far as possible, they prefer to be spared the circumstances whereby they have to utilise any portion of their hospitalisation leave eligibility. Under the revised scheme, therefore, those public officers who normally do not fully utilise their leave eligibility will, by opting to participate in the scheme, gain by converting their surplus portion of leave eligibility, which is a contingent interest, into an entitlement of a monetary allowance equivalent to ten days' pay. The exclusion of education officers from participation under the scheme in respect of the conversion of surplus medical leave eligibility into a monetary allowance results in a positive disadvantage to education officers in comparison with their colleagues in the administrative and executive services. In respect of the abovementioned scheme, the decision of the Government to exclude officers in the Education service from the scheme seems to be based on an oversight. While officers in the Education service generally do not enjoy any annual leave eligibility, they do have the same medical leave eligibility as their colleagues in the administrative and executive services of the Government.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 1501 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Tay Boon Too, Ho Kah Leong and P. Govindaswamy.) Sir, recently the Government has initiated some very welcome measures by revising the leave eligibility of civil servants and by introducing realistic incentives for top civil servants. The much publicised reason for the introduction of these measures is to make the terms and conditions of service in the public sector comparable with those prevailing in the private sector. However, the Government has made it known that employees in the Education service are to be excluded from the benefits of the various schemes recently introduced by the Government to attract and to retain the best in the public service. In so doing, the Government has, in fact, created further anomalies in the terms and conditions of service for different groups of employees in the public sector and has, therefore, effectively nullified all its past attempts to establish the principles of fair comparison and internal relativity within the public service as an objective basis in determining the terms and conditions of work in the public service. Mr Speaker, Sir, I will now refer the Education Minister to the recent scheme of the Government whereby a monthly allowance is to be paid to employees in the public service as compensation for the reduction of their annual leave and medical leave eligibility. Such a realistic scheme is much to be welcomed, except that the Government has declared that all employees in the Education service are to be excluded from the scheme.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I put my questions to the Minister for Finance, I would like to refer him to one point that he has mentioned in his Ministerial Statement. He has made reference to the recent revision of the teachers' salaries, thereby giving the impression that the teachers had a wage increase recently. I wish to correct that wrong impression because in the recent revision there was no immediate increase in salaries for teachers. There is no comparison between the salary revision for the teachers and this current salary revision for the upper echelon of the civil service. My question is similar to that of the Member for Sembawang, and that is, whether the Government is contemplating an immediate salary revision for the other echelons of the civil service. With the booming economy and an accelerated rate of industrial expansion, attractive job opportunities are thus increased considerably with the result that there is a strong competition to attract both the brains as well as brawns not only within the private sector itself but also between the private sector and the public sector. This problem of retaining and attracting the best in the public service is not only confined to the upper echelons of the public service but is also felt throughout the other rungs of the public service hierarchy. Sir, my question is whether consideration will be given to the need for a revision of salaries of the other echelons of the public service not mentioned in today's Ministerial Statement, with a view to ensuring an efficient and able public service in the best interests of the efficient Government of Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to inquire from the Minister for Education as to when will the Industrial Training Board be actually set up, now that the Bill is being read a Second and Third time. What are the present educational institutions that will be taken over by the Industrial Training Board? Will they be only the vocational institutes? Will they include the technical schools, the centralised workshops, and so on? What categories of teachers will be given the opportunity to exercise their option to he employed by the Industrial Training Board, and whether the terms and conditions of service will be as favourable, if not, more favourable than what they are at present? In respect of clause 19 (h) of the Bill which states that the Industrial Training Board can carry on any trade or business, I would like to request the Minister for Education to elaborate on what trade or business that he envisages the Industrial Training Board will carry out. Will this affect the training programme of the educational institutions? There is also a provision in clause 39 which makes it compulsory for apprentices who undergo training to be insured. I would like to know whether consideration is also given to teachers to be insured also. There is provision for teachers to exercise the option as to whether or not they want to remain in the Government service or to be opted in to the Industrial Training Board. In this respect can the Minister for Education ensure that a reasonable period will be given to the teachers to exercise the option, so that they can have a clearer picture of what their future will be when they opt? As at present, they are still vague about their working conditions. 3.12 p.m.”
“Sir, this is a democratic country, and the right to join or not to join a union lies with the worker himself. There is no restriction laid down by the trade unions that their employees cannot join a trade union. In fact, some of them are members of unions.”
“Sir, if the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour wishes to get an answer from the, I say that all employees of trade Unions receive whatever is recommended by the National Wages Council.”