Tang See Chim
Singapore
“In this Bill, Sir, 4 1/2 pages of the Bill out of 20 1/2 pages are devoted to the definition of terms used in the Bill and almost every other clause defines one term or another. Finally, Sir, what about the agent of the corrupt person, the go-between, the abettor of the crime?”
“Sir, maybe it was a misplaced metaphor. Maybe I should say a skunk smells just as evil by any other name. This is exactly the position. There is no point your telling us that conditions have now returned to normal when manufacturers are asked to pay a higher rental. They have to compete.”
“Sir, the Minister said that he has not increased rent but he just revalued the value of the land. This is exactly the same as increasing rent. I mean you call a rose a rose. You increase the rent whether you call it the rent or call it the base value of the property. To the manufacturer, it is still the same.”
“The Senior Parliamentary Secretary said that the rent demanded by the JTC is comparable to that for private premises outside. But I think the JTC has almost a monopoly on industrial property. I just do not see how the Senior Parliamentary Secretary could make such a comparison.”
“Sir, the difference is that once they get the entry visa, they will be allowed permanent residence in the United Kingdom. Whereas here, we may allow them to enter for two weeks and after that we will turf them out. Also, may I just take up this further point.”
“Sir, I just want to take up with the Minister on the regulations he read out from the booklet. Indeed, if all those conditions are met, the person will be given an entry clearance and then he will be able to enter the United Kingdom.”
The complete record
Every one of 698 lines we hold for Tang See Chim, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 14.
“If it is thought that some former Presidents of the Law Society do not qualify, then such disqualification could be spelt out, as indeed Judges who were removed are disqualified from membership of the Senate under clause 5(4). Secondly, Ordinary membership of the Academy for advocates and solicitors and Legal Officers is automatic and mandatory by virtue of clause 14 of the Act without election, admission or appointment by the Senate. The only time he ceases to be an Ordinary member is when he is disqualified under clause 16 or 18 of the Act which implies certain professional misconduct and carries a stigma. Perhaps a provision should be made for an Ordinary member who does not wish to be a member of the Academy to resign. At the moment, as drafted in the Bill, he cannot. Being an Ordinary member is not totally honorary. It carries certain duties and liabilities. For example, payment of a subscription, the amount of which is not determined at the moment. Lastly, Sir, clause 25 of the Bill effectively prevents any decision of the Senate from being challenged in court. I do not think this is a desirable provision. What is going to happen if the Senate by a majority takes a decision that is considered by the legal profession to be totally perverse? What is the reason for granting the Senate this immunity to the legal process? Subject to these comments, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support this Bill. I hope the establishment of the Singapore Academy of Law will fill the void which is perceived to exist in the legal profession. At the moment, the legal profession has a professional body in the Law Society. The Law Society, however, functions on a shoestring budget depending upon contributions from its own members. It makes do with a tiny rented space behind the Supreme Court. It has no common room for its members. There is no library. It has no place for the holding of lectures, seminars, talks and practical exercises. It has not even a place where members can meet for social and intellectual interaction. In other words, it has very little facilities. I am happy to see that these facilities are promised in clause 4(2) of the Bill. The profession has for more than 100 years demonstrated that it has the necessary knowledge of the law and legal scholarship. If recent history is anything to go by, Mr Speaker, Sir, the profession would appear to be weak in professional ethical standards. In the United Kingdom, such standards are instilled and propagated by the Inns of Court for barristers and by the Law Society for solicitors. Hopefully, with the establishment of the Academy, the functions of which according to clause 4(1)(a) is: "(a) to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and learning of the legal profession in Singapore", this deficiency will be filled. I have, however, three points which I would like the Minister to clarify. Firstly, in clause 5, on the composition of the Senate, the President of the Law Society will be a member but not his predecessors, whereas former Attorney-Generals as well as former Deans of the Law Faculty are eligible for membership of the Senate. Why is there this distinction?”
“Sir, in respect of part payment, I understand the part payment is the cash grant. Would the Minister not ask the Resettlement Department to pay the balance of the payment,taking out the items in respect of fruit trees which would require further verification?”
“In this Bill, Sir, 4 1/2 pages of the Bill out of 20 1/2 pages are devoted to the definition of terms used in the Bill and almost every other clause defines one term or another. Finally, Sir, what about the agent of the corrupt person, the go-between, the abettor of the crime? He should be equally guilty but he seems to be getting away scot-free. Perhaps the provisions of the Bill should be made to apply to him. I welcome, Sir, the committal of this Bill to a Select Committee at which these and other provisions of the Bill can be studied in detail. I support the Bill.”
“Under sub-clause (2) of the clause, the court is empowered to issue a restraint order even before proceedings are instituted and without proof that the defendant may remove property out of Singapore. This does not seem to be fair or justifiable. Furthermore, in the event the restraint order is discharged on grounds that proceedings are not subsequently instituted as ordered by the court, no damages are payable to the innocent party against whom the restraint order was applied for. Under our general law there is procedure in the High Court for application of an interim injunction (which is akin to the restraint order here) in cases where there is reasonable belief that the defendant is spiriting away his assets to defeat the course of justice. But in that event, there must be reasonable grounds for such a belief and if it subsequently should turn out that such belief was not justified in law and the defendant has suffered damage as a result, the defendant is always entitled to recover damages from the person who makes the unjustifiable application. Maybe we can simplify matters by applying the general law to corruption cases. The same argument, Sir, goes for charging order under clause 12. We have a well-defined general body of law on injunctions and charging orders. It may be better to apply this general body of law to corruption cases rather than creating new provisions to deal with the situation. Existing laws have certainty; writing new law creates uncertainty and interpretational problems. The principle behind this Bill is sound and I support it. The detailed provisions appear to be too complicated and will lead to difficulties in construction. They should be simplified.”
“Clause 4 of the Bill on confiscation orders and clause 9 on the procedure for enforcing fines, reading together, appear to make confiscation orders to be punitive and not merely compensatory in nature, thus increasing the punishment for the offence over that was prescribed by law at the time of its commission. Does the retroactive provision under clause 3 of the Bill offend against the Article in our Constitution? Or does clause 4 of the Bill only reinforce the existing law under sections 13 and 14 of the Prevention of Corruption Act? On clause 4, it appears that the confiscation order must state the amount recoverable. It does not appear that the court can order, for example, the confiscation of a house bought from corruption money. This leads to certain complicated provisions in the Bill providing for the tendering of statements (and their acceptance) of benefits derived from corruption (clause 6); assessment of the amount to be recovered under confiscation orders (clause 7); the definition of what is realisable properties and value of properties - clause 8; and the variation of confiscation orders - clause 17. I realize, Sir, that there are similar provisions in the English Drug Trafficking Offences Act of 1986. But I believe these complicated provisions can be simplified if the court were empowered to make confiscation orders directly forfeiting all benefits derived from corruption in whatever form these benefits may take. If the benefits take the form of property other than cash, they should be vested in the public trustee and subject to legitimate third party claims sold for the benefit of the Government. Clause 10 of the Bill may cause embarrassment and unnecessary suspicion to the innocent.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, corruption saps the efficiency of our public service and the spirit of our society. Singapore is fortunate in having an efficient, incorruptible public service. We must preserve and strengthen that system and ensure our society is corruption-free. The Bill, by taking away the benefits of corruption, strikes at the very heart of corruption - human greed. By empowering the court to make confiscation orders against unexplained wealth of persons convicted of corruption, the Bill takes away the incentive of corruption. It takes away the temptation and the benefits of corruption. Corruption does not now pay. I support this Bill, but I would like to seek certain clarifications from the Minister. Clause 3 of the Bill, Sir, makes it clear that the provisions of the Act apply to corruption committed before the coming into force of the law, except for persons who have been convicted and sentenced by a court. But does it apply to corruptions committed after the Act comes into force? A grammatical reading of clause 3, Sir, would seem that it does not. There is a presumption in law against retroactive legislation. But is there a converse presumption for the prospective legislation? Can the Minister please clarify? Furthermore, Article 11 of our Constitution protects a person against retrospective punishment. This point was touched on in an article in the Sunday Times of the 27th March which was referred to by both the Minister himself as well as the Member for Chong Boon.”
“Sir, I want to quote, for the Minister's consideration, the Chinese saying, Yang Er Fang Lao, which loosely translated, means bring up your children to safeguard your old age.”
“Sir, maybe it was a misplaced metaphor. Maybe I should say a skunk smells just as evil by any other name. This is exactly the position. There is no point your telling us that conditions have now returned to normal when manufacturers are asked to pay a higher rental. They have to compete. So, whether you call it a withdrawal of your rebate or a revision of rent, they still have to pay more now than before. Also the Minister himself has indicated that the JTC rent is higher than that in the private sector, however marginally, it is still higher.”
“Sir, the Minister said that he has not increased rent but he just revalued the value of the land. This is exactly the same as increasing rent. I mean you call a rose a rose. You increase the rent whether you call it the rent or call it the base value of the property. To the manufacturer, it is still the same. He still has got to pay out more money to the JTC. So what is the justification for that? I would like also to ask the Minister on the question of increase of rents in respect of the timber industry at Kranji which I took up with him. I would like to know what is the position regarding that matter.”
“He also said that when there is demand, the price will go up. JTC, being the largest landlord of industrial property, they would be taking the lead. In fact, the private sector simply follows.”
“The Senior Parliamentary Secretary said that the rent demanded by the JTC is comparable to that for private premises outside. But I think the JTC has almost a monopoly on industrial property. I just do not see how the Senior Parliamentary Secretary could make such a comparison. Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: Sir, I am referring to flatted factories of which there are some private flatted factories. I am not talking about industrial land.”
“Sir, the difference is that once they get the entry visa, they will be allowed permanent residence in the United Kingdom. Whereas here, we may allow them to enter for two weeks and after that we will turf them out. Also, may I just take up this further point. If a work permit holder managed to get clearance from the Commissioner for Employment to marry a Singapore citizen, that marriage itself does not guarantee permanent residence in Singapore. I think this gives a bit of confusion among the people; because they say, "Both departments are government departments and if one department allows me to marry after application, I should be allowed to stay." I suggest the Minister together with the Minister for Labour who looks after the Commissioner for Employment's Office, come to some sort of understanding so that confusion will not be created in the minds of the people.”
“Sir, I just want to take up with the Minister on the regulations he read out from the booklet. Indeed, if all those conditions are met, the person will be given an entry clearance and then he will be able to enter the United Kingdom. Whereas in our case, for some foreign wives to enter Singapore is almost as difficult as the proverbial camel going through the needle's eye.”
“With good behaviour, I think the imprisonment is about 15 years. So I would seriously ask the Minister to be more compassionate in this regard.”
“Sir, Immigration has made significant contributions to the development of Singapore. According to the 1980 Census, out of a population of 2,413,945 persons enumerated in the census, 527,152 or 21.8% were born outside Singapore. That means these people were immigrants to Singapore and this has serious policy implications. It means that a lot of these people would have relatives outside, parents, sisters, brothers and possibly wives as well. All these people would then want to come to Singapore. And I think the Minister should have very compassionate policy to cover these applications. Also, Mr Chairman, Sir, prior to Singapore's independence in 1965, people can move freely between Malaysia and Singapore. Then on the 31st August 1965 Independence came and some of these people were caught on the wrong side of the Causeway. These people because of the changed political situation found themselves without a permanent home. I think these people would really deserve the Minister's sympathetic consideration for their applications for permanent residence. And if for any reason permanent residence could not be granted, they should be granted long-term social visit passes and also they should be told that they would be entitled to it. I would also appeal to the Minister not to charge huge fees for these long-term social visit passes because some of these people really cannot afford such fees. Another point I would like to bring up is that when work permit holders infringed immigration regulations, they were turned out of Singapore straightaway and more often than not would be banned permanently from entering Singapore. I think this is too severe a penalty to impose. Even criminals who were awarded life sentences do not get imprisonment for life.”
“Sir, I shall be very brief but I would like your permission to speak on all the four items (e) to (g) inclusive, as they are inter-related.”
“This is especially necessary because the Teck Whye Estate is being expanded. So I would sincerely ask the Minister to look into the matter urgently.”
“Thank you, Sir. I want to take up a point with the Minister regarding bus service in the Teck Whye Estate. Teck Whye Estate was first opened in 1979 but for a long period of time there was no bus service inside the estate. The estate is about 2 km away from the main road. In spite of representations made to the bus companies, they thought that it was not profitable to run a service there. So for something like eight years, the residents in the estate had to endure the hardship of braving the rain when it was wet and the hot sun when it was fine, to walk out to the main road to catch the bus. However, after much representation and with the help of the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Communications, we managed to persuade the private bus owners to undertake the job. So the private bus owners were allowed to run a bus service from the estate to Bukit Batok. But to everybody's surprise, the termination of the bus route is not at the Bukit Batok bus interchange but about a mile from the bus interchange, at a place which leads to nowhere. And if anybody wants to catch a connecting bus, he would have to walk a fairly long distance to do so. In spite of that, the private bus company was generous and kind enough to provide the service, and here I would like to record my thanks to them. This service has been operating for some time now. What they have done now is to apply for extension of the bus route to the Bukit Batok bus interchange, and I would appeal to the Minister to look into this matter and, if necessary, issue instructions to the SBS to allow the bus routes to terminate at the interchange so that an efficient bus service could be provided to the residents in the Teck Whye Estate.”
“Sir, accidents are caused by the human factor, by the mechanical condition of the vehicle as well as by road conditions. We have a programme for training drivers. We have inspections for old vehicles. But nothing on the designing of roads. I think we can do a lot to avoid accidents and save valuable human lives by good design. Some of the beautiful roads are badly designed. For example, on a bend, the slope of the road is in the wrong direction. I will give an example. This is at Havelock Road. This is a new beautiful stretch of road but it is wrongly banked at the bends. On a rainy day, the roads are slippery. It is very likely that your car will go off the road. It is such a beautiful road and yet we bank it the wrong way. At first, I thought it was banked towards the side of the road because of the necessity for drainage but it is not true. As far as that stretch of road is concerned, there is a drain in the middle of the road. So there is really no reason why it should be banked the wrong way. I would really urge the PWD to look at all of this. I do not think it costs any more to design a road properly, and it will save a lot of human lives and prevent a lot of accidents.”
“Just input the figure and it will appear on the computer in the Sales Section. So you know that this person has a credit, and you could just allocate a flat to him. Instead, he has got to wait for a long, long time for compensation. In the meantime, various notices are given to him to go and select a flat. After the third notice, he is deemed not to be interested in the selection of a flat and he is supposed to look for his own alternative accommodation. How could that be? He has got a sum owing to him by the Resettlement Department. Here, you are asking him to pay for the flat. He dares not take the flat. And if he does not take the flat after three letters asking him to go and select a flat, he is deemed not to be interested. How could you deem such a thing? Of course, he is interested. It is most unreasonable to deem that he is not interested. Sir, I would appeal to the Minister not to allow the bureaucrats to deem this sort of thing. Let us be compassionate. Let us look at the matter carefully and let us treat the resettlement problem with compassion and not just purely on economic theory. I cannot gainsay the economic theory but I would really appeal to the Minister to be a bit more compassionate.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by the Member for Yishun on resettlement. I would like to appeal especially to the Minister to consider the hardship faced by people affected by resettlement. To the Resettlement Department, they may be one digit, a number. But to the person affected, it is his livelihood. It is really very important. While it is, of course, theoretically correct to say that the best way of allocating scarce resources is to leave it to market forces and the best way is by tender, but I say, let us be a bit more compassionate, not just be desiccated, economic, calculating machines. Let us use the heart a little bit and consider the livelihood of these people, the farmers, the shopkeepers, who are affected. Sir, I would like specifically to supplement my colleague's point on the payment and assessment of compensation. You know, the Resettlement Department is very efficient when it comes to counting trees, shops and other items that count for compensation. But when it comes to paying the compensation, it takes a long time. In the meantime, people are asked to move out. People in the rural areas who are affected, have got no money to pay for the flats that are allocated to them. They dare not take the keys to the flats. Because as soon as they take the keys, they have to pay rent. But they have no money. Yet at the same time they have a sum of money to their credit with the HDB because they are entitled to compensation. With the facilities of the computer these days - and Ministers are now talking of a cashless society - why can you not pay them by Giro? Why can the Resettlement Department not establish a Giro system? There is this number; okay, so much compensation is due.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, under the Primary Resources Programme in this Budget, it has got a very grand sounding objective of: 'To ensure the adequate supply of primary produce to meet local consumption requirements.' Previous to this, Singapore was adequate in the supply of pork, poultry and eggs. But since the Primary Production Department implements its policy, we are now neither adequate in the supply of pork nor in the supply of poultry, nor in the supply of eggs. We have a policy for everything but somehow we do not seem to have a policy for our agricultural sector. We have very high-sounding names like agrotechnological parks. Why can't we call a farm a farm? In fact, we did away with the farms. We were adequate in our supply of some farm produce but we resettled the farmers. And now we are trying to replace the farms. It is just like Bugis Street, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. We had a Bugis Street that was good for tourism. But for public environmental health reasons, we disbanded the whole place and now we are trying to recreate Bugis Street. It is the same thing here. I would like the Minister to announce a definite farming policy. My colleague from Yishun has just spoken and I associate myself with his sentiments. We asked farmers to go into a piece of land to do farming, and overnight, in mid-stream, policies changed. There is really no point having very grandiose sounding policies when what we need are actual down-to-earth policies. I would commend the Minister to look seriously into this problem and to announce a definite policy and to stick to such a policy instead of changing policies like we change clothes.”
“That is correct, Mr Chairman. But I am notspeaking on my amendments. I just want to take the Minister on on the points he raised in his policy statement on HDB.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, may I take up a few points raised by the Minister on his HDB policy statement.”
“Sir, would the Minister explain what is the meaning of "dBA" so that Members like me can understand?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Minister consider allowing only those resettled shopkeepers to tender for the shops? Would the Minister give the reason why it is not in the public interest to allow only shopkeepers affected by resettlement to tender? These people are in the business, and so they should know better than fresh entrants into the retail trade. Mr Dhanabalan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the second part of his question answers the first part. If they know better, they should be able to compete with fresh entrants into the business.”
“Sir, is the Minister aware that under our present wage system, the cost of hiring older workers is necessarily higher than younger workers, and that if we leave the entire decision on hiring to the employer, other things being equal, the employer would hire younger workers instead of retaining the older workers? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am aware of that. In fact, that was one of the primary motivations for wage reform. Workers have to be paid in accordance with their output and productivity. The expectations of some older workers may not be completely in line with what they are able to produce or in line with their contribution. And if they want employers to hire them, then these expectations will have to be revised. And I encourage the Member for Chua Chu Kang to make some speeches to affect these expectations downwards.”
“I would therefore support the amendment to the motion.”
“The system will work where people are prepared to come forward to give evidence. It will not where people are afraid to do so or where the safety of witnesses is threatened. We have difficulty in getting witnesses to come forward to give evidence even in traffic accident cases. How much more so to get witnesses to testify in a security case where the safety of witnesses can be threatened? The British government in colonial Singapore knew this difficulty well. Hence it introduced detention without trial of persons whose activities it considered to be prejudicial to the security of the State. The Internal Security Act is not new. Our Constitution expressly authorizes detention without trial in the interest of public safety, peace and good order. People detained under the Internal Security Act are not without legal remedy. They can apply to court if they think they are unfairly detained. For example, if they think that the Minister has not exercised his authority properly. Also, detention cases are reviewed by a committee headed by a High Court Judge at regular intervals. In the particular case of the 12 persons detained in May, the evidence against them have been presented to the Archbishop who is satisfied that the "proof is there" for detention. In spite of this evidence, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would urge the Minister to review the case of the 15 detainees periodically and, if they are sufficiently rehabilitated and will not pose further threats to the security of the State, I would urge the Minister that they should be released. Our Minister for Home Affairs was a Professor of Constitutional Law before he assumed his present high Ministerial office. I am confident that he will not want to detain any one of the 15 persons a moment longer than is necessary.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the recent detentions should cause concern, concern because in this seemingly peaceful times, we still find subversive elements hard at work, aiming to undermine our society. These arrests cannot be viewed in isolation but must be set against the context of the history of our nation. Singapore is a young nation. We shall be celebrating our 22nd anniversary of independence in less than two weeks. While we did not have to fight bloody battles against our colonial masters to win our independence, our path to independence was by no means uneventful. In Singapore's short history, we have to fight subversive threats from both within Singapore and from outside Singapore. After the Second World War, in the mid-1940s, the Communists infiltrated legitimate organizations like the trade unions, Chinese middle schools, clan organizations and other civic organizations. Then came the communalist agitators in the early 1960s who exploited racial emotions and fanned them into racial riots. These were followed by foreign intelligence black operations in the late 60's to destabilize Singapore. It was through the timely and determined action of the Singapore Government against these diverse forms of subversive activities that we managed to preserve the integrity of our State. To counter this covert subversive actions, the Government was forced to resort to the Internal Security Act. It could not have maintained law and order and preserve the fabric of our society otherwise. Our criminal law system was inherited from the British. The system is an adversary system. You give evidence, evidence according to defined rules. Your evidence is challenged. You prove your case on formal technical evidence. No other form of evidence is admissible.”
“If a tenant's shop is up for sale, would you give him priority? Or has he got to move out first before he tenders with the others?”
“Sir, I just want to ask the Minister two questions. Would priority be given to existing tenants if the shophouses are up for sale? Second question is: can CPF be used to finance the purchase?”
“No, Sir, I was not thinking of compulsory attendance at the advanced driving school. What I was thinking of was teaching of techniques above what are being taught now. Driving could be a very terrifying experience when you get into a skid-pan and find that you have absolutely no control at all over the car. I have experience of that because I attended an advanced driving course. The very fact that you have had a terrifying experience makes you more careful in your every day driving. Anyway, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement:-”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I am encouraged to hear the Minister of State said that errant drivers breaching minor traffic regulations are counselled and not booked. I only hope that the petite lady traffic police are more compassionate in their dealing with the driving public. Sir, I would also ask the Minister whether he would consider establishing an advanced school for motorists and I hope he would consider the suggestion.”
“It was a silent film, Sir, and there appeared on the screen "use both hands"; whereupon Laurel grabbed his girl friend with both hands and embraced her. Of course, motorists learn the basics before they pass the driving test. Indicators should be used for turning, signals should be used for stopping, drive at a safe speed, etc. But all this is usually forgotten as soon as one passes the test. Maybe there should be a compulsory re-learning when one acquires a certain number of demerit points. In this connection, may I suggest for the Minister's consideration that he should establish an advanced motoring school to teach motorists the finer points of vehicle control. Even if one does not know how to heel-and-toe, or steer into the skid after the course, the terrifying experience of losing control on the skid-pan should teach one to be more careful in everyday driving. I want to commend the Traffic Police for having now got out of the bad habit of hiding in bushes, lying in wait for the errant motorists. Their aim, of course, should be the prevention of traffic offences and not the conviction of errant motorists. Sir, I think on the whole the traffic police have done a good job and I want to hand them a bouquet with this message: Well done. There is, however, room for improvement.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead QC-09 of the Main Estimates. On traffic control, the Traffic Police should work closely with the Public Works Department. Last week, during the debate on the PWD, Members of this House have brought up various questions on traffic signs and road conditions and how these could be improved. Most of the traffic accidents are due to human error. A tree does not suddenly jump into the path of a motorist unless he loses control of his vehicle, though, of course, trees do obstruct when not properly planted. A car will not split into two unless the motorist decides to test it against a lamp post. With the opening of more expressways on which vehicular traffic travels at a fast speed, traffic control becomes more urgent. I see that the Traffic Police has instituted measures and these have been referred to by the Member for Kaki Bukit, like patrolling the expressways by special units, camera surveillance at busy junctions, etc. But may I also mention that using the breathalyser to check drunken drivers has also resulted in a significant reduction of accidents. I believe that this reduction can be further improved by a sustained education of the motoring public. Driving on the expressway requires a different technique and more alertness than driving on a deserted byway. The days when one can drive with one hand on the steering wheel and the other on the girl friend is over. This reminds me, Sir, of a black and white movie I saw of Laurel and Hardy. Old Laurel was driving along with one hand on the steering wheel and the other on the shoulder of his gorgeous girl friend, when a traffic cop drew alongside.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, on a point of order. If a Member persists in telling a blatant falsehood, he must be made to withdraw it straightaway instead of being allowed to continue with it. May I suggest, Sir, that you direct that he withdraws the falsehood.”
“Financing of the Housing and Development Board (34) That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TH-01 of the Development Estimates.”
“There are many, many examples of these, Sir, and I am sure Members of the House can tell you many, many more. But I think I have made my point.”
“Sir, the Government is spending vast sums of money on building new roads and upgrading them. In doing so and until the works are completed, a great deal of traffic chaos is created. The chaos is added on by contractors who are not properly controlled and supervised by the PWD engineers. Let me give you an example, Sir. In Chua Chu Kang Road where the new Bukit Batok extension joins the Chua Chu Kang Road, traffic in a four-lane road with a central divider is squeezed into two lanes and merging with traffic in both directions separated only by a double white line. And worst of all, the merging of the traffic is at a bend. The bend is not properly banked and there are inadequate warning signs to indicate the merging of traffic at the bend. The merging of traffic at the bend remains in spite of protests to the PWD by the Chua Chu Kang Citizens Consultative Committee. The only concession the PWD engineers made was to put in a few more warning signs. It is a miracle, Sir, that nobody has been killed so far. Generally, there are not enough warning signs to alert motorists of repair works or diversions ahead. And these signs, if there are any at all, are placed too close to the diversion point or to the repair works to give motorists sufficient time to react. And the PWD does not seem to be doing anything about it. Also, our roads are badly sign-posted. Examples are: (1) Merging traffic without warning. Sample location: Clemenceau Avenue by the side of the Istana. (2) Lanes for traffic going straight and turning is suddenly restricted to turning only. Sample location: Orchard Road turning into Paterson Road. (3) Signs indicating closure of left-lane but right-lane closed instead. Sample location: East Coast Parkway at Benjamin Sheares Bridge going from Changi to City.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, may I join in the protest of this indiscriminate naming and changing of names. For example, my constituency is now changed to something that is possibly pronounced as Kai Ko Gang instead of Chua Chu Kang which is a well distinguished name and has a history behind it. After getting away from previous indecent translations of street names, we are now having this indiscriminate changing of names. For example, previously, Raffles Place was translated as Lai Fu Se Pu Li which means that Raffles was indecent. But after having gone through that, we are now having another bout. I think it should really stop.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Minister what alternative employment he has in mind for these people?”
“Sir, may I ask the Minister whether blood donors are screened for AIDS to ensure that the blood donated is AIDS-free?”
“Sir, the Minister just said that one of the criteria of awarding scholarships is manpower requirement. Here we have a post of a Research Officer in Parliament which is not filled. May I urge that the PSC make greater efforts in filling this post and perhaps they could look at the returned scholars who are bonded and just assign a returned scholar to the post.”
“Sir, may I just urge the PSC to make a greater -”
“No, Sir, I am not withdrawing and I would appeal to my GPC colleagues to vote against the Minister. Question on the amendment put, and negatived. The sum of $6,323,430 for Head F ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. Head H -”
“Sir, why can't we offer this place to the High Court, to be an annexe of the High Court. We can take City Hall. It is for us to decide. If we have a will, we have a way. You know what is said of Parliament. It is said that Parliament can do anything except change a woman into a man or a man into a woman.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I think the Minister is really not convincing in his answers to my questions. He said there is one post. Yes, I did say that there was one post of a Research Officer. But he said they could not fill that post. I wonder why? Is it because the salary is too low? I am sure that with a will that single post can be filled. But my point is that even after the single post was filled, it would not be good enough. We have nine GPCs. We must at least have nine Research Officers. I mean even if there was one officer, it would not be sufficient to service all the nine GPCs. I would suggest that the GPC Chairmen join with me in cutting the vote so that the Leader of the House will take note and will provide us with research help. Also about this building. It is a historic building. There is no doubt. That is why I say we could turn it into a museum. But it is a very inconsequential building. You know, when people ask for Parliament, you say, "You look for the building with an elephant outside." That is what Parliament is. Whereas the City Hall is different. I am not asking that we move to a new building or we build a new building. I say we go to City Hall. It is a beautiful building with beautiful colonnades, an imposing building, and it also has a history behind it. So I think it is really a nice building to move to. As to changing time, surely SBC can manage. And if they cannot, I think we privatize it. I am sure that with competition, SBC will be able to manage.”
“It will not be a good idea to have our GPC chairmen sitting at the back because we will then not be able to see them. We want to have good visual and eye contact with them. As regards shifting the sitting time back to the afternoon, I think we have considered this very carefully when we decided to move the sitting to the morning. We wanted to televise Parliamentary proceedings so that Singaporeans will know what takes place in Parliament and they can be informed and be educated about how the business of government is conducted. In order to meet this objective, it will be necessary to have Parliament sittings ending not later than 5.30 or 6.00 pm in order to catch TV time. I understand the concern of the Member for Chua Chu Kang but I think for the time being we have to live with this.”