Teo Hup Teck
Singapore
“The Parliamentary Secretary has said in his answer that many riders of motor-cycles and scooters park their motor-cycles and scooters in the five-foot way. This proves my point that it is difficult to get parking lots for scooters and motor-cycles.”
“OFFICIAL SECRETS (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Official Secrets Ordinance (Chapter 84 of the Revised Edition)", presented by Mr Barker; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. LEGAL PROFESSION (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Legal Profession Act, 1966 (No.”
“A supplementary question. Is the Minister aware that whenever rural people apply for the erection of houses, they meet with difficulties and inconvenience? And whenever law-abiding citizens apply according to regulations or through the assistance of Members of Parliament, they have to wait for several months or even up to one year?”
“May I ask a supplementary question? Because there are no traffic lights at the junction of Yio Chu Kang Road and Jalan Kayu, many drivers do not abide by the traffic regulations. When they approach this junction, the speed normally is quite high.”
“It is because they are not supported by the people and some of the Opposition Parties operate on a communalistic basis. Even in non-Chinese constituencies, a P.A.P. Chinese candidate may be returned; whereas a communal Party will fail with its communal candidate in his own racial community.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we are not directing our complaints at the Chairman of the U.R.S.C. We know very well that the Committee has its own difficulties because the funds allocated for the rural areas are insufficient.”
The complete record
Every one of 28 lines we hold for Teo Hup Teck, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“Because of this, some of the finance companies may have to retrench their' staff and some may have to close down, thereby giving rise to more unemployment and aggravating our present unemployment situation. Mr Speaker, clause 21 of the Bill' says that no finance companies shall purchase or acquire any immovable property. We must understand that when finance companies receive deposits, from the public, they pay interest. Therefore they must do some business by way of loans given out at higher interest rates. If there is a provision that no finance company shall purchase or acquire immovable property, then how do we expect them to continue with their operations? Generally speak ing, banks can make use of money in current accounts without interest. This position which is enjoyed by the banks is not enjoyed by the finance companies. In fact, banks also levy service charges to meet their overheads, even in respect of current accounts. On the other hand, finance companies do not enjoy such facilities. So if they are to be more restrictively controlled than banks, then in order to meet their overhead expenses and to maintain their level of profit, they will meet with great difficulties. In fact, they may not even make a profit at all under these stringent restrictions. The idea of this Bill, of course, is to protect the interest of the public, and the strict control of finance companies is good only to this extent. Mr Speaker, before this Bill is read a Third time, it is my humble view, a view shared by the Member for Tampines and the Member for Ulu Pandan, that it should be referred to a Select Committee for reconsideration. 5.32 p.m.”
“If insurance companies are treated as banks, why cannot finance companies be similarly treated? Mr Speaker, the existence of finance companies is more or less complementary to the operation of banks in Singapore. I would like to show in what way this is true. Many small traders, industrialists, or small manufacturers are unable to get financial assistance from banks, but they can get it from finance companies. This is one instance of industrial or commercial activities by finance companies, and in this way they make a great contribution to our economy. Clause 6 of the Bill provides that the paid-up capital of a finance company shall not be less than $500,000. But clause 17 (1) (c) provides that any unsecured loans should not exceed $1,000. So if a company has a capital of $500,000, its unsecured loan is to be limited by this clause to $1,000 or less. This is inconvenient to the operations of the finance company, and I feel that this clause should be reconsidered. We must see whether the financial position of the individual finance company warrants such a blanket restriction. In other words, we must have some discretion in respect of restriction of loans according to the paid-up capital and the position of the individual finance company. Mr Speaker, if a finance company is big, bigger than the others, then I think it can increase the loan granted. In order to meet the very high overhead expenses, some finance companies may raise "football money" or the rate of interest in respect of loans given out, and because their scope of activities is narrowed down, their turnover becomes smaller. So their profits may not be able to meet the overhead expenses.”
“In this respect, if finance companies can assist in looking for liquid assets or idle capital, then the accumulation of capital brought about by the finance companies will be of great benefit to the industrial development of Singapore, particularly in the field of investment. So it is clear that there is scope for expansion of the business of finance companies. The editorial also dealt with three points. The first point is that this Bill is actually a duplication of the Banking Ordinance, but it is more restrictive than the Banking Ordinance. So because of this Bill, the position of finance companies in future will not be as good as that of the banks, and difficulties will arise which may stifle the flourishing business of finance companies in Singapore. This may give rise to very serious consequences. The second point brought up in this editorial is that the future activities and businesses of finance companies under strict control will not function so well, and this is the negative aspect of this Bill. As a matter of fact, it may be good to protect the interests of the whole of society, but in protecting the interests of the society, particularly the depositors, we should also see that the restrictive law does not interfere with the role played by the finance companies in national development. And so they should be given the same protection as insurance companies are given in Singapore. The third point brought up in the editorial is that the regulation of the operations of finance companies in loans and mortgages and other aspects is too restrictive. It suggests that if banks are allowed to give loans on hire purchases and mortgages, why cannot finance companies be given the same facilities?”
“This will give rise to very serious repercussions and dangerous consequences. Mr Speaker, I fully endorse the views expressed by the Member for Ulu Pandan when he suggested that this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee for further careful consideration. In this way, representatives of finance companies and members of the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and other interested parties, including members of the public, will be given a chance to express their views on this Bill. At the same time, we can avoid the misunderstanding on the part of finance companies in Singapore who may allege that this Bill is introduced in order to assist foreign capital at the expense of local capital. Mr Speaker, generally speaking, we all know that the role played by finance companies is similar to that played by banks in Singapore. Mainly their business is to collect deposits from the people and give out loans at some interest. So in this way they are the same as banks. And their existence need not necessarily pose a threat to or compete with the banks in Singapore. Mr Speaker, I wish to quote the editorial of the Sin Chew Jit Poh of the 19th of December. This editorial made certain suggestions in regard to the present Bill. It says that banks play a very important role in the accumulation of capital, but the role that they play has not reached the ideal stage. The standard of living in Hong Kong may not be as high as Singapore, but, on the average, the population in Hong Kong have about $2,100 deposited per capita in the banks. This is higher than the average deposit in Singapore per capita, which is only $650. So the average deposit per capita in Hong Kong is about three times that of Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the introduction of this Bill aims at strict control of finance companies and the operation thereof. It also aims at the protection of depositors who invest money in them. Therefore, the intention is good in principle, and I believe it is the aim of the Bill to get rid of those finance companies which are not properly run or not bona fide. But the operation of this Bill may also affect those companies which are bona fide. So, Mr Speaker, we must accept the fact that a well-organised and properly operated finance company is of benefit to small traders and wage earners in Singapore. In short, to the small man, finance companies which are bona fide are good because they provide easy and convenient financial aid. But we agree that those which are not so good, of course, should be dealt with. So before this Bill is passed in this House or implemented in future, we should go a step further and study this Bill more carefully to see whether certain clauses in it are over-restrictive, thereby stifling the proper operation of bona fide finance companies. We must see that such bona fide companies are not adversely affected by the operation of the law. On the contrary, if operation of finance companies in Singapore contributes to the prosperity of our country, then they should be encouraged and not restricted adversely. Mr Speaker, if this Bill is passed hurriedly without any overall careful consideration of the various repercussions and consequences, then it will cause some confusion in our society, parti cularly to those who are now depositors. Ef such depositors lose their confidence in the finance companies, then some sensitivity will be caused and a lot of depositors will queue up outside the finance companies to withdraw the `money they have deposited.”
“Sir, what I wanted to ask the Ministry concerned was whether it would consider increasing the parking lots for scooters and motor-cycles.”
“The Parliamentary Secretary has said in his answer that many riders of motor-cycles and scooters park their motor-cycles and scooters in the five-foot way. This proves my point that it is difficult to get parking lots for scooters and motor-cycles. According to regulations, the parking of a motorcycle or a motorised vehicle in the five-foot way is against the law.”
“OFFICIAL SECRETS (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Official Secrets Ordinance (Chapter 84 of the Revised Edition)", presented by Mr Barker; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. LEGAL PROFESSION (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Legal Profession Act, 1966 (No. 57 of 1966)", presented by Mr Barker; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available silting of Parliament, and to be printed. NGEE ANN COLLEGE BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.20 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the Standing Orders, I would like to get a full report from the Minister later on. TRAFFIC LIGHTS AT YIO CHU KANG ROAD/JALAN KAYU JUNCTION 19. Mr Teo Hup Teck asked the Minister of State (Prime Minister's Department) if he will consider setting up traffic lights at the junction of Yio Chu Kang Road and Jalan Kayu to smoothen the flow of traffic and to minimise accidents at that junction. Tuan Haji Yaacob Bin Mohamed(In Malay): Mr Speaker, this question has already been answered by the Minister of State of Defence when the hon. Member put a supplementary question consequent upon Question No. 3 on the Order Paper. So there is no need for me to make a second reply. BILLS INTRODUCED 3.18 p.m NATIONAL THEATRE TRUST (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the National Theatre Trust Ordinance, 1960 (No. 61 of 1960)", presented by the Minister for Culture and Social Affairs (Inche Othman Bin Wok); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting day after 1st of June, and to be printed. SCIENCE COUNCIL OF SINGAPORE BILL "to provide for the establishment of a Science Council of Singapore", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Deputy Prime Minister (Dr Toh Chin Chye); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting day after 1st of June, and to be printed. JUDICIAL COMMITTEE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Judicial Committee Act, 1966 (No. 37 of 1966)", presented by the Minister for Law and National Development (Mr E. W. Barker); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.”
“Sir, the Government will depend on the reports of the inspectors to assess any application for the erection of a house. Normally these inspectors will go through the timber merchants or contractors and builders”
“At Meet-the-People sessions, I have received some complaints from the rural folk. Because the P.A.P. Government is a clean government, corruption is not allowed.”
“A supplementary question. Is the Minister aware that whenever rural people apply for the erection of houses, they meet with difficulties and inconvenience? And whenever law-abiding citizens apply according to regulations or through the assistance of Members of Parliament, they have to wait for several months or even up to one year? And even then they cannot get permits to erect their houses. In other cases, certain houses -”
“May I ask a supplementary question? Because there are no traffic lights at the junction of Yio Chu Kang Road and Jalan Kayu, many drivers do not abide by the traffic regulations. When they approach this junction, the speed normally is quite high. So I would like to ask the Minister whether he has any intention to set up traffic lights at this junction?”
“It is because they are not supported by the people and some of the Opposition Parties operate on a communalistic basis. Even in non-Chinese constituencies, a P.A.P. Chinese candidate may be returned; whereas a communal Party will fail with its communal candidate in his own racial community. This clearly shows that multi-racialism is the correct proposition acceptable to all the people in Singapore. In the Report, it seems that the recommendation for the setting up of the Council of State is because the P.A.P. may become a dictatorial Party in this House. I do not agree that because of that situation there can be any discrimination against any minority. In principle I support the motion before the House. 4.09 p.m.”
“Sir, I thank the Member for Changi for reminding me that there are two seats reserved for two absent Barisan Members. Just now I have said that the Barisan Sosialis do not care for the people. That is why the two Members have also disappeared. But I would not like to elaborate on this point. The Commission's reason for setting up the Council of State is that the P.A.P. is the sole Party in this House. We can be proud of one fact, i.e., the P.A.P. is able to inculcate in the people a new concept and a new type of education for a multi-racial society acceptable to all the people. And the P.A.P. has continuously received their support because it has no communalistic concept or bias. It has been able to educate the people and make them aware that, though we are people of different races, yet we all belong to the same country. We enjoy equal rights and share a common destiny. We have been able to look after the interest of the various races and have respected the languages of the various races. For instance, in this House we have representatives from the Chinese, Malay and Indian communities. We can freely address the House in Malay. Chinese, Indian or English. This shows that we are treating all the races equally. We are also giving equal treatment in all the four streams of education, so that they can all develop equally. We have been able to inculcate in the people a sense of multi-racialism and a new concept for a multi-racial society. From this we can see that the P.A.P. is one political Party that represents the people and whatever candidate of whatever race we have put up in any election has always been elected to the House. The Opposition have always been defeated in any elections.”
“Because of this, they cannot receive the support of the people. Therefore, if they dare to compete with the P.A.P, in the political arena they will definitely meet with defeat and disaster. Because of these various reasons, they are no longer able to represent the people today. As a result, they have no representation in this House. As I have said, if the setting up of the Council of State is merely because of this situation, that there is an absence of the Opposition in the House, then the reason is wrong. If the setting up of the Council of State is to safeguard the rights and interests of the minorities, then it may serve a useful purpose, as we cannot guarantee that in the next I U or 20 years the P.A.P, will definitely retain the majority in this House. By that time the leadership of the P.A.P, will be getting old, and if no capable leadership has emerged then, there may be some crisis in this House, namely, there may come a day when there is no political Party which can truly represent the interests of all the people. Other political Parties in authority may then discriminate against the minorities, whether on religious, cultural, linguistic or racial grounds. For this reason, I support the principle underlying the setting up of this Council of State. But the reason for the recommendation of this Council of State has been --- Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi) rose -”
“has its platform and principles, and we will never act in any way contrary to the interests and rights of the minorities and will not do anything that will harm the religious, cultural or racial interests of anybody. Today we have come to a situation where there is only P.A.P. representation in Parliament and no Opposition. The blame for this should not be put on the P.A.P. but on the Opposition Parties instead. It is also the choice of the electorate. It is because today the P.A.P. is working in the interest of the people. Its every action is based on the interest of the people. That is why we have so many seats in, this House, and the absence of the' Opposition in this House is because the Opposition has not done its duty as an Opposition in this House. It is also because their platform and principles are contrary to the interest of the people and they have actually done harm to the people. That is why they have been discarded by the people and today they cannot have any footing in the House. Just look at the Legislative Assembly of 1955 when the P.A.P. had only three representatives in it. Today we have 49 P.A.P. Members in this House How did we achieve this? Obviously it is because the P.A.P. has been able to represent the interest of the people and it has the support of the people. That is why we have achieved the present position. In the general elections in 1963 the Barisan Sosialis had 13 seats in this House. They could have made use of that opportunity to express the wishes of the people in this House. Yet they did not do so. Instead, they withdrew from Parliament, ignoring their constituents. From this, we can see clearly that they are not concerned with the interests of the people of Singapore. Their object of loyalty is elsewhere - China.”
“Sir, one thing that is regrettable is that certain people and certain organisations have given opinions which are contrary to the multi-racial principles and recommendations in the Report. They have put forward representations on how to safeguard the minority rights in religion, language and other matters. Their suggestions are inimical to all. These can only benefit themselves and will do no good to others. Today, what I want to touch upon is Chapter III of the Report, which is about the Council of State, and give my views and criticisms thereon. According to the Report, the Commission have found that there is only P.A.P. representation in this House. There is no political Party which can take up the duty of an effective Opposition here. Therefore, the Commission, for the sake of public interest, have recommended the setting up of a Council of State in order that it may exercise the function of making constructive suggestions to Parliament or offering criticisms or amendments to legislation before Parliament. In so doing, any Bill which affects the interests of the minorities will be thoroughly studied before it can be passed. It is suggested that in such a situation, when there is no Opposition in the House, that the Council of State may serve a good purpose by preventing the passage of any legislation discriminating against the minorities. But I have something to say about this Council of State if the sole reason for its establishment is for that purpose alone. There are both merits and demerits in it. I can say that although we have 49 out of 51 seats in this House, the P.A.P.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, for the past few days many P.A.P. Members of Parliament have been discussing the Report of the Constitutional Commission in this House. Outside the House, the electorate is also paying great attention to see whether their Members of Parliament are giving any constructive criticisms to or constructive views on the Report. They want to see whether the views of the Commission have been carefully studied by Parliament. They are paying full attention to what we are saying in this House. [Mr Tang See Chim in the Chair] 3.52 p.m. Before I comment on any of the items in the Report, let me, first of all, express my thanks to the members of the Commission for their effort and their good work. Sir, since 8th January, 1966, when the Commission was appointed by the President of Singapore, every member of the Commission has been contributing his bit and doing his duty hearing representations from various quarters and considering how safeguards can be provided in the Constitution for the interests and the rights of the minorities. They have produced the Report which is now before us for discussion. In the course of their work, the Commission have also put forward reasoned arguments for their recommendations. They have also made criticisms on certain representations and have given their views on what they have accepted and what they have rejected. They have made a very careful analysis of the representations submitted to them. They have studied the pros and cons of the whole matter. They have done their duty well, and their efforts in the service of the country are laudable and deserve our admiration.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we are not directing our complaints at the Chairman of the U.R.S.C. We know very well that the Committee has its own difficulties because the funds allocated for the rural areas are insufficient. Our intention is to paint a picture of the general situation in the rural areas for the information of the Chairman of the U.R.S.C., so that he will be able to find some way of resolving the problem. I only hope that this Committee will be able to improve the conditions in rural areas.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I share the sentiments expressed by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, because my constituency is also a rural area and I know very well the situation that is generally common in all the rural areas. Fortunately, the Chairman of the Urban and Rural Services Committee is here to listen to what I have to say and do something about it. I do not say that the Government is discriminatory in its treatment of the urban and rural areas, but there are many things which have to be improved and need carrying out in the rural areas. There are not enough funds to carry out the projects. For instance, the supply of electricity, water and light is not provided in some rural areas because of a lack of funds. Also certain rural roads have been neglected by the Government ever since it came to power. The idea of electing a representative in this House is that he should do something constructive for his constituency. We will be approaching 1968 soon when Members of Parliament will have to stand for election again. The present is a testing period for us. It is, therefore, necessary for us to see that the supply of water, electricity and gas is facilitated.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Sembawang has said that when we implement this Bill, the Barisan Members would oppose it and would try their best to frustrate its implementation. This is true. But what we have done is correct. If we believe this, we can disregard their opposition. The people of our country are well aware of who their enemies are. In the recent by-election in Thomson, the Barisan Sosialis incited the people to cast blank votes. But the results showed that the people were not misled by them. There were only about 300 misguided people who were deceived by them. There were about 11,000 voters, and about 9,000 of them cast their votes for the P.A.P. This shows that what the Barisan Sosialis did in the past was not approved by the people. Therefore, this National Service (Amendment) Bill will be successfully implemented, no matter how the Barisan Sosialis try their best to sabotage it. I will try to fulfil my obligation to mobilise all the people within this age group to answer the call of the nation. 6.31 p.m.”
“At the same time, we will have laid down a firm foundation for a multi-racial society, because during the course of training the youths of various races will have the opportunity to live together, understand one another, and get to know their habits of living and their respective strong and weak points. In this way, a strong body corporate will be established. This is one of the main tasks of our nation-building and also one of the most significant features in the National Service (Amendment) Bill. In the task of nation-building we will be able to train and bring up a generation infused with national consciousness and patriotism. These young people will be able to understand one another, and so the national solidarity of our nation will be strengthened. After our younger generation, under the correct guidance of the Government, has been organised to meet the exigencies of a national emergency, they will certainly answer the call of the nation to defend our country with pride and glory and to ensure our national survival. Mr Speaker, Sir, there is no doubt about the need for this National Service (Amendment) Bill. I believe it will receive the enthusiastic support of our people. In the past few years the people in Jalan Kayu and other constituencies have taken part in all activities, such as organising themselves into the Vigilante Corps, and have expressed a high degree of patriotism particularly during the confrontation. I believe this Bill will also receive the support of our young people. Therefore, I fully support it. Its successful implementation will certainly ensure the survival of our country.”
“This is what the Prime Minister has said, and it reminds us of the great responsibility of the youths of Singapore. They must understand and appreciate the realities of life. So at a time when our country is calling us to take up national service, we must come out bravely and take up the glorious task of defending and protecting our country. We must do our level best to shoulder our responsibility as citizens. To those who join the Army, Navy and Air Force, the Police Force, the Vigilante Corps, and the Special Constabulary, great glory goes to them. Mr Speaker, Sir, national service is needed not only to defend our country and deter foreign intervention and suppress internal subversion, but it also has a more significant and positive meaning. As we all know, our foreign policy is basically a non-aligned one. What we want is the maximum number of friends and the minimum number of enemies. Therefore, we have no intention whatsoever to invade other countries. But, on the other hand, we will not allow any other country to undermine our sovereignty or our territorial integrity. Therefore, the setting up of the Armed Forces is with a view to defending our country. We are definite about this. We are a young country and we must establish well-trained armed forces. This will take perhaps 10 or 20 years to accomplish. This is what our Prime Minister has said - that it will take about 5 to 7 years, or even 10 years, to complete this training programme. By that time we will be able to rely on ourselves to defend our country.”
“If good men are not turned into soldiers, then who will be there to defend and protect the independence of our country, the lives and property of our people? Mr Speaker, today to be in the army and fight does not mean that we fight only with spears and swords. It also entails the exercise of the mind. Some brain work is involved. So the task of defending the nation cannot very well be placed on the good-for-nothing people, but it must be placed on the useful citizens of our country, who have been disciplined and well-trained. These will be the people who will defend our country. I believe that the old concept that good men do not become soldiers must be discarded in toto. At a time when our nation is in need of people to defend its independence and security, we must all come out bravely and accept this challenge and responsibility. This is the time when good iron must be made into nails, and good men turned into soldiers. This is the new concept that must prevail in the present situation. To join the army is a matter of glory for everybody. The old concept must be completely discarded and replaced by the new concept. This is the pre-requisite and spirit which we must establish to ensure the successful formation of our defence force. Singapore is an oasis in South-east Asia, and there is no place other than Singapore capable of giving such a high standard of living to its people. Therefore, it is our good fortune to be able to live in a country like Singapore. As the Prime Minister has already said, our young people must always bear in mind that if we do not understand the necessity of defending our country, then whatever we do will be in vain and in the end we shall lose everything, and others will come and step into our shoes.”
“In the past, we relied mainly on the Commonwealth and other friendly nations for our national defence and safety. But after independence and in the context of the present international situation, we must take note of the particular fact that England is now taking steps to cut down its troops in the Far East, including the withdrawal of its base in Singapore. This reduction will be planned stage by stage, and the time will come when there will be a complete withdrawal of British troops from Singapore. So we must not depend too much on Britain for our defence. We cannot deny that, for our own security, we must take certain steps in this direction. Of course, if necessary, we can also come to some kind of arrangement with friendly nations in the matter of defence. But between us, I say that the main task of looking after the defence and security of our country is a matter for the people of Singapore themselves to decide, so that we can protect our nation from invasion or being jeopardised by anti-national activists. Every responsible and loyal citizen of Singapore must protect his own country and the lives and property of the people from subversion. Under the old society there was a saying which goes like this: "Good iron is never used for making nails, and good men are never made into soldiers." This is quite a popular Chinese saying, but it is an old concept. Perhaps in the old days this saying had some significance. But in the present context, its significance has been completely lost. If good young men are not turned into soldiers, then it follows that the nation will have to depend on good-for-nothing people for its defence. So how can the national security be safeguarded?”
“On the contrary, national service is intended for the defence and protection of the people of a sovereign State. So this change in outlook and attitude towards national service is necessary. Our people must take pride in joining the People's Defence Force, the Special Constabulary, the Vigilante Corps and other services. These organisations have been set up in order to make sure that we can depend on our own strength to defend our independent country and the property and freedom of our people so that our sovereignty and independence will not be jeopardised by any aggressive foreign power or anti-national elements. So the good young people of our country must take pride in joining the national service. The National Service (Amendment) Bill is very significant in this respect. National service in the world - be it in France or any independent country which is neutral or otherwise- is a matter of necessity. For instance, in America, England, Russia, China and other countries, national service is implemented without any question, and even small countries like the Philippines, Thailand, Laos and neutral Switzerland have made provision for national service. Generally speaking, national service is a matter which concerns a citizen who has a duty to his own country. As a member of the Armed Forces of an independent country, I say that it is the duty of all citizens to protect and defend the country and the lives of the people. It is very much a matter of pride for everybody to do this. It is a matter of glory, I would say. Today Singapore is a fully independent, sovereign and integral State. Our people, I am sure, will take great pride in joining the various units for national service.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I feel that as a Member of Parliament I have a duty to support the National Service (Amendment) Bill and air my views on it. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill not only concerns the interest of the people of Jalan Kayu but also the interest of all the people in the Republic. It is also a matter of life and death and involves the security of the nation. As a Member representing the people of Jalan Kayu, it is with great pleasure and pride that I speak on this Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, you will recall that in 1952, when the National Service Ordinance was introduced, it did not receive the popular support of the people in my constituency or the people at large. On the contrary, it was met with a certain degree of opposition from the people of my constituency. The reasons were very obvious. At that time, the people of Singapore were living in a colonial era. They were under colonial rule and were not imbued with national consciousness. For this reason, the people of my constituency and our country at large were under no obligation nor were they duty bound at that time to support national service in the interest of a foreign or colonial power. It was a very understandable argument at that time. Although this happened in Singapore only ten years ago, it cannot be denied that the people were right then in advancing such an argument. Mr Speaker, Sir, you will have noticed that the political situation in Singapore has changed completely during the last ten years. We have thrown off the shackles of colonial rule and have obtained independence. It is, therefore, necessary that our own people should defend our sovereignty. So the significance of national service has changed completely now because it is not in furtherance of the interest of any foreign or colonial power.”