Yong Nyuk Lin
Singapore
“Sir, it gives mc a chance to say again that the modified plan cannot be accepted at this stage. But it does give me the opportunity to answer another point which was raised by the Member for Ton Payoh and which I have missed in my answer, i.e, that the fringe area car parks would not be utilized at night.”
“I am sorry, Sir, for failing to answer all the questions raised by the Member for Sembawang. As regards the full implementation of the recommendations of the White Paper which was meant to be completed by the middle of 1973, I can only say that it was not a 100% implementation of all the recommendations.”
“He said that they threw the mail on the floor. Here again, unless a complaint is lodged, we can do little about it because all postmen and postwomen are being told how to behave and to extend courtesy, and what the correct procedure is and methods of delivery of mail.”
“" And if, God forbid, priority national needs should one day call for a limitation of circulation of automobiles or any other measure, no one would then regard it as an intolerable sacrifice. "For in a society where humanism regains fully its rights, the automobile should not constitute an end in itself," Mr Graber said.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is regrettably true that after many of the estimates for Paya Lebar Airport had been voted, revotes had to be asked for. The reason is that it has taken a long time to get all these development proposals started. They are development proposals really, Sir, and plans have got to be drawn and checked.”
“In these circumstances, I hope it will be appreciated that they are stretching themselves far and wide, and there is always a limit to what a human being can do I can assure him that we will continue to enforce the regulations as far as it is humanly possible before getting a complaint from the Member for Sembawang who says that our enfor…”
The complete record
Every one of 678 lines we hold for Yong Nyuk Lin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 14.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn. Question proposed. EMPLOYMENT OF CONTRACT LABOUR BY GOVERNMENT 6.57 p.m.”
“During the last seven months, over 19,000 mothers have been given family planning assistance by the Family Planning and Population Board. (c) We have also adopted a liberal policy towards employment of doctors with so-called non-registrable degrees as far as the United Kingdom General Medical Council is concerned, so long as there exists a large vacancy situation on our doctor establishment as at present. This is shown by the number of such doctors now in service:- Appointed prior to June 1959 1 Appointed between June 1959 and September 1963 3 Appointed between October 1963 and present 8 -- Total 12 == NEGOTIATIONS ON COMMON CURRENCY (Request for statement) 9. Mr Lim Cheng Lock asked the Minister for Finance if he will make a statement on (a) what transpired in the negotiations on a common currency; (b) why no agreement was reached in the course of those negotiations; and (c) the position of currency in Singapore after the 12th June, 1967.”
“As for the steps taken to improve the situation, other than a review of salaries which is to be determined by the Salaries Commission now in session, we have already reorganised the pattern of work for doctors in service, in order to reduce their work-load as much as possible and generally to improve their conditions of work, for example: (a) In August 1964, the Outpatient Dispensary in Outram Road General Hospital was closed down and the outpatient service decentralised to 26 Outpatient Dispensaries with simultaneous introduction of a token charge of 50 cents per attendance. This firm move has brought about an improved service for the public because waiting time has been drastically cut down as malingerers were weeded out and doctors can now spend more time with their patients. This is reflected in the significant drop in attendances at Government Outpatient Dispensaries from the peak figure of 2.7 million in 1963 to 2.1 million in 1965 (last year). (b) In December 1964, a nominal charge of $10 for 'C' class patients was introduced in Kandang Kerbau Maternity Hospital in an endeavour to cut down the excessive number of deliveries at this grossly over-worked hospital and instead to popularise the free domiciliary midwifery service. Added to this was the launching of a massive 5-year family planning campaign through the establishment of the Family Planning and Population Board in January this year with the objective of reducing our present birth rate of 29 per thousand by one-half. I am pleased to state that there are strong indications that our womenfolk are responding whole-heartedly towards family planning in order to have smaller yet happier families.”
“The number of doctors who have resigned from Government service during the first seven months of 1966 is 39. Of these, nine resigned to take up appointment in the University of Singapore - not actually resignations from our point of view, because the University must get staff; three took up appointments in other medical services, for example, to join the Army Medical Corps; two went for further studies overseas; six resigned to go into private practice, but 19 did not give any reasons for their resignation. I would like to mention, however, that during the same period, 64 doctors were recruited. It must be accepted that there will always be a number of resignations from service for various reasons. Whilst admitting that the rate of resignation is still high, we should take cognisance of whether the rate of resignation has been reduced in recent years, and this, I am pleased to state, is the case. In 1964, out of an approved establishment of 453 doctors, there were 97 -- almost 100 -- vacancies, but as at 31st July this year, the position is 461 on approved establishment with 37 vacancies or a 60 per cent improvement over that of 1½ years ago. Furthermore, it is confidently expected that all vacancies are likely to be filled by 1967 next year.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, proposals have been made in the 1967 Development Estimates for a new canteen to replace the present canteen in Woodbridge Hospital. However, whilst this proposal was under consideration, the Woodbridge Hospital Recreation Club came forward suggesting that it be allowed to build a canteen, combined with recreation rooms. This proposition is now under consideration. If it is approved, the hospital will have a new canteen to replace the old one as well as indoor recreational facilities which will be open to any member of the staff, including those from the nearby Trafalgar Home and the Chronic Sick Hospital, as well as members of the public. RESIGNATION OF DOCTORS FROM GOVERNMENT SERVICE 8. Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Minister for Health how many doctors resigned from the service during the period 1st January to 31st July, 1966, and the reasons for their resignations, and whether and what steps have been taken to improve the situation.”
“(e) A long-term health education campaign will be initiated and maintained both in schools for the children and for members of the public, through the mass media of the Press, Radio and Television. I shall shortly be inviting the officials of both the Public Daily-Rated Cleansing Workers' Union and that section of the A.U.P.E. which represents the supervisory grades of the Public Cleansing Department for a discussion on the proposed reorganised methods and pattern of work and hope to get their full support and co-operation towards putting an end, once and for all, to the ridiculous inefficiency of our present public cleansing service, and thus to augur a new chapter for a more efficient public cleansing service for Singapore, as from October 1966. CANTEEN FACILITIES AT WOODBRIDGE HOSPITAL 7. Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Minister for Health whether he is aware that the existing canteen facilities at the Wood bridge Hospital are inadequate, and whether and when a canteen with better facilities will be erected.”
“(ii) Out of a daily collection of over 600 tons of refuse, an estimated 245 tons or 40 per cent is removed by direct collection from household dust-bins, and this involves 230 workers. (iii) There is therefore an estimated 60 per cent of refuse which has to be laboriously swept up by hand, dug up from drains, put into hand-carts, and then pushed to and placed into large public dust-bins at over 500 bin centres, by nearly 2,000 workers. Most of this refuse, not collected from dust-bins, is largely due to certain irresponsible sections of the public, including hawkers and householders, who indiscriminately throw refuse on to roads and into drains or any vacant piece of land. The revised pattern of work on re-organisation will include: (a) A gradual switch-over to one or more direct collection and less of street cleansing. Any householder or hawker, without a proper dust-bin, will be charged and penalised with a deterrent fine for being a public health menace. (b) A system of task work will be introduced so that a refuse vehicle and work force attached to it (not as many as eight as at present but reduced by one-half to four) will be given an allotted beat with a daily quota of dust-bins to be cleared and the vehicle and crew will be allowed to check-off, even before official knocking-off time, when they complete their allotted task, so that there will be no excuse to slacken or to resort to delaying tactics as responsibility for satisfactory task work will clearly fall on workers as well as supervisory staff. (c) A two-shift system is to be established in place of the present unsatisfactory one-shift system of work. (d) Something new - a bonus will be paid to workers who do not use up their 42 days of sick leave provision.”
“Other important reorganisation steps which have been taken, so far, are as follows:- (a) In October 1965, recruitment of an auxiliary public cleansing force known as the Emergency Cleansing Corps was started. This is a uniformed and disciplined task force, and the basis of recruitment is from two sources, namely, the Work Brigade and from the thousands of our unemployed citizens, now in receipt of Social Welfare assistance. The strength of the Emergency Cleansing Corps today is 624 and this is being stepped up, without limit at present, to keep up with requirements of reorganisation for a more efficient public cleansing service in Singapore than is available at present. (b) In May this year, overtime work (at 1½ rates) during weekdays was stopped, unless at the request of the Public Cleansing Department. Prior to this, between 250 and 300 were on such overtime, daily, on weekdays. Now, the number on weekday overtime work is at the most around ten. (c) We have also decided to stop Sunday work (at double rates) and public holiday work (at treble rates) with effect from 1st October, 1966. It should be brought home to the knowledge of this House that, as a rule, the amount of refuse cleared on Sundays and public holidays (after paying double and treble rates) is less than what is cleared during a normal weekday! (d) It is also necessary for me now to reveal certain startling facts why public cleansing in Singapore needs wholesale reorganisation involving even its pattern of work before contemplating any expansion of work force: (i) Out of 184,431 assessed buildings in Singapore, there are only 48,345 dust-bins or 26 per cent!”
“It should be stated, however, that the latter figure of 3,078 includes the Emergency Cleansing Corps whose strength was 563 then. The number of carts, trucks and other refuse carriers used by the Public Health Division was as follows: July 1962 July 1966 Refuse carts of all types 1,065 1,442 Refuse vehicles in transport pool, including spare and obsolete vehicles 77 147 ( But of these refuse vehicles those in actual use were as follows ) 69 109 In reply to the query whether there are any plans to expand the operations of the public cleansing service in future, the answer is that ever since October 1965, a year ago, reorganisation and expansion has been going on simultaneously and will continue for some time. There cannot be any improvement in the public cleansing service merely through expansion on the basis of operations prior to October 1965, with:- (a) Ineffective Disciplinary Code. (b) High absenteeism on weekdays, especially on Mondays and on days following public holidays, but with practically full attendance on Sundays and on public holidays, (c) Payout of over $1 million per annum for overtime work, on the basis of 1½ times normal pay during week-days, 2 times for Sunday and 3 times for public holiday. With the revision of the Disciplinary Code, effective as from 25th October, 1965, it is now possible to improve and to stiffen discipline in the work force so that even the then Secretary of the Public Daily-Rated Cleansing Workers' Union (Mr M. A. Latiff), who had a long record of habitual absenteeism and frequent absences from work sites, etc., had to be dismissed in April 1966 when he refused to change for the better. Up till the end of July, there have been 7 dismissals and another 22 are the subject of disciplinary inquiries.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I regret to inform the hon. Member for Delta that there are no plans to establish an Outpatient Dispensary in her constituency for two reasons:- Firstly, there are already two Government Outpatient Dispensaries in very close proximity to Delta Constituency: (a) Tiong Bahru Outpatient Dispensary with three doctors at Jalan Membina, which is just outside Delta Constituency boundary, and (b) Prince Philip Avenue Outpatient Dispensary with one doctor, which is about half-a-mile away. Secondly, out of an approved doctor establishment of 461, there are still 37 vacancies and even if all these posts are filled, which is possible within the foreseeable future, the need for doctors to be posted into hospital wards is greater than that of the opening of new Outpatient Dispensaries. It is my view that the existing 26 Government Outpatient Dispensaries, which serve the whole of Singapore island, are more than adequate at present, and no expansion is therefore contemplated for some time. PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION (Daily-rated staff and expansion of operations) 6. Mr P. Govindaswamy asked the Minister for Health (a) in July 1962 and July 1966, (i) how many daily-rated labourers were employed in the Public Health Division, and (ii) how many carts, trucks and other refuse carriers were used by that Division; and (b) whether there are any plans to expand the operations of that Division in future. Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, the number of daily-rated labourers employed in the Public Health Division, as a whole, was 4,805 as at July 1962, and 5,542 as at July 1966. In respect of Public Cleansing Department alone, they were 2,461 and 3,078 respectively.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a small-scale screening unit was introduced last year (1965) in the Kandang Kerbau Maternity Hospital to detect early cancer of the womb of patients as they were being treated for routine gynaecological complaints or after child-birth. As a result of this screening service, the number of cases of cancer of the womb which was at 351 in 1964 rose to 576 last year. Deaths arising from cancer of the womb were 90 in 1964 and 69 in 1965. The staffing of this cancer screening unit has been further strengthened this year with the return of a Medical Officer specially trained in this technique in the United States of America and four laboratory assistants have also been recruited for training in this technique. However, for an effective preventive service to provide early diagnosis of female genital cancer, it will be necessary to examine every woman in Singapore in the dangerous age group of 30-50. As there are approximately 160,000 in this age group, it is therefore obvious, Sir, that this desirable task cannot be achieved for some time to come. Therefore, for the immediate future, only selective examination of cases will be undertaken by the screening unit in Kandang Kerbau Hospital until more funds can be allocated towards training more staff and provision of more equipment and facilities. I am, however, happy to disclose that a second cancer screening unit for women in the Republic is likely to be established, before the end of this year, under the auspices of the Singapore Family Planning and Population Board. OUTPATIENT CLINIC IN DELTA CONSTITUENCY 5. Madam Chan Choy Siong asked the Minister for Health whether he has plans to establish an outpatient clinic in the Delta Constituency, which, according to statistics, has over 50,000 residents.”
“I wish to assure the hon. Member for Delta that the question of looking after the interests of qualified pharmacists in Singapore is very much in the mind of the Ministry. In fact, we are having very close relationship with the School of Pharmacy authorities as well as the Malayan Pharmaceutical Association. It is felt that this is not quite the time to decide on restrictive practices. We are aware that there are a few graduates who have not been fixed up in employment. But this, I think, must take some time because I do not think it should be regarded as a right by any graduate automatically to move into a job after graduation. As I have said earlier on, I can assure the Member that as soon as we feel that it is the right time to stop the employment of unqualified personnel, we shall do so. We are, in fact, making efforts to get pharmaceutical firms to employ qualified personnel as and when licences are being renewed. And because of this, a number of qualified pharmacists have, in fact, been employed. GOVERNMENT OFFICERS (Rudeness towards public) 5. Mr Chow Chiok Hock asked the Minister for Finance whether he is aware of complaints of rudeness by some Government officers towards members of the public, and what action has been taken in the matter.”
“Of course, under any restrictive law, the pharmacist graduates may benefit, but we can perhaps see to it that in future there will not be any more unqualified people dispensing drugs.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, under existing law - to be precise, section 7 (4) of the Poisons Ordinance, Cap. 146 - doctors may both prescribe and dispense medicines, or have medicines dispensed under their supervision. In some advanced countries such as the United Kingdom and Scandinavia, doctoring is, however, kept separate from dispensing. Such a situation is possible only when there is a sufficient number of qualified pharmacists available. In Singapore, at present, the number of doctors in private practice is 460, whereas the number of pharmacists in private practice is only 88. As the School of Pharmacy of our University of Singapore is now graduating annually about 20 to 25 pharmacists who are Singapore citizens, it will not be possible, for the present, to consider separation of dispensing from the function of doctoring, because such a restrictive practice, if implemented, whilst benefiting qualified pharmacists directly will, however, result in unqualified personnel now in the employ of doctors to lose their jobs, and worse still, the cost of services for treatment of patients may also rise in consequence. Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta)(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, just now the Minister for Health has given a reply to my question. But I would like to inform him that understandably if the Government were to implement certain laws, then certain unqualified but experienced people employed by doctors would be out of job. I would like to ask him whether he can make use of any law to prevent any future happening of this sort; in other words, while the present employees will not be affected, the practice will be stopped in future, so that unqualified people may not be employed in dispensing drugs.”
“The attention of the Public Works Department and Housing and Development Board, who are carrying out this work, has been drawn to this situation. (b) The Refuse bin-centre referred to is a pre-war bin centre situated on Crown land, and situated at least 25 feet (not 10 feet as stated) from the nearest house and is built on a concrete platform. It is also sited conveniently for the cleansing beat labourers to dispose of the refuse from adjacent kampongs. The centre is also situated away from the main Serangoon Road and adjacent to the kampong area. It appears from a survey of the area that present site is the most convenient and practicable one. Any new site will equally bring objections from adjacent householders. NEW CITIZENSHIP IDENTITY CARDS FOR NON-MALAY CHILDREN 5. Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi asked the Minister for Labour whether a non-Malay child, born in Singapore and adopted by Malays, will be issued with his Malay name and Malay as his race appearing on it.”
“(a) The drains of this area are subject to weekly or more frequent cleansing by the newly established Emergency Cleansing Corps. House-to-house collection of refuse is being done daily or on alternate days, at present. A fair number of the drains in this area are �dry� , namely without flow of water during dry weather, and as such should not give rise to any mosquito breeding. There is, however, evidence of indiscriminate dumping of refuse by householders or other persons into drains and on vacant land in this area. Action has, in fact, been taken by the Public Cleansing Department on these contraventions of the Cleansing Regulations. A special mosquito survey was conducted on 14th June, 1966 of houses in the area bounded by Moonstone Lane, Opal Crescent, Ruby Lane, Topaz Road, Woodsville Road, Meyappa Chettiar Road and the surroundings. This survey showed that of the 167 premises inspected, 22 (14 per cent) were found to have places which bred mosquitoes. The places where mosquitoes had been found to breed include articles ranging from disused motor truck tires, fish tanks, tin-pails, disused W.C. pans, earth drains and sullage drains. The general situation of this area also favours the breeding of mosquitoes, which is only 200 yards from Sungei Kallang. Sungei Kallang has been a frequent source of mosquito breeding because of changes in water level and other problems of drainage and water flow. There are also the problems of extensive earth movements and silting at the mouth of this river. Owing to multiple problems in connection with this river, only palliative measures by oiling against mosquito breeding can be taken and although of limited value, this is being done. The proper solution to the problem of Sungei Kallang is improvement to the banks of the river.”
“Andrew's Children - - 120 120 Orthopaedic Hospital 11. Tan Tock Seng T.B. and - - 1,320 1,320 Hospital general 12. Trafalgar Home Leprosy - - 965 965 13. Thomson Road As stated - - 288 288 General Hospital 14. Woodbridge Mentally 28 65 1,776 1,869 Hospital ill --- --- ----- ----- Total 115 249 6,433 6,797 === === ===== ===== * For deliveries a nominal charge of $10 was made effective as from 1st December, 1964. ALSAGOFF ESTATE (Allocation of house numbers) 6. Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi asked the Minister for Finance whether the Government will give house numbers to the houses built before 1st April, 1960, in Alsagoff Estate whose house owners are paying ground rent to the landlords or their agents.”
“As for the response to Family Planning under the auspices of the Family Planning and Population Board, I am pleased to say that for the first 5 months of this year, a total of 15,718 mothers are now receiving family planning assistance, made up of 4,691 new cases and the balance being former Singapore Family Planning Association cases. As for future plans of expansion, firstly, we intend to build more Day Centres for the mentally ill; secondly, to build a third General Hospital of about 700 beds for the eastern part of Singapore under the second 5-Year Development Plan 1966/1970, and, thirdly, a Maternity Wing of 120 beds has already been provided for in this year's Development Estimates in Thomson Road General Hospital which, when completed, should greatly relieve Kandang Kerbau Hospital. In respect of (d) of the question under reply, Sir, Thomson Road General Hospital has a Casualty and Emergency Unit with effect from July 1965 but limited to admission of casualties and accident cases between the hours of 8.30 in the morning and 3.00 in the afternoon. It is planned to operate this Emergency Unit on a 24-hour basis as soon as nursing staff are available to man it. Following is the Schedule: GOVERNMENT HOSPITALS IN SINGAPORE Hospitals Type Paying Paying Free C Total A Class B Class Class 1. Changi Prison As stated - - 64 64 Hospital 2. Chronic Hospital Old age - - 68 68 3. Kandang Kerbau Maternity 18 36 389* 443 Hospital and Gynaecology 4. Mental Defective Children - - 45 45 Unit 5. Middle Road Skin and - - 61 61 Hospital Social Hygiene 6. Middleton Infectious - - 250 250 Hospital Diseases 7. Outram Road As stated 69 148 1,061 1,278 General Hospital 8. Police Training As stated - - 20 20 School Hospital 9. Queenstown Prison As stated - - 6 6 Hospital 10. St.”
“In the case of Outram Road General Hospital, it has been necessary to alleviate the pressure of numbers by a quicker turnover of patients and the average length of stay of patients is around nine days per patient. It is agreed that this is not an ideal method, but has to be resorted to until such time as more hospitals can be built and, what is even more important, more staff, i.e, doctors, nurses and technicians, and equipment are available. An effort, however, has already been made to relieve the pressures on Outram Road General Hospital with the setting up of two surgical theatres in Thomson Road Hospital in January 1965, thus converting it into Singapore's second General Hospital. Two effective steps have already been taken to relieve the pressure in Kandang Kerbau Hospital. In order to encourage greater use of our Free Domiciliary Midwifery service, a nominal charge of $10 was levied for 'C' Class patients from December 1964. Next, Government has given full publicity for some time regarding the need to offer Singapore mothers the latest techniques in Family Planning and have, in fact, established a Family Planning and Population Board in January this year to implement a 5-Year Family Planning programme in all Maternal and Child Health Centres. Both these measures, I am glad to say, have shown immediate and heartening results. Out of a total of 58,217 births in Singapore in 1964, there was a peak number of deliveries in Kandang Kerbau Hospital at 39,598. Last year, 1965, the total number of deliveries in Singapore fell to 55,736, and for the first time Kandang Kerbau Hospital also showed a drop in its deliveries at 38,849.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the first part of question (a) , there are 14 Government hospitals in Singapore with a total of 6,797 staffed beds at present, of which the majority 6,433 or 90 per cent are free of charge (i.e. 'C' Class). There are 249 'B' Class beds at a charge of $12 per day and 115 'A' Class beds at a charge of $30 per day or $40 per day, if air-conditioned. As the hon. Member has asked for details of the number of beds in each hospital, and their classification as well, I am therefore submitting the details in a separate schedule for tabling and circulation instead. With regard to (b) , as a general rule, it can reasonably be said that the present bed capacity in Government hospitals as a whole are adequate, but the following three are either congested or under great pressure, namely, Woodbridge Hospital, Outram Road General Hospital and Kandang Kerbau Hospital. Before answering (c) of the question on proposed programme of expansion, may I, Sir, indicate certain steps which have already been taken to lessen the present congestion or pressures of the three named hospitals? Firstly, in the case of Woodbridge Hospital, thanks to the efficacy of modern drugs and in accordance with modern practice, it has been possible for more and more patients to be discharged from hospital and to continue treatment in what are known as Day Centres. Secondly, as Trafalgar Home, which adjoins Woodbridge Hospital, is only half-full, a section of Trafalgar Home is now being renovated and converted for the transfer of the chronically sick from Woodbridge Hospital, in order to relieve the congestion at the latter hospital.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Revised Edition of the Laws Bill, when enacted, will be the instrument which will render possible the consolidation, collation and codification of the laws of Singapore so that the law on any particular subject can be read as a clear, connected and complete entity and so that good order and certitude will be brought into our Statute Books where chaos once existed, and legislative untidiness transmuted into coherent neatness. Law without tears, Mr Speaker, Sir, is what this Bill in brief aims to achieve. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Mr Yong Nyuk Lin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. NATURE RESERVES ORDINANCE (Variation of Schedule) 5.05 p.m.”
“The Commission's work is purely technical and is clearly defined at clause 4 of the Bill. What the Commission is empowered to do in the process of revision is carefully circumscribed; the Commission is charged with the task of making the law, as it stands, readable, but it has no authority to indulge in the luxury of making innovations to the law. The principal feature of the Bill and the manner in which it departs from previous enactments of this kind is that the Revised Edition of Acts and of Subsidiary Legislation may be prepared and published, at the Commissioners' discretion, volume by volume, in any sequence and at such times as they may deem expedient. Instead, therefore, of the usual tedious interval of several years before the Revised Edition as a whole is published, volumes will appear one after another as rapidly as possible, each volume coming into force from such date as the President may determine. While, in the case of the previous Edition, it took four years for the preparation and publication of the whole Revised Edition, it is hoped to print the first volume of the new Edition shortly and to make available the remaining volumes, one by one, to the Bench, the Bar, Government officers, the public and all those who need to refer to our laws. The Bill provides that upon the completion of any volume of the Revised Edition of Acts or of Subsidiary Legislation, the Commissioners shall transmit a copy thereof to the President who may specify, by order published in the Gazette, the date on which the completed volume shall come into force, and from that date the laws in question will become part of the Statute Book of Singapore. It is provided that after the publication of that order, the volume in question shall be published and presented to Parliament.”
“With a view to facilitating a reading of the laws modified during the Malaysian period and also in consequence of orders made under the Republic of Singapore Independence Act, 1965, it is proposed to publish reprints of laws, embodying all amendments and modifications whatsoever made to them during the last ten years, and several reprints have already been published. The Interpretation Act, 1965, at section 38 provides the necessary authority for the issue of reprints of our laws, and these will form part of the next Revised Edition of the Laws of Singapore. Turning now to the contents of the Revised Edition of the Laws Bill, it will be seen that it follows the general design of the Revised Edition of the Laws Ordinance at Chapter 1 of our present Edition. Provision is made in the Bill for the appointment of a Law Revision Commission. The purpose of this Commission must not be misunderstood; its function is not to revise legislation in the sense of improving it with the object of effecting any changes which the Commission, or the public making representations through the Commission, might consider desirable; nor is it the function of the Commission to introduce legislative measures or concepts of advantage to Singapore. Rather, its purpose is solely to issue a revised edition of all principal and subsidiary legislation, faithfully incorporating all the amendments and modifications that have been made and published to date, either by way of statutory enactments or Modification Orders. The President is to appoint the Law Revision Commission comprising, as Law Commissioners, the Attorney-General and such other person as may be appointed by the President to prepare and publish a Revised Edition of Acts and a Revised Edition of Subsidiary Legislation.”
“(iv) The succeeding Edition of the Laws of the Straits Settlements was published in 1926 and contained the laws in force on 31st December, 1925. (v) The 1936 Edition which followed was prepared under the authority of the Revised Edition of the Laws Ordinance, 1935, and contained the Ordinances amended to 31st December, 1935. (vi) Finally, we have the present 1955 Edition of the Laws in eight volumes with Annual Supplements for the years 1956 to 1962. This, then, was the position with regard to legislation in Singapore immediately before Malaysia Day, at which time the law could be ascertained with the exercise of reasonable diligence. However, consequent partly on the multitudinous Modification Orders issued principally in Kuala Lumpur during the period Singapore was part of Malaysia, and partly because of the various amending Ordinances that have been enacted in Singapore over the last ten years, our laws are not as readily ascertainable as we would like them to be, and it is therefore my hope that the Attorney-General's Chambers and the Ministry of Law will make it possible to render the perusal of any part of our Statute Book a painless one. The House will recall that section 13 of the Republic of Singapore Independence Act, 1965, provides, inter alia, that the President may, by order made at any time during the period of three years after the Act comes into force, make such modifications in any written law as appear to be necessary or expedient as a result of the passing of the Act and of the independence of Singapore upon separation from Malaysia. Pursuant to this provision, modification orders, prepared by the Attorney-General, have been published.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Hon. Members are doubtless aware that the present Edition of the Laws of Singapore was published more than ten years ago, and that during this period far-reaching constitutional changes have taken place, ending with the separation of Singapore from Malaysia in August last year. Even had this last event not occurred with the attendant modifications in the law occasioned thereby, it would have been nonetheless necessary to bring out a Revised Edition of the Laws as soon as possible. But this factor, taken in conjunction with the fact that we have had numerous amending Ordinances since the last Edition of the Laws was published a decade ago which need to be fused into their respective principal Ordinances, makes the preparation and publication of a Revised Edition of the Laws a matter of some urgency if we are to have a handy manual of laws consolidated, modified, amended, and brought up to date so that "looking up the law" is not the frustrating, tiresome and often difficult process that it now is. Since the earliest days when Singapore was part of the Straits Settlements, there have been six consolidations or revisions of the laws affecting Singapore: (i) First was published a revision in two volumes of the Acts and Ordinances of the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlements from 1st April, 1867, to 1st June, 1886. (ii) The second revision embraced the Acts and Ordinances of the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlements from 1st April, 1867, to 7th March, 1898. (iii) Next was the Revision of 1920; this Revision which was prepared under the Law Revision Ordinance, 1910, was published in 1920 and contained the Ordinances amended up to 31st December, 1919.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, line 20, to leave out "officers" and insert "officer". Amendment agreed to. Clause 4, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 5 - The Chairman: May I draw the attention of the House to clause 5? There will be a resetting*. And may I also draw the attention of the House to page 3, lines 6 to 12, in which there will be a reset in order that it may read more accurately? * The reset, in page 2, lines 29 to 34, is as fo1lows:- "(b) corruptly give, promise or offer to any person whether for the benefit of that person or of another person, any gratification as an inducement to or reward for, or otherwise on account of -". Unless any Member wishes to speak on any particular clause from clauses 5 to 21, I shall take the rest of the Bill together. Clauses 5 to 21 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; read a Third time and passed. REVISED EDITION OF THE LAWS BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.55 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, lines 17 and 18, to leave out "investigators and special investigators" and insert "investigator and special investigator". Amendment agreed to.”
“The purpose of clauses 13 and 14 of the Bill is to define more specifically in section 17 of the Ordinance the extent of the special powers of investigation which the Public Prosecutor may confer on the Director, or an Assistant Director of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau, or any police officer of or above the rank of Assistant Superintendent for the more effective investigation of corrupt practices. Clauses 15 to 18 extend to the Director and any Assistant Director certain powers of investigation, search, etc., provided under sections 18, 20, 24 and 25 of the Ordinance for special investigators of the Bureau. Clause 19 seeks to amend section 26 of the Ordinance in order to provide that the abettor of an offence of corruption shall on conviction be liable to be punished with the punishment provided for the offence. By clause 20 will be enacted two new sections which will make attempts to commit, or conspiracy to commit, any offence under the Ordinance punishable as for the offence itself. Clause 21 introduces a new section under which a citizen of Singapore committing an offence under the Ordinance outside Singapore will be dealt with in respect of such offence as if he had committed it in Singapore. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Yong Nyuk Lin]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 4.51 p.m. Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 4 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Prevention of Corruption Ordinance, 1960, certain amendments to which have become necessary, itself replaced the 1937 Ordinance with the same title and the Evidence (Special Provisions) Ordinance enacted in 1946. The Bill seeks, first, to make certain changes in terminology in keeping with Singapore's status as a sovereign Republic with her own President and Parliament. These are effected by clauses 2, 3, 6, 7 and 8 of the Bill. Clause 4 of the Bill amends section 4 of the Ordinance in order to bring the Director and all other officers of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau within the meaning of "public servant" as defined in the Penal Code. Clause 5 offers a more succinct phrasing of the present section 5 of the Ordinance, while clause 9 seeks to do the same for section 12 (b) of the Ordinance. Clause 10 extends to the Director and any Assistant Director of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau the powers of arrest and investigation, conferred by the existing section 15 only upon the Bureau's senior special investigators and special investigators. Clause 11 of the Bill will enable officers of the Bureau to exercise all or any of the special powers in relation to police investigations into seizable offences, if any seizable offence under any written law should be disclosed in the course of an investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Ordinance. By such amendment of section 16 of the Ordinance, sections 16A and 16B will become redundant and it is proposed in clause 12 to repeal them.”
“Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Yong Nyuk Lin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.47 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill seeks to amend the Limitation Ordinance, 1959, to reduce the period of limitation for damages for personal injuries from six years to three years. This will bring the law in line with the law in England where the period of limitation was fixed at three years by the Law Reform (Limitation of Actions) Act, 1954. The effect of the amendment will be that in general actions for personal injuries, arising, for example, from motor-car accidents, may only be brought within three years of the accident. It is desirable that such actions should be heard as soon as possible after the accident, as, if the action is instituted, say, after four or five years, it would be difficult for witnesses to testify about the accident with any degree of accuracy. The Act will therefore prevent the institution of stale proceedings. Police investigation papers are normally destroyed by the Police two or three years after an accident and if actions are brought after that, police witnesses will be unable to refresh their memories from statements or plans made by them soon after the accident. It is felt that the reduction of the limitation period to three years would cause no hardship to third parties. Injuries caused by motor accidents normally become obvious immediately after the accident and the wide publicity given to proceedings relating to accidents in the local Press and the availability of lawyers make it possible for any third party to take advice and action within a reasonably short time. The Bill has been referred to the Singapore Bar Committee and they support its provisions. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and seven Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and seven Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection. LIMITATION (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.42 p.m.”
“The provisions relating to family provision appear to have worked well in England and it is proposed to introduce them into Singapore. The Muslim law contains provisions to safeguard the position of widows and children in cases of intestacy and there is already existing provision in section 41 of the Muslims Ordinance, 1957, to enable the Court to vary the will of a Muslim testator to make provision for his heirs. It is therefore not proposed to extend the legislation to Muslims. The Bill has been considered by the Singapore Bar Committee and has been agreed to by them. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill seeks to introduce into Singapore the provisions of the English Inheritance (Family Provision) Act, 1938. As this Bill will change the existing law and will affect the right of a person to will away his property as he likes, it is proposed to refer it to a Select Committee, so that full consideration can be given to its provisions. The former English law did provide for family provision in giving the wife a right to dower by virtue of which, if the wife survived her husband, she became entitled to an estate for life in a third of all her husband's freeholds of which he had been seised at any time during the marriage. As this right of the wife attached even though the husband alienated the land, it gave rise to a great deal of practical inconvenience and was eventually abolished by the Dower Act of 1833. After that, there was nothing to stop a man (or a woman with respect to her separate property) from devising and bequeathing his whole estate to charity or to a complete stranger and leaving his widow and children penniless. It was to prevent this evil that in 1938 the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act was enacted. That Act did not cast upon the testator any positive duty to make reasonable provision for his dependants, for it would be impossible to enforce any such obligation, but it provided that if he fails to do so, the Court may order such reasonable provision as it thinks fit to be made of the estate to his dependants, as defined in the Act. The Act was further amended in 1952 to extend it to cases of intestacy, as it was felt that the general law of intestacy might leave a child inadequately provided for.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill seeks to make the amendments rendered necessary by the constitutional changes affecting Singapore and its ceasing to be a part of Malaysia. The opportunity has also been taken to make some amendments to the Ordinance. The definition of "child" for the purpose of payment of compensation on death has been extended to include illegitimate and adopted children, so that where, for example, both the parents have been killed in a motor-car accident, damages can be obtained for the benefit of such children. It has been found that the provisions of the new sections 12A and 17A sought to be introduced by clauses 5 and 7 of the Bill respectively are, however, already to be found in our law. The provision relating to the award of interest on debts and damages is to be found in section 8 of the Civil Law Ordinance, and that relating to moneys payable under a policy of life assurance in section 73 of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Ordinance. So I shall be moving an amendment, Sir, with your permission, to delete these clauses in Committee. The Bill has been referred to the Singapore Bar Committee and has been approved by them. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Mr Yong Nyuk Lin]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 4.02 p.m. Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 5 -”
“The first available sitting day after the 30th April, 1966.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have the President's recommendation to proceed with this Bill. I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to provide for the acquisition of land for public and certain other specified purposes, the assessment of compensation to be made on account of such acquisition and for purposes connected therewith, and to repeal the Land Acquisition Ordinance (Chapter 248 of the Revised Edition) and the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Ordinance, 1964 (No. 1 of 1964)." Bill read the First time. Second Reading”
“Although these two voluntary organisations would be required to register with the Board under the provisions of clause 11 of the Bill, the closest co-operation with these two agencies will be maintained, as representatives from each of these two agencies have been sounded to serve as members of the Board under the provisions of clause 4 (1) (i), and I am pleased to state that these invitations have been accepted. There is also a provision under clause 12 for the Minister, if he deems it necessary in the public interest to do so, to order the Board to take over the functions pertaining to family planning and the assets and property of any body or association which is required either to be registered under the provisions of clause 11 of the Bill. Clause 13 spells out in detail the functions of the Board which covers family planning and population control programmes, and clause 17 provides for various penalties for any person who fails to comply with the various provisions of the Bill. The other clauses are mainly administrative in character. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Mr Yong Nyuk Lin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment: read a Third time and passed. RESIGNATION OF MEMBER FOR BUKIT MERAH (Mr Lim Huan Boon) Announcement by Mr Speaker 4.00 p.m.”
“An important provision of the Bill is clause 11 which provides that any person, body or association now carrying out family planning work in Singapore has to be registered with the Board. Specific exemption, however, is made for medical practitioners arid pharmacists who are registered under the Medical Registration Ordinance (Cap. 191) and Registration of Pharmacists Ordinance (Cap. 198) respectively. The Board may also register any body, association or person carrying out family planning work with or without conditions. This is necessary as the Board is to he the sole agency for the promotion and dissemination of information pertaining to family planning in Singapore and it must ensure that such a valuable social programme is not to be exploited commercially or otherwise by any other agencies. It is pertinent for me to mention, at this stage, of the prominent work of two voluntary organisations now conducting family planning activities in Singapore. Firstly, the Singapore Family Planning Association, which was established as far back as 1949, or 16 years ago, and at whose request, Government was asked to take over 90 per cent of their present responsibilities on family planning. Arising out of this move by the Singapore Family Planning Association, the White Paper on Family Planning thus came into being. Secondly, the South-East Asia and Oceanic Regional Centre of the International Planned Parenthood Federation and to which Federation the Singapore Family Planning Association is also a member thereof. This Regional Centre of I.P.P.F. serves as a Training Centre for family planning workers for the territories ranging from Fiji in the east to Burma to the west of Singapore.”
“The total cost to Government for this Five-Year Plan is estimated at $1 million. Action on a national basis is required to cope with the present problem of uncontrolled increase of population which, if left unchecked, may well hinder and even to nullify present great and strenuous efforts at economic expansion by the Government and its people. The chief purpose of this Bill is to provide the legal means whereby the Five-Year Plan for Family Planning could be given effective direction and execution. If this Family Planning programme succeeds - and we are determined that it should - besides increasing welfare and happiness for hundreds of thousands, Singapore's future annual net increase in population in the 1970's can be brought down to one-half of its present rate, and thus be brought in line with the prevailing rates of population increase now found in the prosperous and advanced countries of the world. Clause 3 provides for the formal constitution of a body corporate to be known as "the Singapore Family Planning and Population Board" as recommended in the White Paper on Family Planning. The Board is to have a maximum membership of 15 members, vide clause 4. The Board represents a broad spectrum of interests, seven are ex-officio members (five representing the Ministry of Health and the other two from the Statistics and Social Welfare Departments respectively) and eight others are non-officials, two of whom would represent the University of Singapore and up to six others from members of the public who are deeply interested in family planning and population control activities. The usual powers are given to the Board under clause 6 to employ such stall as may be deemed necessary for the effective carrying out of its work and programme.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Singapore's present population is over 1.8 million and our population density is more than 8,000 persons per square mile, certainly a very over-crowded little island State! Our crude birth rate is around 32 per thousand, which is much too high. The fact is that too many children are being brought into the world each year at the great cost of their mothers' health, and also far too many bread-winners of families are finding it difficult to feed and clothe adequately the many extra children. Regrettably, many women in sheer desperation over innumerable child-bearing over the years are resorting to illegal abortion, as a way out. This is evidenced by nearly 500 patients being admitted to Kandang Kerbau Maternity Hospital each year in serious condition, known as "abortion with sepsis" and which is most likely the result of unsuccessful attempts at induced abortions. The number of illegal abortions each year is conservatively estimated by people in the know to be in the region of thousands! In order, therefore, to liberate our women from the burden of bearing and raising an unnecessarily large number of children, to lighten the burden of many bread-winners, and to reduce the nefarious activities of ruthless professional abortionists, Government accordingly published a White Paper on Family Planning as part of its second Five-Year Development Plan (1966-70) of Singapore - Cmd. Paper 22 of 1965 dated 27th September, 1965. This Plan envisages that over a period of five years a target of 180,000 eligible married women, of the fertile age group (15 to 44 years) would be motivated voluntarily and actively to participating in family planning.”
“However, clause 5 ensures that the authority of the Coroner to direct the post-mortem examination of a body under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code is not to be prejudiced in any way by the operation of this Bill. This is, therefore, a very comprehensive Bill to permit the use of human tissues for purpose of grafting and for the dissection of human bodies for medical examination, education or research. It is essential that this important piece of legislation be introduced to permit such work, which at present is being done on a limited scale, without legal coverage or proper safeguards which are now to be rectified by the provisions of clause 6 of the Bill. Finally, there is the additional safeguard that the person entrusted with cremation or interment of a body is specifically debarred from authorising the removal of parts of the body and post-mortem examination of it. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Mr Yong Nyuk Lin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. SINGAPORE FAMILY PLANNING AND POPULATION BOARD BILL 3.47 p.m. Order for Second Reading read.”
“However, advantage has been taken for the Bill to be drafted for even wider general application and is not being limited only to the transplantation of corneal grafts. The Bill makes it possible to use parts of bodies of deceased persons for medical treatment, i.e. for transplantation of any tissue or organ, as and when such operations can be successfully performed in Singapore. The Bill also allows for the post-mortem examination of bodies and of its dissection for medical education and research. Clause 2 of the Bill stipulates an important safeguard that removal of parts of the body for therapeutic purposes or for medical education or research can only be performed, if the person, before his death, had expressly given permission either orally, or in writing, and which has been witnessed by two or more persons, before such procedures may be carried out, after his death. Clause 3 of the Bill empowers any person who has lawful possession of the body of a deceased person to authorise, in writing, the use of the body for therapeutic purposes or for medical education or research or for post-mortem examination of the body, if he has reason to believe, after making such enquiries as may be practicable, that the deceased person had not previously expressed an objection to his body being tampered with after his death or that the surviving spouse or relative of the deceased does not object to such body being so dealt with. Clause 4 provides for the contingency whereby the Director of Medical Services may authorise, in writing, the use of the body or parts thereof for use as indicated in the Bill, if the body of a deceased person has not been claimed for more than 24 hours from a hospital, or other institution which is maintained on public funds.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The grafting of healthy human tissues to replace diseased parts of a human body has been fairly common medical practice for some time. And one of the most common, and also the most successful transplantation operations at the present time, is that of corneal grafting, where the corneal graft is obtained from the eye of a recently dead person. Recently, more spectacular transplantations have been attempted although with less successful results. For example, there have been transplantations of organs, like kidneys, from one person to another, and there are reasonable hopes that such operations may become more commonplace and successful in the near future. There have also been attempts to use tissues from animals and even of inert materials such as plastics, for replacement and transplantation operations, but the main source of transplant material, in the foreseeable future, will continue to be that of human tissues. So far, there is no legislation in existence in Singapore whereby a person may "will" his body or part of his body to doctors for use as transplant material. Such a deficiency in our laws has somewhat hindered medical progress in Singapore for the more extensive use of tissue transplants. As a result, many blind persons in Singapore, for example, unfortunately have to remain blind, because of the lack of sufficient corneas which can be willed for their benefit. This Bill, therefore, serves to bring light and happiness to those now doomed to a life of eternal darkness and unhappiness by enabling persons who are prepared to "will" their eyes, on their death, for use on suitable persons.”
“In fact, hawkers will be prohibited from plying their trade along bus routes. At the present moment, we see too many hawkers crowding themselves around bus stops, and even at pasar malams, with their wares displayed inside bus-stop shelters, which is ridiculous. 4.45 p.m. So by providing some accommodation for hawkers as a temporary solution, we will try to get them away from the main roads and bus routes and allocate places for them in side streets. Gradually we will be able to persuade them that they can do better business if they find places in permanent premises like markets, shop-houses and so on. We think that during the course of a few years we may be able to reach that ideal stage where hawkers, except for the itinerant ones, will no longer be seen doing their business in the open streets, as what is existing today. Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the explanation, Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $5,814,930 for Head D 04 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head D 05 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the hon. Member for River Valley, I would like to say that the provision of $900,000 for the building of markets next year, 1966, would be in respect of five markets only. Jurong Neighbourhood 1, a medium-sized market with 120 stalls costing around $167,000; and a large-sized market with 150 stalls in the Bukit Ho Swee Neighbourhood 4 area estimated at $240,000; a very small-sized market with 60 stalls in Tuas off Jurong which may come up to $123,000; and MacPherson South Estate off Pesiaran Keliling; and the fifth one is likely to be at the Toa Payoh New Town Neighbourhood 3 or the Redhill extension area which has not yet been decided. The first three markets have already been approved by the Development Planning Committee. To the Member's second question about the proposed implementation of the new Hawkers' Code which will be announced sometime in February and the licensing of hawkers from 1st of March, I have indicated that the licensing of hawkers will take a number of months to conclude, and that it is the first step towards the control of hawkers in Singapore. As indicated, the five new markets that will be built next year will probably only provide something like 500 stalls for hawkers. So it is impossible to give an answer that the licensing of 40,000 to 50,000 hawkers can therefore be solved by building five markets next year. What is intended in the long-term plan for hawkers is to get them into permanent premises to conduct their business, that is to say, either in Government-built markets or private markets or inside shop-houses. It will take some years before it can become effective, but the new Hawkers' Code will provide a temporary solution to get hawkers off the main streets.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the hon. Member for Serangoon Gardens, the provision of $320,000 for 1966 is for the intended purchase of five refuse collectors, 6 crane wagons and one street watering wagon. As explained in the previous debate on public cleansing, we have had to face a situation in which even if we had purchased more vehicles for disposal of refuse, owing to the practice of absenteeism among the workers and sometimes of the drivers, there would have been more vehicles than there were drivers. And that was how it was going on for quite a number of years. But now that there is this new Disciplinary Code which has been put into operation for the last two months, we believe that there will be better observance of discipline from our workers and drivers. It is possible, now that we have put the matter on a proper basis, to consider the purchase of more refuse collectors and crane wagons. So I envisage that for the New Year we should be in a position to see an improvement in the public cleansing situation in Singapore. What has taken place in the past and what we see today is something which I think we will not likely see in future.”
“There are over a hundred thousand cars in the streets. In course of time, I think hawkers should not be doing their businesses in the streets. They should be getting into shophouses to do their businesses properly. That is to be the general trend, Sir. That would be part and parcel of the new hawkers' code when it is announced. I hope that when it is implemented, we may be well on the road to having gradual control of the hawker situation. Inche Rahamat (In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw.”
“I am sorry if I have left out replying to the complaints of the hon. Member for Geylang Serai. I believe his complaint was that, in the allocation of stalls for the Geylang Serai market, they were given to day-hawkers and separate stalls were given to night-hawkers and, therefore, they were unable to make a decent living. Unfortunately, when this huge market was built in Geylang Serai, there were more hawkers registered for stalls than there were stalls in the market. So in order not to disappoint the hawkers, it was decided to make everybody happy by giving each hawker a stall, whether it is for day or night, instead of allowing one hawker to enjoy the facilities of a stall for day and night. That was how it arose, and there was some dissatisfaction over this division. Then unfortunately the two racial riots broke out, and, I think, all the market stallholders who were allocated stalls decided to move out. That unfortunately is the situation. We have a brand new market erected at great cost - I think over $400,000 - but it is practically empty, which is a sad state of affairs. So it is better to tackle the hawker problem not just for Geylang Serai but for the whole of Singapore. The problem is, first, to license all hawkers, and, second, after licensing them, to try to control them and get them into markets, whether built by Government at a considerable cost of a few hundred thousand dollars apiece, or to encourage them to go even into private markets built for that purpose. The private markets, like Government markets, are half-empty. And it may even be necessary to encourage hawkers to do their businesses inside shophouses and not to hawk in the streets, because Singapore is fast growing into a large city of two million, if not more, people.”
“I am sorry if, in answer to the problem, I appear to have concentrated on the city areas. But naturally what takes place in the city will affect the rural areas, because we are looking at Singapore as a whole. May I just say that, to give an example of the size of the problem involved, say, for refuse, in any one day we are now collecting and disposing of nearly 600 tons of refuse, of which over 400 tons would be within the city area. The rural areas would be 130 tons. The task force deals with about 40 to 50 tons of refuse. That is the situation. We are really trying to tackle the big problem in the city area, where a huge pile of refuse can be seen to be there; whereas in the rural areas there is less refuse and it is also possible, as my hon. Friend, the Member for Changi has said, for the residents there to bury the rubbish within their compound. There is ample land to do so. But it is not possible to bury refuse in the city area; one could not dig up a hole, for example, in the concrete road to bury the rubbish. But it is possible for farmers to dispose of their own rubbish by burning - I am glad some refuse is being burnt rather than just being left alone to rot and to attract flies. So the problem of disposal of refuse in the rural area, in our view, is less urgent than that in the built-up area. I think at this stage I might as well answer the hon. Member for Anson when he says that he does not think mosquitoes come out from water but that they come out from refuse. It is true that if tins collect some water in them after rain or a shower - there is a little bit of water in the tins - that will be suitable for the breeding of mosquitoes. So mosquitoes can come out from tins. But there is really water in the tin before the mosquitoes can breed.”