COMMITTEE ON DISTRICT COUNCILS AND FUNCTIONS OF CITY COUNCIL AND RURAL BOARD

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

The Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat): Mr Speaker, Sir, in rising to move the motion standing in my name, I wish to state that my colleagues and I do not feel disposed to agree with the Rendel Constitutional Commission's recommendations on local government by which the City and Island Council would become a single local government authority with jurisdiction over the whole island of Singapore and responsible for the majority of local government functions on an island-wide basis.

This idea of a single island-wide local authority in Singapore, with a large city population and a not inconsiderable rural population and its admixture of the city area and much larger rural area, does not adequately fulfil one of the primary functions of local government, which is to give the maximum opportunity for the largest number of the community to take part in local government. Local government service is the place where people learn, and this political education is very necessary to the whole process of the democratic state. Therefore, the more opportunities people get of taking part in local government, the better it would be for Singapore.

Then, again, I consider that rural and urban interests are conflicting and incompatible and that it is hardly expected of a small City and Island Council of 24 (32 if aldermen are included) to hold the balance between the urgent needs and interests of the urban areas and those of the rural areas. The ideals, ways of life and the conception of the art of living of the urban dweller are diametrically opposed to those of the rural dweller. To rural inhabitants in Singapore, living in areas far away from the centre of activity, the City and Island Council could become an impersonal body.

It is also advisable to consider whether it is desirable to have on this island two authorities - the Legislative Assembly and the City and Island Council - of such size and powers. The concept of government in Singapore, in my view, should be to establish the Legislative Assembly as emphatically the responsible body for the welfare of the island as a whole, while at the same time bringing local government matters of suitable character much closer to the real control and interests of the rate-payers.

Therefore, in consequence of the foregoing reasons, the whole question of reform of local government in Singapore should be considered afresh. To that end, my motion indicates the lines on which the suggested reforms should take.

It is proposed to appoint a committee to inquire into the desirability of decentralising the powers and functions of the City Council and the Rural Board, and inquire into and make recommendations on the desirability of setting up District Councils appropriately named and responsible for local government functions in different geographical areas of the island, having regard to the municipal status of the older parts of the city area. In my view, the Royal Charter establishing Singapore as a city need not, I think, be a block to reorganisation of this kind.

As part of the reorganisation, also, this committee is being asked to inquire into and make recommendations on the desirability of establishing statutory corporations responsible for the supply of water, electricity and gas and for any other services now performed by the City Council. I am aware that the Rendel Commission recommended that public utilities like water, electricity and gas should, for the time being at any rate, be placed under the City and Island Council. But it is considered that this aspect of local government reform could be inquired into again.

Naturally also, in considering the reform of local government in Singapore, it will be necessary also to inquire into and to make recommendations on the re-allocation of the functions and financial responsibilities between the Government and local authorities. Appendix One of the Rendel Report lists the main functions proposed for the City and Island Council. It appears to me that a number of the larger of these functions could very appropriately be transferred to one or other of the Ministries, while other functions might be retained as municipal by the local councils.

Finally, in keeping with this Government's declared intention to introduce multi-lingualism into the proceedings of local authorities, this committee is being asked to recommend the procedure to be adopted and also the languages in addition to English which should be allowed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I now formally move the motion standing in my name,

That this Assembly is of the opinion that a Committee should be appointed to enquire into the desirability of decentralising the powers and functions of the City Council and the Rural Board and in particular:

(a) to enquire into and make recommendations on the desirability of setting up District Councils responsible for local government functions in different geographical areas of Singapore;

(b) to recommend names for such District Councils and the boundaries within which they should function having regard to the municipal status of the older parts of the city area;

(c) to enquire into and make recommendations on the desirability of establishing statutory corporations responsible for the supply of water, electricity and gas and for any other services now performed by the City Council;

(d) to enquire into and make recommendations on the re-allocation of the functions and financial responsibilities between the Government and the local authorities;

(e) to make recommendations on the procedure to be adopted to allow the business of the local authorities to be conducted in languages in addition to English and to recommend which languages should be allowed;

and to report in accordance with the foregoing provisions.

The Assistant Minister for Commerce and Industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to second the motion moved by the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing. As Members are aware, I have been for over four years connected with the City Council of Singapore as an elected Councillor. I can therefore claim to have some knowledge of the workings of local government.

Local government, by its very nature, is essentially one that is closely connected with the daily life of the people. The decisions taken by a local government body regulate the day-to-day life of the population and so much so that they become part and parcel of the life and habits of the population. It is therefore very desirable that the local government body should be brought as close to the people as possible, and that the public in every part of the island should feel that they are closely associated with and are themselves responsible for taking decisions which affect their day-to-day life, and particularly decisions which affect their own locality. A system of allowing the people in each district to regulate their own day-to-day life to suit their own local conditions would be impossible with the establishment of an island-wide local government authority, as is recommended in the Rendel Commission's Report. Such an island-wide local body could, at its best, be only very remotely connected with the people, and I think this remote connection with the people is the main objection to an island-wide body.

I therefore have pleasure in seconding the motion.

Question proposed.

Mr John Ede: Mr Speaker, Sir, we have just heard yet another invitation, this time from my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government, to avoid the awful moment of decision and at a time when we were promised the First Reading of the City and Island Council Bill, to join a committee for the reconsideration of the entire problems of local government. The hon. Members opposite remind me of the words of the old hymn - "They shivered on the dreadful brink and feared to launch away."

An hon. Member: On Progressive waters!

Mr John Ede: This is the most astonishing about-turn that the Government has yet made in its short life. At least on the question of public transport we had an inkling of what was to come when an election pledge for the nationalisation of transport was watered down in His Excellency the Governor's speech to the establishment of a transport authority to deal with routes and fares, and thence by easy stages to the setting-up of a commission.

Let me, however, remind the House of the statements we have already had in this Chamber on the coming City and Island Council Bill. In the Governor's speech we heard that "a Bill to establish the City and Island Council will be ready for consideration by the Assembly in the near future". A few days later the Hon. the Chief Minister, in opening the debate on the Governor's speech, stated as follows:

"It had been hoped that today we would have at least one more Bill tabled, the City and Island Council Bill. The Government recognises how urgent is the measure and how important that we should not further prolong the prolonged life of the present City Council."

The following day the Chief Minister, addressing the, Member for Seletar (Mr M. P. D. Nair), stated that "there may be room for pleasant surprise in the meeting to come on the City and Island Council Bill." The surprise of indecision and delay after so much promise of prompt performance is an unpleasant one; all the more so because we were only given 24 hours' notice of this retreat from a prepared position. So, instead of carrying on at once with what only a month ago was an urgent measure we are to go three or four years in reverse to reconsider the ground covered by the Hill Report, the recommendations of the Rendel Commission, and all the committee reports and memoranda which have been poured out on all these subjects. I would further add that the present Government has no mandate for such a step from the electorate who put them in power.

I do not propose, Sir, to consider the various questions raised by this motion in detail today, nor can I be expected at 24 hours' notice to do so, but one or two points need to be made.

As regards the principles of decentralisation of local government functions, as advocated largely by Dr. Hill, it has to be remembered that we are dealing with a small area of about 220 square miles. Will it be economical, will it be expeditious, will it be efficient, to have numerous District Councils dotted over the island to carry on rural administration, and what will the effect be of making the City Council, or whatever the Central Municipal Authority will be called in the future, even more powerful and more of the 'big brother' in its relationship with them than is the case with the Rural Board today? Shall we not have District Councils with different policies on, say, hawkers or attap-housing or water-borne sewerage? And how are overlapping and extravagance and delays in administration to be avoided?

For many years we have had the example before us of dual control in traffic matters, the City Council being responsible for certain aspects of traffic control, and the Government Traffic Police responsible for others. And no hon. Member here would care to say that that was an ideal or efficient arrangement.

We are in agreement with the view that the rural areas will have a much larger share of responsibility for the administration of the island at the local government level through representation on the City and Island Council, and they will have a large enough proportion of the 24 seats on the Council to ensure that their views are heard to good effect.

With regard to paragraph (c) of the motion, the question of establishing statutory corporations responsible for the supply of water, electricity and gas - in other words, the present trading departments or public utilities in the City Council - let me say no more than this: the present system is one of public ownership; the establishment of corporations is another form of public ownership - a distinction with practically no difference. What, then, is to be gained? - little or nothing! Indeed much is to be lost, because as soon as these public utilities leave the control of the City Council, their considerable properties will be subject to assessment from payment of which they at present enjoy complete immunity. The obvious result will be evident within six months or so of the establishment of these corporations, that the prices of electricity, water and gas will have to be increased. It has been suggested on more than one occasion that these public utilities should be removed from political control, but cannot it be fairly argued that in the last few years politics have seen to it that rates have not been increased despite very heavy capital expenditure on these undertakings?

As regards paragraph (d) - the reallocation of the functions and financial responsibilities between the Government and the local authorities - I am informed that exhaustive recommendations were made to Government on the whole of this question only last year. Any further survey of this field would be a waste of time and effort.

Finally, on the subject of multi-lingualism and the procedure for its adoption, is the Government seriously implying that it has no well-considered plans on how this should be carried out, despite the fact that it was an important plank in its platform? Can it be that the Government, having found it difficult in the last few weeks to make any firm decision of its own in one language, now wishes to pass on to others the responsibility of deciding how to conduct business in four or more? And indeed, Sir, is not this the root cause of this extraordinary eleventh hour motion, namely, that the hon. Members opposite have not got the courage of their own convictions? I say to them, "Get on and govern." If you are convinced that District Councils and electricity corporations and decentralisation are the best form of local government, then it is your job to draft the necessary legislation and bring it before this House and use your majority to get it passed. But do not expect us to do the work for you, so that later you may get all the credit for work that goes on well, and pass on the blame to this side of the House if it does not. We have the remarkable position whereby the Government is trying to have the best of both worlds. Policies are to be worked out in committees by a coalition of Parties, and executive action then taken by the Government Party alone. This is not the way in which democratic institutions operate. This is not the way in which party government operates. We reject this policy of 'passing the buck' and of avoiding responsibility and shirking unpopularity, and we oppose this motion. Let the hon. Members opposite make their own decisions and stand by them, and govern as a popularly elected majority government should govern. And let them realise that there is a growing body of public opinion from every community and class throughout the country which considers that their actions show that they have been in power for seven weeks too long.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, I must also regret the somewhat hasty about-turn that this Government has found necessary in a matter of two months. It is not a matter which should have been so lightly reversed. When they drafted the Address by His Excellency the Governor, the Government had then taken stock of the position and had at that time decided to go on with the City and Island Council Bill. We must have more explanation why it is now thought necessary that this whole Bill is to be scrapped and a commission instituted.

I sympathise with them in viewing the City and Island Council provisions with a degree of suspicion and of unhappiness. That was, with the exception of the present Minister for Labour (Mr Lim Yew Hock), a Progressive Party concept. It had its attractive qualities. It was neat; it was simple. You drop out the 25th constituency, and you have 24 nice, neat constituencies for your City and Island Council. You have the same machinery for elections and you transfer half, or more than half the functions of a little government like that of the Colony of Singapore, to another semi-government body.

But there is a lot to be said - and I think it should be said much more fully before this debate closes - for reviewing it from this point of view: that the Government feels that a more democratic framework can be set up to associate more and more people with the governing and regulating of their own lives; and if Rural District Councils is one method of doing it, then Rural District Councils should be created. But I think this matter has been viewed too lightly. It is not a matter that can be resolved just by a committee or a commission, either of this House alone or to include outsiders. Before this motion is passed, we would like to have the Government state categorically why it was that, within these eight weeks, they have decided that there were cogent and strong reasons to abandon the City and Island Council Bill, and we would wish to hear it now.

Mr R. Jumabhoy (Telok Ayer): Mr Speaker, Sir, I received this paper only last evening, stating this motion will be moved.

I was on the Municipal Commission from 1938 to 1948. We had been always fighting to have co-ordination in this small island of Singapore between the City Council, the Improvement Trust and the Rural Board. In the post-war period we had the Hill Report. Then we had the recommendations by the Rendel Commission. The present coalition Ministry run by two Nominated Members and three Officials decides to put this recommendation into practice and bring the motion before this Assembly.

Personally, I will not like to take any interest in this motion because we have not got sufficient notice. If this coalition wants to run in their own way, let them go on. How long can they go on in that way? Personally I would side with the Member for Tanglin and the Member for Tanjong Pagar. I do not think I will take any interest. Let the Government carry on with it.

The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I had hoped to spare hon. Members of this Assembly further addressing them today. I must confess that the plea of the Member for Tanjong Pagar for further information is, to my mind, a legitimate one and I would like to ask you - before I do so, I would like to deal with the petulant Member for -

An hon. Member: Telok Ayer?

Mr Speaker: Order, order. Will you withdraw the word "petulant", Mr Chief Minister?

The Chief Minister: I withdraw it, Sir. He seems to blame the Government for having received the motion paper somewhat late. I should not like to put any blame anywhere, Mr Speaker, Sir. It seems to me that that is a matter within the jurisdiction of the Speaker, and were it out of order, you would have so ruled. I have no doubt, Sir, seeing it as it stands on the Order Paper, that it was given in time - sufficient notice according to the rules was given - and if the Member for -

An hon. Member: Telok Ayer?

The Chief Minister: - Telok Ayer cannot gather his thoughts together in 24 hours, perhaps he would like to move that we should make special rules for Members from Telok Ayer.

As regards the somewhat abusive tone of the remarks from the Member for Tanglin, I must confess, Sir, that I can find nothing constructive in them, and I find it not necessary to consider them further. But the request for an explanation from the Member for Tanjong Pagar is a legitimate one, as I have said, and the answer is this: We were appointed as a Government on the 7th April. In, I think, seventeen days we had to go through a great deal in order to acquaint ourselves with our Ministries, work out a new tradition, organise ourselves as a team, because it must be remembered that it is not the Labour Front alone that is the Government, nor the coalition that is the Government - as my learned Friend keeps on insisting and rubbing in to some extent truthfully - and we had to learn to work as a team, and it was then that we understood that there was the City and Island Council Bill ready on the stocks which required but a little amendment for the purpose of adding the multi-lingual sections.

Sir, when it came to consider other matters that may be cognate to the multi-lingual sections, I would like to reserve my position on what I had hoped would be a pleasant surprise-and which I hope still will be a pleasant surprise - in matters in relation to the Bills that would be introduced ultimately in connection with the City and Island Council. But it was then discovered that we were creating and perpetuating and strengthening, in a small island, two bodies - the Assembly and the City Council - independent almost of each other, with very considerable powers, and that the City Council, though allegedly parochial in character, would have such considerable authority that it could flout the decisions and impede the execution of the policies of the Assembly. That is a dangerous position in a small island, and we see, to some extent, how it is working today when hon. Members representing the Progressive Party talked blithely - may I say, to my mind, with a certain sense of irresponsibility - about a motion in the City Council to purchase the Traction Company, without seeking to co-ordinate their action with the action of the Government; without seeking to inform themselves as to our views when, having issued that notice to purchase, they come along to us and ask us for money, and find they cannot have it! When City Councillors can descend to the status of irresponsible little children, as has been amply proved here today by the words of the Members of the Progressive Party, you can appreciate how very really dangerous the position would be if the City Council were given powers independent of the Assembly, and authority which could flout our decisions.

Now, Sir, we have been attacked for having commissions. One would imagine we had invented them. I, for one, would not be ashamed to have invented commissions. But having come to the conclusion that it was dangerous to have this island-wide authority juxtaposed to this very Assembly, we then went to the Rendel Commission which gave it birth, and from there to the Hill Commission, and from there to certain of our own local experts. The problems are vast ones and a commission can be very helpful, not seeking to avoid our responsibility, as has been so sneeringly suggested, but seeking for the welfare of this country that all should be given an opportunity to co-operate. We have never sought to make political capital - that we leave to the Party that makes the charge - and I would like to add this: that if the Progressive Party and the party representing Telok Ayer do not wish to take part in assisting in these deliberations for the formulation of a policy, of a procedure for the parochial government of this island, they would be very welcome to abstain - we hope they will have the courage to abstain - or disown the hon. Member who has spoken so sneeringly of the commission. That is the explanation of the Government for what is called the volte-face. There is no change in policy.

Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat rose -

Mr Speaker: Inche Abdul Hamid, in reply?

Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat: One point that I would like to clarify here, Sir, is this: that I am only seeking the approval of this Assembly for the appointment of a committee and that committee will be appointed by the Government and not by the House.

Sir, as regards certain allegations made by Members of the Opposition, particularly the question of time - some Members have said that they received the Notice Paper only yesterday - I would like to refer the Members concerned, with all due respect to you, Sir, to Standing Order No. 22 (3).

On question put, the House divided: Ayes, 26; Noes, 4; Abstention, 1. Ayes Noes Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat. Ede, John. Ahmad Bin Ibrahim. Goh Tong Liang. Braga, A. J. Lim Choon Mong. Chew Swee Kee. Lim Koon Teck. Davies, E. J. Goh Chew Chua. Goode, W. A. C. Hart, T. M. Jumabhoy, J. M. Lazarous, A. R. Lee Choon Eng. Lee Kuan Yew. Lim Cher Kheng. Abstention Lim, R. C. H. Jumabhoy, R. Lim Yew Hock. Mak Pak Shee. Marshall, D. S. Mohd. Sidik Bin Haji Abdul Hamid. Nair, M. P. D. Ong Piah Teng. Absent Seah Peng Chuan. Lim Ching Siong. Sutherland, G. A. P. Tan Theng Chiang. Tan, William. Thomas, Francis. Wong Foo Nam.

Resolved,

That this Assembly is of the opinion that a Committee should be appointed to enquire into the desirability of decentralising the powers and functions of the City Council and the Rural Board and in particular:

(a) to enquire into and make recommendations on the desirability of setting up District Councils responsible for local government functions in different geographical areas of Singapore;

(b) to recommend names for such District Councils and the boundaries within which they should function having regard to the municipal status of the older parts of the city area;

(c) to enquire into and make recommendations on the desirability of establishing statutory corporations responsible for the supply of water, electricity and gas and for any other services now performed by the City Council;

(d) to enquire into and make recommendations on the re-allocation of the functions and financial responsibilities between the Government and the local authorities;

(e) to make recommendations on the procedure to be adopted to allow the business of the local authorities to be conducted in languages in addition to English and to recommend which languages should be allowed;

and to report in accordance with the foregoing provisions.