COMMERCIAL TELEVISION (INTRODUCTION)

Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Amendment to Question [9th February, 1956].

"That this House approves in principle the introduction of commercial television in Singapore by the issue of an exclusive licence to a commercial undertaking without charge on public funds but subject to control by the Government." - (The Minister for Education).

Which Amendment was, to leave out all the words from "of" in line 1 to the end and insert?

"television in Singapore and recommends that a Commission be appointed to explore the possibilities of setting up a public corporation to operate it." - (Mr Lee Kuan Yew).

Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out."

The Chief Secretary (Mr W. A. C. Goode): Sir, if I may conclude the remarks I was making on this amendment yesterday afternoon, I should like to do what I can to correct a false impression and any misunderstanding which may have been caused by reports in this morning's Press, where I am reported as having attacked the Government.

Sir, the hon. Member who moved this motion made it clear that the original motion before the House was not a Government motion; that this is a free debate in which Members are entitled to express their own views, and in which the views of the Government are not being put forward.

I should like to make it quite clear, beyond misunderstanding, Sir, that I have not as yet joined the People's Action Party and nothing that I said yesterday will, I hope, be interpreted as in any way attacking the policy of the Government. I was giving my views in this debate as other hon. Members are doing.

The Minister for Health (Mr A. J. Braga): Mr Speaker, Sir, after having heard the arguments advanced yesterday by the Member for Tanjong Pagar (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) and others, I now propose, Sir, to move an amendment to the amendment which is now before the House. The amendment that I am moving is to leave out all the words from "a" before "Commission" and insert:

"Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore".

Amendment handed in.

Mr Speaker: The appropriate time, of course, to move that amendment, the hon. Member will probably realise, is when I propose the Question later on "That the words proposed to be inserted, be inserted"; but, of course, that does not prevent the hon. Member from speaking on what he proposes to do. Mr Braga.

Mr Braga: The purpose of this amendment, Sir, is not to keep out the possibilities of any other form of institution to run television. It may be a public corporation; it may be a private corporation; or it may be a marriage of both. It does not exclude any possibilities. Sir, I will move this amendment when you put the Question before the House, and not now.

Mr Speaker: I had better remind hon. Members that the only Question before the House is, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out." If that is agreed, then, of course, we go on to the other Question as to the words to be inserted. That is the position.

The Chief Minister (Mr D. S. Marshall): If it please you, Sir, I would like clarification. In order to have this amendment accepted, the existing amendment before the House then should be negatived, and then we proceed. Is that it, Sir? Or is it only when you propose the Question that we can move an amendment before the vote?

Mr Speaker: Can I just explain it again? The procedure is this. Now we have, in fact, two Questions which affect the Member for Tanjong Pagar's amendment. The first Question is that certain words that he proposes to leave out be left out. That is being debated now, and in the course of the debate any Member may, of course, touch on the words which the hon. Member wishes to include. That has been done. Now, after I put that Question, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out", if Members agree that those words be left out, then, of course, I will go on to the Question that the words proposed by the hon. Member to be inserted, be inserted. It is at that period that any Member can move amendments to that Question.

I will put the first Question.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out," put, and agreed to.

Mr Speaker: The Question now is, "That the words proposed to be inserted, be there inserted", and the words proposed to be inserted are the words proposed by the Member for Tanjong Pagar:

"television in Singapore and recommends that a Commission be appointed to explore the possibilities of setting up a public corporation to operate it".

That is the Question that is now before the House. Now, Mr Braga.

Mr Braga: Mr Speaker, I am very much obliged. I do move an amendment to the Member for Tanjong Pagar's amendment. I have already handed it to the Clerk of the Assembly, Sir.

Mr Speaker: It is in order.

Mr Braga: I move, Sir,

To leave out all the words from "a" in the first line and to insert the words "Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore".

As I have already said, Sir, this would not exclude the possibilities of any institution running it as the Committee may recommend.

The Assistant Minister for Labour and Welfare (Mr Mak Pak Shee): I second the motion.

Mr Speaker: The original amendment was to leave out all the words after the word "of" and to insert the words "television in Singapore and recommends that a Commission be appointed to explore the possibilities of setting up a public corporation to operate it". Now it has already been agreed that the words proposed to be left out, be left out. Since then there has been another amendment proposed to the original amendment, and that is, to leave out all the words after "a" and to insert the words "Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore". So that the whole Question would then read:

"That this House approves in principle the introduction of television in Singapore and recommends that a Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore".

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out of the original amendment, be left out".

The Chief Minister: If it please you, Sir, we have had quite a few miracles this month. The Progressive Party have accepted complete independence and the Democrats have come out fully in favour of a Socialist platform equal to the Labour Front, and the Labour Front has converted an official into being a Fabian - more Fabian than the Labour Front - who tells us the principles of Socialism for which we should stand. Now, Sir, the fact that I am going to vote in favour of this amendment will suggest that there is yet another miracle, and I am being converted by my friend and colleague the Hon. the Minister for Communications and Works (Mr Thomas) and the leader for the P.A.P. But that is not the position. It is preferable that an instrument of this character, with public influence, should be in the hands of Government if the expense is not prohibitive.

I have, Sir, in my small way and in so far as I could, examine the possibilities. For myself I was satisfied, Sir, that for the first few years it would be preferable to allow private capital to do the spade work and to have Government control; and later on, as we see how things progress, to buy it over with full knowledge of the practical difficulties as they work out daily, and as we can see them before our eyes and particularly with full knowledge of the cost to the country of this service. That is why, Sir, I supported the original motion and I was against the amendment which sought to limit the service of television to a public corporation without consideration of any other possibilities, because I feared, and I still fear, that if we seek to make it a public corporation and do not investigate the other possibilities, we will find it impossible to carry on or else take over a burden with considerable liabilities which we cannot fully envisage and which may gravely reflect upon our capacity to deal with problems of a more pressing social character.

The amendment now proposed by my friend and colleague the Minister for Health (Mr Braga), Sir, takes away that objection, although it still leaves the objection of delay - and delay can be important, but it is not vital. In this instance, Sir, there have been sentiments expressed - and expressed with some force and, may I say, with some logic - sentiments of fear, even from a member of the officials, that to put this in the hands of big business would gravely prejudice the welfare of the country - and it is very welcome that we should have from an official so refreshing a suspicion of big business!

Sir, the word "Commission" has been changed to "Committee" for this one purpose: A Commission has considerable powers of compulsion, powers to take evidence on oath and to force production of documents and attendance, and powers to take evidence in private as well as in public. Now, Sir, those powers should not be lightly given or unnecessarily given. In a matter of this character, there can be no reason whatsoever to fear that any organisation or anybody who is invited to give evidence would refrain from doing so. There is no necessity for these powers of compulsion, and a Committee would be fully adequate because it would similarly have powers to take evidence both in public and in private. For the rest, Sir, it leaves that Committee free to consider other aspects of the introduction of television without the limitation that is sought by the Member for Tanjong Pagar. As my friend and colleague the Minister for Health has pointed out, it may well be that there could be a marriage between public and private capital, Sir, in the form of giving Government the control which is considered adequate and which I consider necessary over television. It may be that even that would be impossible and the Committee would wish to recommend that, though it is preferable to have a public corporation, nevertheless, because of technical, organisational or financial difficulties, commercial television be introduced for a temporary period. We have this morning read that Indonesia has accepted commercial television and is introducing it. In those circumstances, Sir, I, for one, will accept the amendment proposed by my friend and colleague the Minister for Health - that a Committee be appointed to investigate the possibilities. Though I do regret that there should be this delay, I do also recognise that if there is this wide and genuine fear of the threat of big business, then it is necessary that we should accept this delay in order to have the picture that the public wishes.

Mr R. Jumabhoy (Telok Ayer): Mr Speaker, Sir, perhaps few of us remember that a few years back we had an exhibition in Singapore of television. The public thought that television would be here very shortly, but years rolled by without any result. However, some steps, in the way of motions or amendments to motions, are now being taken - whether it should be run by a public corporation or by private enterprise.

Sir, those democratic countries which are slowly proceeding towards Socialism have still a love for privately-sponsored projects with some control by the Government, and if these projects are found to be unsatisfactorily run later, then the Government takes over. After all, Sir, even the big states have not been able to provide all the capital for all the necessities, and that is why they have encouraged private capital to come forward.

Mr Speaker: Order, Mr R. Jumabhoy.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: I am coming to the amendment, Sir.

Mr Speaker: I just want to make quite clear what the position is. There seems to be some misunderstanding. Hon. Members will realise that the position now is that we have agreed that commercial television is out of the picture. We are now dealing with the question whether or not a Commission should be appointed to explore the possibilities of setting up a public corporation as against a Committee to explore the possibilities of the introduction of television.

The Chief Minister: With respect, Sir, do forgive me for seeking to correct you - I do apologise - but the very purpose of the amendment is to leave commercial television in the picture. The amendment by the Member for Tanjong Pagar (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) says "public corporation", whereas the amendment by my friend the Hon. the Minister for Health (Mr Braga) leaves it to a Committee to decide whether it wants a commercial institution, whether it wants a public corporation, or whether it wants a marriage of the two. Commercial television is still in the picture.

Mr Speaker: There seems to be some misunderstanding about the whole procedure, because once certain words are left out of a motion, those words are left out and cannot be restored. But if it is the wish of the Assembly that the matter should still be pursued, it can, of course, be done. I am only pointing out what the procedure is. So, if it is the wish of the Assembly that this question of a commercial undertaking should still be in the picture, the debate on it can, of course, continue. Is that the wish of the Assembly then?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar): No.

Hon. Members: Yes.

Mr Speaker: The majority seem to say Yes, so let us have some more talk about it. Yes, Mr R. Jumabhoy.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, I am not pleading on this platform that we must have a commercial corporation to do that. Far from it. I am just putting forward the picture of how other countries are allowing private capital to come forward and help the country in certain projects.

Sir, coming back to this television exhibition I was talking about just now, I happened to ask one of the engineers who was there as to what distance one could operate a station. If I remember it correctly, Sir, he told me that it could be from 50 to 70 miles. Now, if any corporation, public or private, or Government is to operate, it can take advantage of the other territories also to earn additional income and also give its benefits. Sir, we have forgotten altogether this most important aspect. If a station can operate from 75 miles away, then it is possible that our neighbouring territory will also be interested.

Sir, another point is this: Why not let the State run this? But, then, Sir is the State big enough to take up so many projects? Has it sufficient capital to do so many things? I certainly say that we have only got a limited capacity. If we have a limited capacity, why not explore the possibility that other territories might join, and here the Hon. the Chief Secretary (Mr Goode) brought in a very good point in this debate - that if it is to be a State project, why not bring in broadcasting also? That is a very important point. Broadcasting serves not only Singapore, not only the Federation, but also our other neighbouring territories, Borneo, etc. and it might be possible for a Committee or Commission to explore the possibility of getting these territories in, because if they are interested, our burden will be less. It is very well to say why not put up so many million dollars for this and that project? Where are we going to get the money from? Sir, our neighbours even have floated corporations where the State capital is 51 per cent or 75 per cent and private capital is less. The State has the control but they give up the management to a properly-run private organisation. I refer to a shipping company floated by the Government of India; 75 per cent of the capital belongs to the Government and 25 per cent to a private company, but the management has been handed over to the company. Sir, take the case of the India National Airlines. It is a Government concern and is capitalised by the Government. It is one of the best airlines, and second to none. Yet it has been handed over to a private company to run and it is doing wonderfully well. It may be State-cum-private capital too. We might bring in other interested territories. The bigger territories should have more interest. I do not know if I am in order, Sir, but this was debated yesterday. Take the railways, for example. It is a Federation affair. Airlines may be a Federation affair too, because a major portion of the Federation is served by them. The Government of Singapore should not take on their own shoulders a responsibility which is not entirely their own. Public internal transport is, of course, the Government's responsibility. They can take over television if they want to, but when other territories are interested, we have got to think wisely. Whether a Committee is appointed to consider the question or whether it should be a Commission is immaterial; but if broadcasting is to come in, I think a Commission might be better. However, the Hon. the Chief Secretary has not moved an amendment to bring in broadcasting.

Sir, if a Commission is appointed to consider only television, the procedure would be rather laborious and expensive. A Committee might do quicker work. I would suggest, not a Committee of this House, but an ad hoc Committee which should also consist of experts who can give us really good advice, check on the information received, and make recommendations accordingly to the House.

Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar): Mr Speaker, Sir, I had a very open mind when the debate on this motion started, but the excellent exposition by the Hon. the Chief Secretary persuaded me to think that the course he has suggested is the best one in that there is every possibility that television could be economically run by the Broadcasting Department in conjunction with, possibly, advertisement programmes. To me, who has been both in the Government and in business, that is a great attraction. I have known how expensive any undertaking can be when run by Government, but in this case we have an existing corporation dealing with practically the same line as that of television. We have all the buildings there, quite a bit of equipment, the personnel, and the new venture can well be undertaken by the existing staff with an addition of, say, half the number which would normally be required by a new corporation.

Once we are persuaded that we should take time to think and make enquiries before we proceed further, then I agree with the amendment suggested by the Hon. the Minister for Health, to the effect that the enquiry should be conducted fully and not limited just to a public corporation. I therefore heartily support this amendment moved by him.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Chief Minister appears to prefer a Committee rather than a Commission, because he feels that a body which is to investigate a very important subject would not have the powers of compelling witnesses to speak on oath and make other requests for the disclosure of information. I think the Chief Minister probably does not realise that such an enquiry would have to be extensive and thorough, and a Commission is by far the more effective way of getting information before the members of such a Commission. I am not dogmatic in my approach to television being under a public authority. I am prepared to meet those Members who wish to have this Commission or Committee which will investigate the possibilities of television under some other authority than a public authority. But I feel that such a Commission - I would prefer a Commission - should be asked to pay particular regard to, and to make recommendations on, the best way in which it should be introduced in Singapore. It might be well to give this Commission sufficient scope so as to include in its deliberations the question of broadcasting together with that of television.

I have here, Sir, an amendment which I hope will meet the views of those Members of this House who do not wish the Commission to be tied down to investigating only television under a public authority but under any other authority. Such a Commission could, at the same time, be given the opportunity to investigate and to make recommendations on the setting up of a public cor- poration to run both broadcasting and television together.

The Chief Minister: That is possible under the present amendment.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I am not saying Sir, that -

The Chief Minister: To examine the possibilities -

Mr Speaker: Order, please.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the amendment as it now is, reads:

"That this House approves in principle the introduction of television in Singapore and recommends that a Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore."

I would like to go beyond that and give this Commission the power to explore the possibilities of putting broadcasting and television under one authority. It may be a public authority. It may be that the Commission, after its deliberations, may recommend that it remains under the control of a Government department. In any case it is an opportune time to consider this question of broadcasting together with television on this present motion. I have here, Sir, an amendment which I propose to move. It reads:

"To leave out all the words after 'a' and to put in the words 'Commission to be appointed to investigate the possibilities and recommend the best means whereby it can be established, with particular reference to making recommendations for the placing of broadcasting and television under one authority'".

Amendment handed in.

Mr Speaker: There is one aspect which perhaps the hon. Member has not considered, and that is that he has, in fact, moved an amendment which is an amendment to his own amendment. Therefore, that being so, I think he is completely out of order in doing that. Of course, there is nothing to prevent any other Member from adopting his suggestion and moving the amendment at the appropriate time.

The second aspect, of course, is that this amendment completely negatives the amendment now before the House. Therefore the procedure really to be adopted is for the hon. Member to vote against this amendment. Then, if he succeeds, his amendment will, of course. come back to the House and somebody else can move an amendment to his original amendment. I hope I have made myself clear.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I am much obliged to you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I hope, Mr Speaker, Sir, that we can precede with this debate without personal animosities. I hope we will take this opportunity to have a Commission appointed to explore the possibilities of bringing broadcasting and television under one authority. On many an occasion in this House important matters have arisen quite accidentally as when some persons wanted to be junior Ministers and this led to a constitutional crisis. Some persons think that television is a great idea and, after talking to some friends, decide to invite tenders. Some persons get angry because others criticise them for the way in which things are done; or they object to amendments even if they are reasonable - indeed particularly if they are reasonable.

Whatever happens at the end of this debate I hope the House will remember that Members of an Assembly come and go, but institutions like broadcasting and television may go on, if not forever, at least long after we are gone. We should sit back now and think over the possibility of doing something on a firm and steady basis. I must thank the Chief Secretary for having introduced broadcasting into this debate. I had wanted to introduce this subject of bringing broadcasting and television under one public authority, but I thought that if I went that far I might antagonise sufficient Members on the Government side to make it impossible for my motion ever to get through. But I now find support from an official for the idea of putting broadcasting and television together. Of course, the official view is that it would be better if both were under a Government department. My view is that it would be better if both were under an independent public authority. Members of the Opposition will therefore have less reason to suspect any bias in the presentation of any views, or any particular kind of view, over a Government broadcasting or television system.

I am against this amendment by the Hon. the Minister for Health because:

(1) I do not think a Committee is adequate for this purpose; and

(2) I consider this is an appropriate time to have a Commission appointed, not only to explore the possibilities of commercial or State television but also to consider whether this is not the right time to bring broadcasting together with television under one authority.

I ask the House therefore to support me in rejecting the Minister for Health's amendment. I would invite it to amend my amendment in order that this Commission will have the power to investigate the question of broadcasting and television being placed under one authority.

The Minister for Communications and Works (Mr Francis Thomas): Mr Speaker, Sir, the processes of democracy is often accused of being rather slow, and I must say that they have been strikingly slow in this Assembly during the sittings of the last two days and today. I do personally believe that in this particular debate on television, we are all substantially agreed that what we want is to have the matter examined and have the information before us on which we can make up our minds. I do not feel there is any great substance in whether it is a Commission or a Committee. There is no matter that I can see which is likely to call for judicial powers to enforce people to give evidence on oath or to compel secret papers to be produced. There is nothing much to consider except possibilities in the future. There is nothing much in the past in television which we can hope to examine, and I do not think that point is very significant.

For myself, I am quite satisfied with a Committee provided it is well planned and competent to do its work. I do not think it will be obstructed by inability to compel evidence. I think that the various points that have been raised since the Hon. the Minister for Health put his amendment can all be dealt with quite adequately without further discussion here, by giving an undertaking that the terms of reference for the Committee will be so framed that whatever the representatives of the people want to be considered shall be considered. We do not have to frame the terms of reference in this House. We can indicate broadly what the intention of the House is, and it is up to the terms of reference to indicate precisely what the functions of the Committee are. I am sure there will be no difficulty about framing terms of reference which will be satisfactory to all concerned.

I only rise to make this suggestion, Mr Speaker, Sir, because I feel that at present we have got a kite up in the air with an endless stream of little amendments attached to its tail, and if we go on attaching further and further amendments we shall be here until we recess for our tiffin and we shall still have got very little further with our Order Paper; and I can see the sitting going on until maybe ten o'clock or twelve o'clock at night or into the early hours of tomorrow before we get away if we continue to spend a lot of time debating what is really not much more than a procedural point. So personally, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would be glad to accept the amendment of the Minister for Health on the understanding that the Committee would be given adequate terms of reference to deal with the matters which have been raised in this debate.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: On a point of clarification, Sir. Does the Minister for Communications and Works say that he feels that this Committee should have the power to investigate the possibility of broadcasting and television being put together?

Mr Francis Thomas: Yes, I think there is no reason at all why they should not examine that. I think it is a most fruitful suggestion.

The Chief Minister: It is part of the whole.

Mr M. P. D. Nair (Seletar): Mr Speaker, Sir, it appears to me that in this debate one of the most important points has been lost sight of. Both the original motion and the amendments have suggested, in principle, the introduction of television in Singapore, but I have not heard, apart from a few passing remarks, whether it is desirable to introduce television in Singapore. To me, Sir, this is a very grave matter which should have been debated at considerable length and the pros and cons assessed.

I think, Sir, that the terms of reference of the proposed Committee should, if possible, include the question whether it is desirable to introduce television in Singapore, because in the past few months I have heard many arguments against this. The Hon. the Chief Secretary made it very clear to this Assembly yesterday that more than 50 per cent of the population are below the age of 21. This controversy about the introduction of television in Singapore has been going on for some time, although there has been no official suggestion as to its introduction.

Sir, I have no strong views about television in Singapore, because I have always thought that its introduction in Singapore will not benefit the ordinary man in the street very much. I would request the Government to consider this matter and to so frame the terms of reference as to meet my request.

The Chief Minister: On a matter of elucidation, in answer to my friend the Member for Seletar. As I see it, the motion should have been passed and I should have to carry out the appointment of a Committee. The motion accepts the principle of the introduction of television, Sir, and in the circumstances it would not be appropriate for Government to include in the terms of reference a request that the Committee consider the desirability, because, as I see the motion or the amendment now before the House, it incorporates an acceptance of the principle of its introduction. All that the Committee can do is to investigate all the means, including the question of an alliance with any other forms of entertainment, radio as well as others. But it cannot investigate the question of desirability.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out of the original amendment, be left out," put, and agreed to.

Mr Speaker: The Question now is, "That the words proposed to be inserted, be there inserted," so that the original Question, as amended, would read:

"That this House approves in principle the introduction of television in Singapore and recommends that a Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore."

This is an opportunity for hon. Members to suggest amendments to the words proposed to be inserted. If there are none, I will put the question.

Question, "That the words proposed to be inserted, be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

Mr Speaker: Now the original Question, as amended, is before the House:

"That this House approves in principle the introduction of television in Singapore and recommends that a Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore."

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Sir, for the purposes of the record, I wish to say that we have taken note of the fact that the Chief Minister and the Minister for Communications and Works have said that this Committee will be empowered, in its terms of reference, to investigate the possibility of bringing broadcasting and television under one authority.

The Chief Minister: With respect, Sir for the record, I would not have my words twisted, but I would like to say that the terms of reference - I repeat what I have said - of the Committee would empower it to investigate any relationship that it considers appropriate between television and broadcasting.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I should be much obliged, Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Minister for Communications and Works would clarify the position, because, as I understood him, he said, in his bland, affable manner, "Yes, the Committee will have powers to look into everything, and all this debate is quite unnecessary." Is that so or is that not so?

Mr Francis Thomas: I really feel, Mr Speaker, Sir, that democracy is slowing down almost to a standstill! I think the Committee should investigate the things which it is asked to investigate and which are the things which the House wishes to have investigated and which the House has indicated should be investigated and which, no doubt, the Committee will investigate![Interruption.]

Mr Speaker: Order, order. We cannot go on like this. Mr Lim Choon Mong, you can speak on the motion.

Mr Lim Choon Mong (Serangoon): Mr Speaker, Sir, now we have the whole motion, as amended, before the House; the question is whether this House approves the principle of the introduction of commercial television in Singapore and a Committee to be set up to investigate it.

Mr Speaker: The word "commercial" has been left out.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Yes, Sir. I have noticed that radio, broadcasting and newspapers are all very important media whereby ideas can be passed. Radio, especially, is a suitable pastime for people. I also know the great importance of the cinema in entertaining people.

Sir, I have no very strong views against television, and I am just saying what is in my mind as a private citizen. From my observations, Sir, I think we do not have many industries in Singapore, and I think the first need of Singapore is to have more money put into industry. The question has occurred to me whether it would be right for us to encourage investment in another form of entertainment or whether it would not be better that the people who have capital should be persuaded to set up more industries so as to boost up production for the sake of greater national wealth. We do want, of course, some sort of entertainment too, but I am of the opinion that if we have television coming into Singapore, we must consider what section of the people it will benefit. A television set, I have been told, would cost between $800 and $1,000. I am wondering whether this amenity, when it comes to Singapore, will ever reach the common man.

Mr Francis Thomas: Yes.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Will it ever reach the homes of people who earn $100 or $200? Sir, as has occurred in other lands, television sets will probably be set up in public houses, in coffee-shops (as we have them here) or in bars. It will then create a situation whereby the man in the street, who cannot afford to own a television set, may be attracted to get into a bar or a coffee-shop and then glue his eyes on to the television set, instead of spending more time with his family at home. Of course, as you know, the family should be the strongest unit in democracy and we should always make the man stick to his family. I therefore wonder how much this is going to take the man away from his family.

Furthermore, Sir, there is the question of the programmes. Whether they are good or bad depends on the people behind them. It is just like a double-edged sword. It can cut one way and do good. It can cut the other way and demoralise the people.

I do understand and I do appreciate the fact that T.V. is a modern form of entertainment available in all advanced nations, and because of that we should also have this amenity. But I would like the Committee, if it ever sits down to consider its terms of reference, to consider also the points of view that I have put forward in this Assembly.

Mr R. C. H. Lim (Nominated): Mr Speaker, Sir, it does appear quite clearly now that the Member for Serangoon has become more socialistic than ever before. Of course, it will be the duty of this Government - the Labour Front and the Alliance Coalition Government - to see that the interests of the masses are not only not ignored but well protected.

I visualise that when television comes to Singapore the youth clubs, the trade unions and the community centres will be provided with television sets.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng (Changi): At Government expense?

Mr R. C. H. Lim: I have found out that in England now you can get a television set on the hire purchase system at a price of about 25 guineas. If Government, during the early stages of the introduction of television in Singapore, do not place a duty on television sets, it will certainly enable the low income group to have television sets. So I should like to assure the Member for Serangoon that he need not be alarmed, as far as this Government is concerned, that the interests of the masses will not be protected, especially the youth clubs.

Question,

That this House approves in principle the introduction of television in Singapore and recommends that a Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore,

put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House approves in principle the introduction of television in Singapore and recommends that a Committee be appointed to explore the possibilities of its introduction in Singapore.