SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISION (Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 59 of 1956)

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

2.31 p.m.

The Financial Secretary (Mr T. M. Hart): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's authority to move,

That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $672,122 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 59 of 1956.

Sir, this paper deals with the applications for supplementary provision which are required to balance over-expenditure in certain votes in the 1955 accounts. Hon. Members will note that, in some cases, over-expenditure has occurred because bills have inadvertently been debited to the wrong votes. It is not really surprising. I do not know exactly how many bills, vouchers, etc. the financial clerks of Government have to deal with in the course of a year but it must run into hundreds of thousands. These minor inadvertencies are bound to occur. What is surprising is that they occur so infrequently.

The Schedule contains eight items and only one of these items is for a sizeable amount. That item is No. 368 which refers to the Regional Fisheries Research Laboratory at Changi. There has been over-expenditure to the extent of $657,624, all of which is recoverable from Colonial Development and Welfare funds. Hon. Members may ask why over-expenditure of this amount occurred without an application for supplementary provision being made. I asked the same question when my attention was drawn to the matter early this year. Enquiries were made and it is clear that the omission was due to the fact that the eminent scientist in charge of the station was not completely familiar with the requirements of financial General Orders and to the fact that he spent much of the latter part of 1955 at sea with the research vessel the arrival of which he had anxiously waited for so long. The officer concerned has had his attention drawn to the requirements of financial General Orders in this connection.

Over-expenditure in connection with the Cambodian Trade Fair was permitted as it was clear that the original Singapore provision would not be exceeded and that it seemed better to wait until exact requirements were known before seeking supplementary provision.

Sir, I beg to move.

Mr Chew Swee Kee: I second the motion.