FIRST SCHEDULE

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head 26-

The Chairman: We are on Head 26 and I would inform hon. Members that there are 60 minutes left for that head. The Question is -

Mr D. S. Marshall (Cairnhill): Mr Chairman, Sir, could I enquire whether, in view of the other amendments available and the desire of some Members, including myself, to speak on the Main Question and draw attention to other items under this heading, you could, Mr Chairman, allocate part of the available time for this heading for the purposes of this amendment?

The Chairman: I am afraid I am bound by Standing Orders. The hon. Member is aware that time has had to be allotted for each head of expenditure, and I do not think I can deviate from Standing Orders.

Question again proposed,

"That the sum to be allotted for Head 26 be reduced by $100,000 in respect of subhead 3, Family Planning Association, appearing on page 144 of the Estimates."

10.06 a.m.

The Minister for Health (Mr A. J. Braga): Mr Chairman, I think at the outset I ought to say that I appreciate your timely halting of yesterday's debate at the moment of interruption, when emotions and feelings were running high owing to taunts being hurled at me as I was addressing the Committee on what is to me a serious subject. If in a moment of heat I said anything unseemly, I wish to apologise to hon. Members and particularly to my ministerial colleagues.

At the adjournment yesterday, Mr Chairman, I was explaining to hon. Members that I had been trying as much as possible to reduce expenditure on medical buildings without lowering standards, and I said that construction of the new Training School, the Nurses Hostel and several clinics and outdoor dispensaries, which the former Government had estimated to be built at $80,000 each, had cost $50,000 each, a saving of $30,000 each. I have nothing more to add to what I said yesterday, Mr Chairman, except this: that with the sum of $100,000, the Government can build two more such clinics or outdoor dispensaries in such parts of the island as may need them, and they would give much better service to the country than does the Family Planning Association which, in my opinion, should be a voluntary organisation and should not be subsidised by Government.

In conclusion, I would like to draw hon. Members' attention to Head 26, page 145, and see some of the other charitable grants which have been provided for in the Budget:

After-Care Association - only $10,000.

Little Sisters of the Poor (a most deserving cause) - only $4,800.

School for the Deaf (another very deserving cause) - only $6,000.

Singapore Youth Council - only $15,000.

I would like to see all these grants increased rather than to see $100,000 voted for the Family Planning Association.

When I returned home last night, I received this so-called interesting pamphlet which was sent to me by the members of the Family Planning Association and which was alluded to by the member for Tanglin yesterday. In the Encyclical of Pope Pius XI on Christian Marriage His Holiness declared:

"Any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offence against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin."

If hon. Members are interested and wish to read the Encyclical of His Holiness I shall supply them with a copy.

There is also this comment:

"As regard the evil use of matrimony - to pass over the arguments which are shameful ones - not infrequently - others that are false and exaggerated are put forward. Holy Mother Church very well understands and clearly appreciates all that is said regarding the health of the mother and the danger to her life; and who would not grieve to think of these things?".

In the discourse to midwives it was accepted that in very serious cases of ill-health or where the mother's life is in danger, the use of the "safety period" is permissible.

Mr Chairman and hon. Members, I have nothing further to add to what I have said except to urge you, with all the force at my command, not to agree that this colossal sum of $100,000 be given to this Association when that money can be utilised for very much more useful purposes.

10.11 a.m.

The Minister for Communications and Works (Mr Francis Thomas): Mr Chairman, Sir, in view of the number of Members who wish to speak on other items under this Head, I think it is important that we should exercise not birth control but speech control, and I shall therefore make mine as short as I can.

There are only two points to which I wish to refer. The first is a practical point of national implication in this amendment. The Minister for Health has conceded that the information given by the Family Planning Association can properly be given in Government clinics where it is required, and it seems clear to me that if we deprive the Association of financial support, it will either have to reduce its work very considerably or will have to wind itself up. There will then be an increased burden thrown on to the public revenue by people having to go to the Government clinics for advice there, and we shall merely be transferring the load from the Charitable Allowances and Grants Head to the Ministry of Health Head. I have no doubt that in the transfer the amount of money involved will very considerably increase, because you will have removed the voluntary unpaid element which at present is very considerable. The final effect will be a much heavier burden on the funds of the country. Incidentally, that, of course, disposes also of the argument that Catholics should not be forced to contribute to family planning work, because the government funds are derived from Catholics as well as from others, and if the Ministry of Health is going to provide these services, then the Catholics must still be contributing in so far as they are good citizens and pay their income tax and other taxes.

There is one other argument put up which I feel deserves a moment of time. It was suggested that if the Family Planning Association continued its work, we should suffer from a lack of manpower for our Singapore Battalion and pan-Malayan development work. This is a very long-term view indeed. During the immediate future, all you would get would be an increase in baby-power, and I do not think baby-power is very significant either in soldiering or in working. If you take the period from the time of conception to the time the living soul becomes effective from a working or a soldiering point of view, say, 18 years, and stop family planning, it could not possibly have any significant effect until about 1975, which is indeed a long-term view. By 1975 some 400,000 boys and girls now already alive, and many of them in school, will have been added to the effective labour force. I do not think we need fear any absence of manpower in those circumstances. It is a most ill-conceived argument based, I am afraid, on a complete failure to distinguish between an infant in arms and a worker at his lathe.

Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar): Sir, I think we should all look on this subject of family planning from an objective viewpoint and we should not be influenced by our beliefs or outside forces. The only consideration that we should put before us is whether this expenditure of $100,000 will benefit Singapore or whether it will do us no good at all. To my mind, we have the examples of China, India and Japan whose governments have adopted family planning and they do so not because they want it but because of necessity, because of over-population and the impossibility to food and clothe all the children being born in those territories. These countries will not adopt family planning unless it is vitally necessary and we in Singapore are coming to that stage. We have now over 20,000 people unemployed and their numbers are increasing, and this has been confirmed by the Minister for Commerce and Industry. On top of that, we have those people who are now leaving school and trying to find employment and their numbers will be increased. I can assure the Members of this House that the question of unemployment is very serious. There can be no more rubber packing in Singapore because it is not economical to pack here due to the rise in wages, and you have over a thousand people unemployed on that account alone. In my opinion, if an expenditure of $100,000 can save a thousand or even a few hundred people from the embarrassment and worry of having to meet confinement expenses and the support of a new mouth in the family, I think the money is well spent. If we can save a few hundred women from the worry of an unplanned confinement and going through the sufferings of ill-health and having to visit quack doctors in order to obtain abortion, which may injure their health and possibly cause their death, then we shall have spent this money well.

Sir, I would ask Members of this House to view this expenditure of $100,000 objectively, and if we are not influenced by our beliefs and outside forces, our common sense will tell us that it is money worth spending.

Mr G. A. P. Sutherland (Nominated): Mr Chairman, Sir, I also will exercise speech control. I would just like to touch on one angle of this debate. Last year several people outside the Assembly accused us of treating this subject with the utmost levity. Some of the remarks passed in this Committee may have bordered on the salacious, but much of what was said was said with conviction and sincerity. In any case, what is so terrible about having a dig or a jest at the expense of family planning? The birth of a human being may be the greatest of all mysteries, but there is no mystery about contraception, or should not be! One member said he was surprised that there should be joking about such a serious subject. That seems to me to be bordering on the sanctimonious. We have had laughter in this House, Sir, on many occasions and sometimes it has relieved tension. At times it has taken place in discussions far more serious than this one. My own view is that I refuse to regard the subject of family plan, fling as holy ground. I believe that the Family Planning Association consists of a group of people who are absolutely sincere in their convictions and are of impeccable reputation. I think the work they are doing, which is largely voluntary, is in the very best tradition of voluntary workers in that they are devoting their time to the relief of sufferers and to the poor. As such, I think they are deserving of government assistance. That I believe, Sir, and I have heard no argument so far which will ever shake that belief.

The Chief Minister (Mr Lim Yew Hock): Mr Chairman, Sir, someone has said that speech, like pregnancy, is easy to conceive but hard to deliver. That is why there have been some unplanned speeches and certain ill-advised deliveries! Sir, last year the subject was thoroughly debated and this year I find that most of the speakers who took part in the debate last year find it unnecessary to repeat the performance. But I do see, Sir, that the Minister for Health still maintains that planned parenthood is unhealthy. I am very happy, too, to see that the Minister for Communications and Works, while not maintaining that there should be more communications and less work, still makes out a case for planned parenthood.

Sir, I have asked for the figures since 1950 of the amounts of contribution or grants to this Association. It began in 1950 with $5,000 and it kept on mounting up - 1951, $10,000; 1952, $20,000; 1953, $30,000; 1954, $45,000; 1955, $60,000; 1956, $85,000; and next year, $100,000. Every year when this vote was being debated in the Assembly, there had been opposition. It would appear, Sir, that opposition to the Family Planning Association makes it more thriving and makes it more worthy of support. We are proposing to increase the grant by $15,000 in 1957, and in 1958, with the record of service that they have rendered to the people of Singapore, I should not be surprised if the $100,000 is exceeded. Sir, the F.P.A. is rendering a service which my Ministry, the Ministry of Labour and Welfare, while looking after labour still has to look after its welfare, maintains that it is a sum worth spending.

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Sir, yesterday I said that this was an unfortunate and unnecessary amendment. I hope the voting on it will prove it unnecessary, and I think it has been amply proved that the debate has been unfortunate. The subject seems to exacerbate feelings deeply held and produces an emotional incapacity for logical thought and an excitement as indicated in yesterday's wild attack on me personally by the Minister for Health.

Sir, as for the lack of logic in the approach, I would draw your attention to the Minister for Health's statement made proudly that he is building several maternity clinics and hospitals, and in those maternity clinics and hospitals for which we obtain money from the public by tax in order to support them, family planning advice is given. Sir, if this Government can use money obtained by tax for the support of clinics and hospitals which, as part of their work, give advice on family planning, where is this evil which he sees in -

Mr Braga rose -

The Chairman: Point of order?

Mr Braga: Point of clarification, Sir.

The Chairman: Will the hon. Member give way?

Mr Marshall: No, Sir. Where is this evil which is alleged to exist in the utilisation of money directed to an organisation whose integrity and whose approach to this human problem has not been challenged either in this House or outside?

Sir, there was one other matter brought up by the Member for Changi to which I would like to reply. He said that these dedicated ladies in the Family Planning Association have very rich husbands, so let them go and sell their jewellery -

Mr Lim Cher Kheng (Changi): Sure, sure!

Mr Marshall: I would say this, Sir. I know the Member for Changi is a sincere social worker. I have seen him go into court. I have seen him bail prisoners. I have seen him do quiet work for the public. But I say this to him. Would he give his all for any one particular aspect of the social services in which he is interested? Is it not good that there are people who do come forward to give not merely money but of their time to serve the people? Let us remember that the $100,000 is but a part of the budget of the Family Planning Association and that the persons to whom the Member for Changi has referred do, in fact, give their voluntary donations to the extent that they can, but they do appeal to the public and the public does support this Family Planning Association. So I say, with respect to the Member for Changi whom I have always regarded very highly, that that jibe was uncalled for.

I can only hope, Sir, that the absence of many of the supporters of family planning who voted last year will in no way affect a matter which gravely affects an important social service for this territory, and that some who abstained last year will take courage to support a very worthy cause.

Mr Braga: Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to correct a statement that was made by the Member for Cairnhill just now. Subject to correction, Sir, I do not think that I ever said that free advice on family planning is given in the maternity clinics and hospitals; what I did say was that if any woman, for reasons of health, requires advice on matters of that nature -

Mr Marshall: Family planning?

Mr Braga: Not necessarily family planning, but advice on matters of health. She can get that advice in the maternity clinics and hospitals, but as far as I know, these centres do not give such advice on family planning as advocated by the Family Planning Association. [Interruption.]

Mr Lim Cher Kheng crossed the Floor of the House.

The Chairman: Order. The hon. Member is completely out of order in crossing the floor unnecessarily. Will he please return that document?

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Yes, Sir. I apologise for crossing the Floor, Mr Chairman. Please forgive me for taking that particular document. The reason is that I wish to refer to it and answer back.

In my speech yesterday I did not advise those office bearers in the Family Planning Association to sell their jewellery. I advised them to save that money and not to spend it on diamond rings and beautiful dresses.

I must thank the Member for Cairnhill for his nice compliment on my social service activities. Sir, as a social worker, I have had occasion to attend many social functions. Sir, I wonder whether or not the Little Sisters of the Poor can be classified as an institution which has rendered a great service to this country?

Hon. Members: Sure.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Yes, but when I looked through the Budget, I failed to find the Little Sisters of the Poor applying for any government grant.

Mr Marshall: On a point of information, Sir. The Member for Changi will find there is a grant for the Little Sisters of the Poor at page 145, Head 26, subhead 24 of the Budget.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: I beg your pardon, Sir. Because the debate has been so heated and so sensational, I failed to observe this. I thought it was the Blue Cross Charitable Institution. Sir, the Blue Cross is a recognised institution and is run by public donations. If the House will allow me, I will organise more social functions and render greater service to this country without a government donation.

Mr Lee Choon Eng (Queenstown): On a point of order, Sir. Has the Member for Changi indicated the length of time he requires to speak on this subject, Sir, and has he used up all that time?

The Chairman: That is not a point of order. I have allotted 100 minutes for the whole of Head 26. I take it that hon. Members are aware of it and that they are also aware that there are two more amendments put down for debate. There are just over 30 minutes left.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Thank you, Mr Chairman, Sir. Besides the two points which I pointed out yesterday, I wish to add another point - public spirit. We are most appreciative of the work done by these energetic and devoted ladies for the Family Planning Association. I am wondering whether they cannot take another step forward and also direct their attention to the Blue Cross Charitable Institution which is run on a voluntary basis. I believe the money spent on the Blue Cross Charitable Institution is much less than that spent on the Family Planning Association. The relief done by the Blue Cross is an indication of its public spirit. So I wish the office bearers of the Family Planning Association would try to understand my point of view and give it careful consideration if they wish to run the Association on a voluntary basis. If the advice that they give is not only to be confined to family planning but also to other matters, then I am in support of this grant.

The Chief Minister: Just a little point, Sir. Last year the Government gave a free vote on this matter, and this year it will be the same.

Question put.

Hon. Members: Division, Sir.

The Chairman: Clear the lobbies.

The House divided: Ayes, 8; Noes, 15; Abstentions, 6. Ayes Noes Braga, A. J. Chew Swee Kee. Butterfield, C. H. Ede, John. Goh Tong Liang. Goh Chew Chua. Jumabhoy, J. M. Goode, W. A. C. Lazarous, A. R. Hart, T. M. Lim Cher Kheng. Lim, R. C. H. Lim Choon Mong. Lim Koon Teck. Tan, William Lim Yew Hock. Marshall, D. S. Nair, M. P. D. Seah Peng Chuan. Sutherland, G. A. P. Tan Theng Chiang. Thomas, Francis. Wong Foo Nam. Abstentions Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat. Ahmad Bin Ibrahim. Jumabhoy, R. Lee Choon Eng. Mak Pak Shee. Mohd. Sidik Bin Haji Abdul Hamid. Absent. Lee Kuan Yew. Lim Ching Siong. Ong Piah Teng.

Question on the amendment accordingly negatived.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I move,

To reduce by $5,000 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 18, Grant to Automobile Association of Singapore, on page 144 of the Estimates.

Sir, I am glad that under the "Remarks" column this grant requires Treasury sanction and I do hope that such sanction will not be approved. This Association is a private body and is affiliated to all the other motoring associations in the British Commonwealth. I do not see why we should provide a grant to a private association. $5,000 is required, Sir, and from the reasons given, I see that this sum is to assist the Association to replace existing road signs with new ones. Road signs are, in fact, the responsibility of the Government or the highway authority, which is the City Council. It should not be the responsibility of a private association to provide road signs. I am told that such road signs are put up for the purpose of guiding motorists to different places of interest. It is more or less in the nature of tourist propaganda and it should therefore be the responsibility of the Government and not of private association.

The Automobile Association of Singapore is maintained by the members. I am myself a life member of the Association and, as such, I should have been very happy to see that a grant is provided for it. But it is a principle that is involved, Sir. It is not the question of a grant that is coming to my Association. I am very much against the principle of granting money out of public funds to a private association. As the Minister for Health has indicated in his speech on family planning, it is the policy of the money that is involved. I hope that Treasury sanction will not be given and I trust that the House will support my amendment.

Question proposed.

Mr Francis Thomas: The explanation is very simple, Mr Chairman, Sir. If the hon. Member will look at page 418 of the Estimates, he will see a rather fuller explanation of what it is proposed that the Association should do. A distinction is drawn between the signs which give orders, say, "Stop" or "Keep left" - which are definite orders - and those which give useful information such as the fact that there is a narrow bridge ahead or you are coming to a double bend and that kind of thing.

The grant in this case is a dollar-for-dollar grant and, in fact, if the Association is not given the grant and it does not put the signs up, then the burden will be transferred to the Government. The advocates of less taxation, I am sure, will support this grant which will cost only $5,000 from the public funds, whereas if the Association is not allowed to co-operate with the Government, then presumably the whole amount will have to be paid from the public funds, or will not be provided, with less improvement consequently in the traffic situation. There is undoubtedly very great need for improvements of all sorts in the safety and rapid flow of traffic in Singapore, and anything that can be done should be done. If the Government organisation has to be extended to deal with these things that will, of course, involve not only expenditure on signs but expenditure on additional officials to go round and see where the signs are to be put up. There is very often a real saving to be achieved by using a voluntary organisation to do work which the Government could do but which would be costly and elaborate and which would perhaps be slower because everything has to go through the government machine.

I should add perhaps that the Traffic Branch of the Police, who, after all, are experts on this problem, strongly support this vote, and that the signs to be erected will be erected in consultation with the Traffic Branch both as to types and location. I hope my explanation is sufficient, Sir, for us to pass on to other items. It is, in fact, a saving of money and probably an increase in efficiency will be derived from making this grant to a voluntary organisation which can do useful work in the public service.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, it is really surprising to hear from the Minister for Communications and Works that if the road signs were to become the responsibility of the Government, the expenditure involved would be more. There was the opinion frequently expressed yesterday that broadcasting should come under private enterprise. Is it the Minister's contention that whatever is undertaken by the Government will cost far more than if it is undertaken by private enterprise? If that is so, I am very much surprised.

On the question of road signs, Sir, I am fully aware, as I have indicated in my speech, that it is not a question of "Stop, look, go", but it is a question of "Major road ahead" or "Sharp bend" as indicated by the Minister. All the way up to the Federation, Sir, I do find such signs and it is my opinion that they should be provided by the Government rather than by a private organisation, if the Automobile Association of Singapore is trying to help motorists, it should apply for a grant from the Commonwealth Headquarters Association to which it is affiliated, rather than from the Assembly. I do not think it is right for the Government to grant a dollar for a dollar, a dollar for a dollar, to all kinds of organisation. I shall be coming back to this dollar for dollar basis on another issue at a later stage. I think this is entirely wrong. As the Member for Changi has indicated earlier, because the Blue Cross is doing charitable work in place of the Government, and if that organisation is going to apply for a dollar for dollar grant, then the Government will be committed to a colossal sum of money. As it stands today, Sir, we are committed to $1,078,520 just for charity alone, and if more associations come to Government for dollar for dollar grants, where will it land? We are faced with a deficit of $36 million, Sir, and out of that the Member for Cairnhill has indicated that $14 million or $15 million is provided for four minesweepers. Out of that charity, another $16 million to $20 million may have to be provided in time to come. Can this Government afford that, Sir?

Mr Marshall: if it please you, Sir, I must confess that I fail to understand the Member for Queenstown. Surely he does not discourage voluntary organisations of citizens seeking to serve their fellow citizens? This is a voluntary organisation. It is recognised that it is doing very useful work. It is recognised that it has inadequate funds to do this work competently and fully unless it receives assistance. Therefore, rather than take over the work which would deprive citizens of, for one thing, the opportunity to serve the country and which would also increase the cost to Government, Government has very wisely said, "We will give you half of what it costs for a service that is essential to the country." If the hon. Member is complaining about a million dollars to charity, all I can say, for my part, is "Not enough."

I would like to see, Sir, for example, since the Minister for Communications and Works has shown the interest of his department in the welfare of the road user, that there should be a greater grant to the Safety First Council to enable it to reorganise itself on an efficient basis. It is no use giving a little. You cannot get much in return; but if you give adequately, then you can assist the voluntary organisations to better efforts and to far greater returns than the outlay which is indicated.

Government should not, as a matter of principle, take over all charitable organisations. Voluntary charitable organisations are a very valuable asset to the people of the country and to those who have an opportunity to serve. For myself, Sir, I would like to say this: I will never be chary in supporting Government in all legitimate measures, even generous measures, to assist charitable organisations to discharge the functions they seek to discharge to the maximum possible efficiency.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Sir, the Member for Queenstown claims to be a business man, and I am unable to understand why he cannot see the mathematics of this case. Surely the saving is not only a dollar for a dollar, but the time that Government officers would take to design and put up all these sign posts?

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I move,

To reduce by $l25,000 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 31. Grant to Young Women's Christian Association, on page 145 of the Estimates.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I must point out very clearly that I am in no way against the Young Women's Christian Association or its members; especially where women are concerned, it is rather dangerous! Sir, I am fully aware of the activities of this Association in providing all sorts of amenities for young girls and women and I think it is doing a very good job. But what I am concerned with, as I have said earlier, is the principle of voting such a grant. It will create a precedent if we are to grant money to organisations year after year. There are two other organisations with similar objects, and there may be more. These two organisations are, if I may quote, the Y.M.C.A. and the Chinese Y.M.C.A.

If my memory is correct, Sir, in 1953 the Social Welfare Department intended to rebuild the Prince Edward Hostel at Prince Edward Road. Subsequently they came to know that the Chinese Y.M.C.A. intended to put up a building there. In order to save Government expenditure, the Director of the Social Welfare Department, Mr Cromwell, negotiated with the officials of the Chinese Y.M.C.A. and offered a grant of $150,000 to this Association in putting up that building - but on one condition. That condition was that a part of the building should be allotted to the hostel so that the boys from the existing hostel could be transferred to that building. It is rather surprising, Sir, that when the vote came up, it was turned down. Sir, when a grant of $150,000, which was negotiated by an official of the Government with an organisation with similar aims was turned down by the Government, why then should we now approve a grant of $125,000 to another organisation with similar aims?

Mr Marshall: It is not the same government.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: I see! It is clear now! I think that was the reason why it was turned down! Then it was a colonial government, but now it is the Labour Front Coalition Government! But what I feel is this, Sir: there seems to be a bit of discrimination when giving grants to charitable organisations. From the list of charitable grants I see that the Girl Guides Movement is given a grant; the Girls' Life Brigade is given a grant; the Boy Scouts' Association is given a grant. But, Sir, there is a youth movement in Singapore which is doing just as good service as all these movements, and that is the Boys' Brigade Battalion. I am really surprised that I do not find this movement being given a grant. I think the Government has discriminated when giving grants this time and I hope that when the question of giving grants comes up again next time, the Government will not show any discrimination which casts a reflection on some other organisations. Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr R. Jumabhoy (Telok Ayer): Mr Chairman, Sir, it is very interesting to see that a religious organisation has been given a grant of such a large sum of money when it is known full well that this colony has no official religion. Sir, since Singapore has so many religions and so many races, why do we not declare it to be a secular State? Possibly a Muslim State, because Singapore was originally a Muslim village? Possibly is it a Communist State, because Singapore has no official religion?

Sir, I have been supporting the Young Women's Christian Association for 35 years. It is on my donation list yearly and I will go on supporting it. Sir, this world-wide organisation is doing wonderful work, but if such an association is given a grant on a dollar for dollar basis for building work, then I do not see any reason why other associations with similar aims should not also be given grants. For example, the Ramakrishna Mission is also doing wonderful work irrespective of caste or creed but it has not been given a grant. The Young Men's Muslim Association has not been given a grant. The Muslim Missionary Society has been given no grant. Sir, has the Government decided to give a grant to all these organisations which are doing wonderful work for the welfare of the public? I would like to seek an assurance from the Financial Secretary on this matter.

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Sir, I understand the approach usually is that Government seeks to assist charitable associations which do public service irrespective of race or creed, and I think that has been true when I was Chief Minister; and I believe that the Ramakrishna Mission, although religious in aspect, does assist without reference to race or creed, did receive assistance from the Government.

I would draw the attention of the House to what I know the Member for Telok Ayer is fully aware of, and that is that the Y.W.C.A., though a Christian Association, has, in fact, in its many years work in the colony, made no distinction between race and religion in Singapore in assisting the people; and I think the House should know for what purpose the present sum is required. Sir, the Y.W.C.A. has, through the generosity of the Government, received land totalling 66,000 square feet in Outram Road. They have enough money to build one wing and they need more money to complete it. The main purpose of that building, Sir, is the education and provision of training classes in sewing, cooking, laundry work and crafts of all kinds for women of all races. It is not a question of accommodation for a particular Christian group. The work which they do is wholly irrespective of the religions of the persons they seek to assist, and surely we would wish to support whole heartedly the efforts of this organisation in giving provision for simple education in worthwhile crafts to the poorer sections of the population. I feel sure, Sir, that if the House knew fully the facts of the case, there would be no question of any criticism of this worthwhile grant.

The Minister for Education (Mr Chew Swee Kee): Mr Chairman, Sir, perhaps I might elaborate on what has been said by the Member for Cairnhill. The Y.W.C.A, since 1933 has been running evening schools for under-privileged girls, and at the moment there are 600 of these girls attending classes in three centres - one at the Havelock Road Children Centre; one at the Prinsep Street Children Centre; and one at the Cantonment Road School. For the benefit of hon. Members, I will name the courses provided:

In the morning they have nursery and kindergarten; classes in home-craft and languages and hand-work. The languages include Mandarin, Malay and English.

In the afternoon the classes are in commercial subjects and also include child-care, health education, sewing, tailoring, cooking and training of amahs.

In the evening there are schools run for the under-privileged girls who work in the factories and for other girls in other jobs.

Sir, I think this money is well spent. If we do not spend it, it might be more expensive for Government to look after all these under-privileged children and illiterate women who seek to better their lot in life.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim (Sembawang): Mr Chairman, Sir, I support the amendment moved by the Member for Queenstown. Sir, the Y.W.C.A. has. never appeared before in the Budget. Let me draw your attention to the footnote numbered (iv) at page 145 - "Grant towards cost of building a centre". As far as I know, Sir, there is already a centre at Fort Canning. If the representatives of the Young Men's Muslim Association go to see my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing, and - I hope I am not embarrassing him - ask for a grant of $125,000 (the same sum as is granted to the Young Women's Christian Association) to build another centre, can the Minister give us a guarantee that the Government will give them what they ask for?

The Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat): The representatives of the Y.M.M.A. should go and see the Financial Secretary and not the Minister for Local Government, Lands, and Housing.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Sir, I am only quoting the Y.M.M.A. as an example. Sir, it may be difficult for the Minister. I realise it, if the Government or the Chief Secretary were to show the same interest in the Y.M.M.A. as in the Y.W.C.A.! I say that definitely it is no fault of the Minister because, after all, Sir, Lady Black and Mrs Goode are patrons of the Y.W.C.A.!

The Chief Minister: Sir, there is only one minute more to go. In reply to the points raised by the Member for Queenstown, the grant in this particular case is in conformity with Government policy to institute a drive for educational and social services for under-privileged children not at present within the influence of existing youth organisations. This grant would more likely achieve better results at less cost than most other forms of expenditure on youth welfare. If there are other organisations which can qualify under this policy, Government will definitely give them favourable consideration.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: After hearing the explanation given by the Chief Minister, Sir, I intend, with the permission of the Chair, to withdraw my amendment.

The Chairman: Is it the desire of the Committee that the amendment be withdrawn?

Hon. Members indicated assent.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Lee Kuan Yew-

To reduce by $125,000 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 31. Grant to Young Women's Christian Association, on page 145 of the Estimates.

In Mr Lee Kuan Yew's absence, the amendment was not proceeded with.

The sum of $1,078,520 for Head 26 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 27-

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Lee Kuan Yew -

To reduce by S300,000 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (23) , Hotel Allowance, on page 147 of the Estimates.

In Mr Lee Kuan Yew's absence, the amendment was not proceeded with.

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $1,395,090 for Head 27 stand part of the Schedule."

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Mr Chairman, if it please you, Sir, can I have your consent to move the amendment proposed by the Member for Tanjong Pagar (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) since he is not here?

The Chairman: The hon. Member should have made that application much earlier. I have already proposed the Question on the Main Head. If that application had been made, I think there is precedent to say that any Member, in a Committee of Supply, can adopt a motion on the Order Paper in the name of another Member; but I am afraid, in this instance, the hon. Member is too late. He can ask a question, of course.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Thank you very much, Sir. I would like to say here that last year the Financial Secretary told us in this House -

The Chairman: Order. If the hon. Member is on the same item as appears in the Order Paper, that is,

"To reduce by $300,000 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (23) . Hotel Allowance, on page 147 of the Estimates,"

will he confine his remarks to a question on that item, unless he is speaking on the policy of the whole department?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Mr Chairman, Sir, in fact, I intended to ask the Financial Secretary to explain this vote of $300,000. Last year in this House he did mention that this sum would be reduced this year because quarters were being built for expatriate officers who had to live in hotels because there were not enough quarters for them.

The Financial Secretary (Mr T. M. Hart): I think hon. Members are aware that the object of the money in this vote is to assist officers, who must live in hotels while waiting for quarters, to pay hotel bills, the cost of living in a hotel being very much more costly than living in a house.

The payments of hotel allowances are governed by a series of circulars which have been in operation since very shortly after the war. The gist of these circulars is that, in the case of a single officer, Government pays that part of a hotel bill for board and lodging which exceeds $600. In the case of a married officer, Government pays anything in excess of $1,100. Definite limits are, of course, placed on the expenditure which can be incurred on hotels. These figures of $600 and $1,100 per mensem are the sums which it is estimated a single officer and a married officer would have to pay respectively on board and lodging if they were living in their own quarters. These circulars apply not only to expatriate officers but also to local officers who return from study courses overseas.

It is estimated that some 35 officers would be eligible for hotel allowances in 1957. There is still a waiting list for government quarters, and there are some contract officers who are here for only a short time and whom we find it not worth while to set up in quarters.

$300,000 has been provided, that being the figure which was provided last year, and, as the Member for Sembawang has rightly pointed out, in all probability the whole sum may not be required. Expenditure to-date this year has been running to the order of $180,000 to the end of October and I should think expenditure next year will be of the same order.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Mr Chairman, Sir, I understand from page 396 of the Estimates that the programme is almost completed, and yet we are asked today to vote for another $300,000 for 1957. Would the Financial Secretary give a more genuine explanation of the matter?

The Chairman: Did you say "general explanation"?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: I said "a more genuine explanation".

The Chairman: Order. The expression is completely unparliamentary. Will the hon. Member withdraw it?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: I withdraw it, Sir.

Mr Hart: It is, of course, correct that the programme of building quarters for government officers is nearing completion, but I am advised that, as far as can be estimated, there will be approximately 35 officers staying in hotels in 1957, because they cannot be accommodated in government quarters. For that reason, hotel allowances will be required.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $1,395,090 for Head 27 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 28-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $3,814,440 for Head 28 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Marshall: May I seek your guidance on this, Mr Chairman? I had hoped to raise under this Head the question of the use of the Undesirable Publications (Amendment) Ordinance. I do not wish to take the House by surprise or to seek to introduce a matter which may not come up under this Head. I am in doubt myself as to its appropriateness and I would like your ruling, Sir.

The Chairman: That is a question that can best be answered by the Ministerial Bench. It depends entirely under which Ministry that matter comes.

The Chief Secretary (Mr W. A. C. Goode): Mine, Sir.

The Chairman: In that case, the hon. Member is too late.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $3,814,440 for Head 28 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 29-

The sum of $142,460 for Head 29 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 30-

Question proposed.

"That the sum of $2,018,970 for Head 30 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr John Ede (Tanglin): Mr Chairman, Sir, there is one matter on which I would like to seek information from the Hon. the Financial Secretary. When speaking on the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill on Monday, 19th November, 1956, I made reference to the 1,800 non-resident individuals subject to income tax. I asked at the time how they were assessed - whether it was on dividends paid by limited companies, or whether the net was thrown wider to include other sources such as income from rents and partnerships and so on. Possibly the Hon. the Financial Secretary overlooked this point when he made his reply on the Second Reading.

Mr Hart: The answer to the question raised by the Member for Tanglin, Sir, is that non-resident individuals are taxed on all income arising in Singapore.

Mr Marshall: Mr Chairman, Sir, this House must recognise that there is considerable concern throughout the country at what is believed to be the inefficiency of the Income Tax Department, and this has been highlighted when we learned for the first time the appalling news that there is a tradition of swindling the Income Tax Department every week, every month and every year, and the smug complacency of the Income Tax Department towards this tradition. Sir, it is more than a little surprising that this information has never been divulged to the public and that there should have been no genuine effort, in so far as one can ascertain from the figures, to meet it, apart from the fact that the figures this year seem much lower than heretofore. We are told that the persons cannot be pursued in the United Kingdom because of private international law. There has been no suggestion of any effort to have a special arrangement with the United Kingdom on the subject.

There has been a complete lack of recognition of one of the basic facts of life in Singapore, and that is that the business community, to an important extent, are transients, and in Singapore, more than in any other country in the world, we need adequate regulations for the protection of our revenue and the prevention of this tradition of swindling the Income Tax Department after having got all they could in other ways. There have been 1,800 odd swindlers in nine years, making it four every week, and the Income Tax Department has been silent on the subject in so far as the public of Singapore are concerned. When the Financial Secretary is pressed for a reply, Sir, we are informed that nothing can be done but since we insist, the matter will be taken up with the Federation. The whole principle of it is wrong, Sir. It seems to me that the administrative approach to the problem of income-tax gathering is wholly inadequate, and I call upon the Government and the Financial Secretary to take radical measures to transform the present Income Tax Department into an efficient organisation.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Mr Chairman, I cannot agree more with the sentiments expressed by the Member for Cairnhill. It was indeed a great shock to the public when it learned that Singapore was being swindled of millions of dollars by these income tax evaders. Sir, I think it is high time for the Financial Secretary to set up machinery to check this terrible practice of swindling the Income Tax Department. Sir, although the Income Tax Department is a pan-Malayan organisation, I am sure the Federation of Malaya will be pleased to receive a lead from Singapore to check this reprehensible practice.

Sir, all these days we have been debating on how to save government expenditure and how to collect more revenue. But now, faced with political, social and educational advancement, more money is needed to keep pace with this advancement. Sir, the burden of taxation is being placed on the lower income group and yet in other ways we have been losing millions of dollars. I therefore wish the Financial Secretary to take note of this point more seriously.

Mr Hart: The Member for Cairnhill, Sir, called upon me to take radical measures to reorganise the administration of the Income Tax Department, but he did not suggest what radical measures he had in mind. He also made reference to "the appalling news" that a fantastic amount of money had not been collected as a result of people leaving Singapore without paying their income tax.

Sir, I draw attention once more to the fact that, over nine years, 1,700 people have left Singapore owing tax to the tune of $1.1 million. The Member for Cairnhill made no reference to the fact that during the last two years a very significant decrease has been achieved. I cannot say what is the number of people who actually fled the country in 1955, but, again speaking from memory -

Mr Marshall: On a point of correction, Sir, that is a very unfair statement. I did refer to the very great difference n this year's collection. My hon. Friend's memory is at fault.

Mr Hart: No, Sir, I am sure my memory is not at fault. The Member for Cairnhill said that there was a great improvement in this year's figures. The improvement was most marked in the previous year's figures. In other words, during the last two years the Income Tax Department has been doing a particularly good job in this matter.

As I have said, Sir, I will approach the Federation of Malaya to see whether they would join with us in taking some action to prevent people fleeing the country without paying tax. Whether or not I will be successful in my approach, I cannot say.

I am afraid, Sir, I cannot accept the criticisms which have been levelled at the Income Tax Department. On the contrary, I consider the Department has done and is doing a splendid job in the face of many difficulties. In considering income tax in Malaya, one has to remember that, firstly, the Income Tax Department has only been in existence since 1948. There is a tendency to compare the Income Tax Department with the Board of Inland Revenue in the United Kingdom (which, to the best of my knowledge, has been in existence for over a hundred years) in respect of the success or otherwise that has been achieved.

Sir, the Income Tax Department has been in existence for only eight years.

Secondly, the Income Tax Department was established in the face of the most bitter opposition front all sections of the community, and antagonism has coloured the approach of all sections of the community towards the work done by the Department and the results achieved by the Department.

Thirdly, it had to start completely from scratch with only a very few officers who had any knowledge whatsoever of income tax law or the collection of income tax, and staff, of course, had to be recruited and trained for the purpose of collection of tax.

Fourthly, as a result of delay in bringing the Ordinance into force, the Department started off with a legacy of one year's income tax assessment in arrears.

Fifthly, it had to build up from scratch the sources of information without which no Income Tax Department can function efficiently.

Sixthly, whenever it has wanted to take some new action which might lead to a more efficient collection of tax and detection of evasion, it has met with a storm of protest and, on the majority of occasions, has eventually been hamstrung by the reactions of the public.

Lastly, ever since it started, it has suffered from a chronic shortage of staff which has not yet been overcome. We have had to go to every country in the world, to obtain recruits for the Income Tax Department and, as I see it in the future, we will still have to go to every country in the world to obtain recruits for the Department.

In these circumstances, Sir, far from being inefficient, I think the Department has done a remarkably good job. In the years since it came into operation, it has, in fact, collected $459 million for Singapore. That was a considerable sum and a very significant contribution to the revenues of the country. This does not mean, Sir, that the efficiency of the Department cannot be improved. It can be improved and is being improved as more staff become qualified by experience to fill the higher jobs and as their places are taken by promising new recruits. Efficiency is largely a matter of having an adequate supply of experienced staff. As I have said, this staff is extremely difficult to obtain. There is a chronic shortage of good income tax officers throughout the world. In our efforts to train officers to the high standard of knowledge and experience necessary to hold their own with professional men with whom they have to deal, we have been trying to obtain the services of a training officer. This is a highly specialised job and good officers are few and far between and are in great demand. Our efforts have so far been unsuccessful, but I am happy to say that we have managed to arrange for a highly qualified member of the Comptroller-General's Office in Kuala Lumpur to undertake the job until we can obtain a training officer of our own.

One hears from time to time that the Department is not aware of many taxpayers who are not enmeshed in its net. I doubt this myself. The Department's information branch taps a multitude of sources which are unknown to the general public in order to bring all taxpayers to account. Recently, in connection with the suggestion that many people were evading tax, the Department made a street survey of selected business areas in Singapore. The idea was to test the truth or otherwise of the suggestion that many small business men were escaping. The results confirmed the belief of the Comptroller that he had most of the potential taxpayers on his books. Very few new taxpayers were found in these busy areas and only a few appeared to be paying less than they should. There is, of course, some evasion of tax. That is inevitable. Even in Britain where, as I have said, income tax collection has been in force for over a hundred years, there is evasion, sometimes on a very substantial scale. But I doubt whether evasion here is as bad as many people suggest. In any case, we now have an investigation team going. It will be strengthened and, as I said the other day, it has over the past three years managed to bring in $5 million worth of tax which would otherwise have been lost.

11.31 a.m.

Mr Lim Choon Mong (Serangoon): Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I would like to speak on the general policy of income tax and I wish to draw the attention of the Government to a few of the complaints generally voiced by the taxpayers. In the case of a single man, the tax relief is $3,000, and this is the same in the case of a single woman. However, when a man gets married, it seems that the income tax law operate to his disadvantage, because he is made to pay not on the amount of the income that he has earned after his marriage but on the total income of his wife and himself on the year before they were married. I would ask the Government to look into this matter and see that no undue hardship is inflicted on newly married couples.

On the question of relief, Sir, I know that in England widowed mothers and unemployed parents are given relief. I know that the relief amounts to slightly over $500. In Singapore we do not have this in operation. We in Singapore always say that we copy whatever is good in England, but this is an instance where it is practised in England and not practised in Singapore. I have said before that the people here support their parents and, in doing so, make their parents less of a liability on the social welfare institutions. If they can help Government in such a manner, I think it is only fair that they should be given relief when they are supporting their parents who are not gainfully employed. I would like Government to give this point serious consideration and, if possible, introduce a Bill before this Assembly giving this sort of benefit to the people of Singapore.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I rise to support the proposal put forward by the Member for Serangoon to increase the tax relief allowance in order to make provision for the parents. Sir, in oriental tradition, the parents hold an important status in the family. They are more important than the wife and the children. But the existing income tax law makes provision for the wife and children and leaves out the parents. We in Singapore are marching towards political independence, but at the same time I should like to urge the people to fight for ideological independence. It is high time for the elected Government to give a lead to the people of Singapore and prove that it is different from the previous colonial Government, and one wise step in this direction is to amend he Income Tax Ordinance by including parents in the relief allowance.

11.36 a.m.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, speaking in support of the last two speakers, I do not think it is necessary for me to elaborate on this issue. Much has been said that the personal relief allowance should include the parents. The Member for Cairnhill, speaking on this subject when the Income Tax Bill was debated, indicated that the Labour Front Government was fully aware of the Asian way of life and had taken this fact into consideration; but it is a surprise to me that after 18 months in office the Labour Front Government has never thought fit to legislate for personal relief to be given to parents. As I have said again and again, the parents take priority over the wife and children. Without our parents, we would never exist. Since the Member for Cairnhill has indicated that the Labour Front Government is fully aware of this fact, I do hope that within a matter of two or three months a Bill will be introduced into this House making provision for personal relief also to be given to parents rather than to the wife and children only, and I am sure that this Bill will receive the approval of every Member here except, maybe, the expatriates.

A bachelor earning $3,000 a year may have to support his parents and possibly five younger brothers and sisters, and to grant him an allowance of $3,000 only - which is $250 a month - is to make it impossible for him to maintain that big family which, according to Western eyes, is actually not his family. That is his father's family. The younger brothers and sisters solely depend on the wage-earning member of the family, irrespective of whether or not he is married. If the wage-earning member is married, then, of course, his burden would be far heavier because, in addition to his own family, he will have to support his parents and his younger brothers and sisters.

A personal relief allowance of $5,000 is given to a family man. That $5,000 works out at about $416 a month. Sir, the Member for Paya Lebar (Mr Lim Koon Teck) has said that I am not good at mathematics. Now, with this $416 to maintain a wife without children but with the parents and a few younger brothers and sisters depending on him, I doubt whether this amount is sufficient with the present high cost of living. Sir, there are more Asians than expatriates in the Council of Ministers and I sincerely hope that we will not copy the Western way of life. I know that the existing Income Tax Ordinance is copied from the United Kingdom. As we are on the way to merdeka, we should change this Ordinance to suit our country and not the United Kingdom. Once again I express the hope that a Bill will shortly come before this Assembly giving relief to parents.

Mr Hart: Sir, we may be on the way to merdeka but I do not think we are on the way to complete freedom from taxation! I have heard a great deal in the course of the last few days about the habit of the population of Singapore to support their relatives - their fathers and mothers, and their brothers and sisters - but they are not alone in that. In every country in the world, it is the privilege of sons and daughters to support their aged parents, and that is done in countries like Great Britain and other continental countries where the rates of personal allowance are very much lower than they are here in Singapore. In any case, it would seem that the families in Singapore appear to be rather larger than in other countries of the world and no doubt the burden of supporting parents is cast over a very much wider field.

On the question of allowances, having regard to the amount of the personal allowances which are in existence at the moment, I can hold out no prospect whatsoever of being able to add to them. Our need for revenue is such that if there is to be any change in the allowances in the future, it must inevitably be to reduce them.

On the question raised by the Member for Serangoon, it is a fundamental principle of income tax policy throughout the world that the incomes of husband and wife should be lumped together for the purposes of assessment of tax While I have a certain amount of sympathy for him on the point which he raised, I can offer no prospect whatsoever of being able to meet it.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $2,018,970 for Head 30 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 31-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $388,420 for Head 31 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I should like some points to be clarified. On page 161 of the Estimates, against items (11) and (13) of sub-head 1, I see that the personal emoluments given for the same appointment are different. Against item (11) we find that the personal emolument of the "Personal Assistant to Minister" is $630 rising annually by $25 to $755; whereas against item (13) it says "Personal Assistant (to whom it is not indicated) $705".

Sir, I also wish to refer you to page 227, items (13) and (14) of sub-head 1. Against item (13) it says "Personal Assistant to Permanent Secretary =$730-25A-880"; whereas against item (14) it says "Personal Assistant to Minister=$630-25A-755". In this latter case, Sir, I cannot understand why the Personal Assistant to a Minister is in a lower salary scale than the Personal Assistant to the Permanent Secretary to a Minister. How are these figures arrived at, Sir? Can the Minister concerned or the Financial Secretary clarify this position?

Mr Goode: The hon. Member has raised a very pertinent question and I think the only reply I can give is that we have inherited today what I have frequently described as a jungle of individual salary scales varying by small amounts for no particular reason; and the reason that we have inherited this tangle is, I think, due to the fact that over the past years we have had a multiplicity of revisions of salaries in which a multiplicity of sectional interests have been represented and have reaped sectional advantage. It is one of the major operations which must be carried out, namely, to simplify this complicated salary structure and try and get down to a limited number of simple scales which are intelligible to all of us. We are now engaged in the operation of carrying out such a rationalisation of scales in Division IV and I hope that, in due course, you will find that your salary scales are not subject to peculiar, and often very difficult to justify, variations.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: I fully appreciate the explanation given by the Chief Secretary, Sir, but I would have thought that the Minister, while attending a meeting of the Council of Ministers called in order to go through the Budget, would have drawn attention to the fact that his own Personal Assistant was receiving less pay than the Personal Assistant to his Permanent Secretary. Sir, I hope that by next year we will not find this difference in personal emoluments.

The Minister for Commerce and Industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy): Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, the second last remark made by the Member for Queenstown does not apply to my Ministry because, as you will see from the Estimates, the Personal Assistant to the Permanent Secretary is drawing a fixed salary of $705. He may be a senior officer who has come to a level where he is fixed. In the case, however, of the Personal Assistant to the Minister, he starts at $630 and rises up to a higher figure than the Personal Assistant to the Permanent Secretary, that is, up to $755. At the rate he is drawing now, his total salary for the year will come to $8,510, whereas the other officer's salary will come to $8,460; but he can rise further up than that.

Mr Braga: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, as the Member for Queenstown has referred to the Personal Assistants in my Ministry, I would like to say that, as far as my own knowledge goes, the Personal Assistant to the Permanent Secretary is one of the oldest members on the staff and I believe has been promoted because of his long service up to the scale-grade of $730-25A-880, whereas my Personal Assistant is a very young man and has not been long in the service.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, when we come to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, I think we are on the most important Ministry in the Government. This is the Ministry that is either going to bring us a prosperous Singapore or a Singapore that is poor and unable to hold its own against other territories. For the last few months there has always been a thought in my mind that the future of Singapore is going to be bleak. The future of Singapore is not going to be as rosy as we all like it to be.

Previous to this, Sir, Singapore enjoyed the status of a big entrepot. It supplied the needs of Indonesia, Siam, Indo-China, Hongkong, the Federation of Malaya and Burma. This was in the days when most of these territories, such as Burma, Indonesia and French Indo-China, were still colonies. The position today, however, has changed and now we have the independent territories of Burma, Vietnam, Vietminh, Indonesia, India and Ceylon, and by next year we will have another independent country coming up, and that will be the Federation of Malaya. It is a fact, Sir, that as soon as a country attains independence, it will try its very best to do what it thinks is best for itself. We find today that Indonesia is trying to trade directly with the West. Indonesia is trying to replace Singapore with Djakarta. In the same way, we find our nearest neighbour, the Federation of Malaya, imposing tariffs on all goods imported into it. All these measures, Sir, -

The Deputy Chairman (Mr R. C. H. Lim): Order, please. May I ask the hon. Member to confine himself to Head 31, Ministry of Commerce and Industry?

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Absolutely, Sir. I am coming to the policy of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry and what I have said is just a preamble.

Mr Marshall: Time is limited!

Mr Lim Choon Mong: I have ten minutes to my credit, Sir! Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, all these things will mean that the entrepot status of Singapore will be lowered and, in all probability, Singapore will just be a port of call. We have plans to make Singapore an industrial centre like Hongkong, but again, Sir, for reasons which I have just given, progress in this direction may not be as rapid as we would like it to be; and I would like the Minister for Commerce and Industry to inform us as to how we can maintain Singapore as a prosperous city. It is important that it must be so, Sir, and there are only a few ways in which this could be done. One of them would be expansion into the sea, that is, expanding the fisheries industry. Sir, I will be speaking on that aspect when it comes up for debate under the appropriate Head.

Mr Marshall: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether his Ministry is considering the establishment of an organisation to assist the Malay population to play their full part in the economic life of Singapore. Sir, I believe wholeheartedly in the principle of equal justice for all races. In this particular instance, I would draw attention to the fact that the Malay educational policy of the past was of a character which had checked them and acutely depressed part of the population economically, and they do need special assistance in order to integrate them into modern economic life. I know that the Ministry of Commerce and Industry has been keenly interested in the question of education in methods of fishery, and there was a scheme, Sir, early this year of whose fate I have learnt nothing more; but apart from that, I would like to know if there is in contemplation an organisation to assist in their integration in commerce and industry.

11.55 a.m.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Mr Deputy Chairman, we are now discussing the Head "Ministry of Commerce and Industry". Sir, we have acknowledged the importance of Singapore as a commercial port. This Ministry is therefore most important. Despite the integrity and sincerity of the Minister for Commerce and Industry in trying to promote and encourage more trade and industry, let us ask ourselves whether anything has been done in this direction. For myself, I say "No". In fact, we are sliding down.

The Member for Serangoon has mentioned that South-East Asia has entirely changed; so many independent countries have been born. The countries surrounding Singapore have had their former colonial economic system changed into a nationalist economic system. Singapore today is very much less important than it was before. We are facing a critical position. The Federation of Malaya is going to achieve merdeka very soon. Sir, there is one thing which I regret. Despite the fact that we have many pan-Malayan departments, the two Governments have never yet come together to consider whether or not to have pan-Malayan economic development. The new import duties imposed by the Federation of Malaya are not only a serious setback to our local industries, but it might well be the end of our local industries. Based on these facts, therefore, I do not think the Ministry is entitled to call itself the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. It is no use at all to have the word "Industry" if the Federation is not sympathetic to our industrialisation policy. I would remind the Government that it is high time to consider formulation of pan-Malayan development plans. Unemployment is facing us today, and if nothing is done, it will mean the end of Singapore as an entrepot centre. Many factories will have to close down. Sir, despite the fact that there has been a great deal of smuggling of Indonesian rubber, many rubber mills have had to close down. If the Minister wants to keep the word "Industry" in his Ministry, he must do something at once to bring this about.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, first I must thank the Member for Serangoon for his remark that my Ministry is the most important Ministry in the Government. Evidently he thinks so, but some members of the Press do not, because normally you do not find them giving much space to my warnings of the economic future of Singapore. Sir, I am glad that the Mem bers of this House are now slowly realising, after repeated warnings given by me from the September sittings onwards, that our economic future is not as bright as we had hoped it would be Sir, during the September sittings, where we debated the Governor's Address, I warned the House that we would be lucky if we could manage to keep up our entrepot trade to the same level as we are doing now. There are many people in Singapore who, unfortunately, cannot see the writing on the wall. They are still complacent about it and they still think that we will survive somehow. They say, "We have survived for the last hundred years. So why should we not survive now?" But Sir, they fail to note the changing conditions in the world today. They fail to realise that as each Asian country gains its independence, it wishes to develop its economy for the benefit of its own people and not for the benefit of some other middle man, like Singapore, and naturally you cannot quarrel with them over that. Sir, I am glad that Members of this House have now realised the true state of affairs and have shown their concern over the future of Singapore.

Sir, what does the Government intend to do about it? Frankly, Sir, the Government can only try, but it cannot be a hundred per cent sure that our economic future will be sound, because a lot depends on the attitude of other countries towards us. Therefore, as I have always stressed, it is politics that will be the ultimate solution to our problems and not economy. The position of Singapore is viewed not from the economic angle but from the political angle.

I have given warnings about our entrepot trade and I have laid stress on the development of our secondary industries. At the 7th November sitting I outlined a programme whereby we could encourage industries, but there again I must warn Members that a lot depends on whether we could realise the results that we hope would be achieved, on the attitude of the Federation. Sir, the duties imposed by the federation at its last Budget sittings on a lot of manufactures are going to affect greatly some of our industries, and I am not only disturbed but I am also, frankly, Sir, worried about it, and I think every responsible person in Singapore is worried about it. I have done my best to indicate to the Federation Government that Singapore and the Federation should be looked upon as one economic unit, though politically we may be separated, but again, Sir, it is politics that is today directing economy, and so far a solution has not yet been reached. I do hope that we may be able to reach a solution of viewing our two economic systems on a single unit basis rather than on a separate unit basis. I have not given up hope, Sir, in this direction but, frankly, I would be misleading this House if I said that I am over-optimistic.

Sir, the Member for Serangoon has pointed to the right direction when he said that we should develop our fisheries to a greater extent. I entirely agree with him, Sir. I have given the problem of fisheries development a great deal of thought in the last few months because, as I see it, we are an island surrounded by waters from two of the greatest oceans of the world, and I think we could look towards the sea to support us more. However, the development of fisheries would take a lot of time. There is a schedule in the Estimates which shows a summary of expenditure incurred by the Fisheries Department. This has been steadily expanding since 1946. In 1946 it started with an expenditure of $37,000 only, going up to $41,000 in 1947, dropping to $14,000 in 1948 and $37,000 in 1949, then going up again to $163,000 in 1950, $143,000 in 1951, $268,000 in 1952, $311,000 in 1953, and I believe it is $500,000 this year and more next year. From these figures, Sir, you will see that the Fisheries Department has been expanding steadily. In the very little time that I have left to hold office as Minister for Commerce and Industry before the elections come along next year, I will do whatever I can to set the Fisheries Department on the right course so that it may be able to expand. Sir, I will speak in more detail on this subject when we come to the Fisheries Estimates.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, stress by me always has been laid on commerce and industry as the lifeblood of Singapore's income. Entrepot trade and industry come under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. "Industry" does not only mean, as the Member for Cairnhill said yesterday, produce. Produce is an important item of entrepot trade and entails importing, grading and re-exporting. Singapore has been handling a lot of manufactured goods in importing and re-exporting. Sir, entreport trade means middle men handling commodities between different countries; in other words, it is a sort of transhipment centre. An entrepot centre can only thrive if its handling charges are cheap, its port dues are competitive, so that other countries will send their goods; or the merchants in the entrepot centre import goods and re-ship to other countries. That is called entrepot trade. In other words, you have to compete, and the only way to keep our entrepot trade is to bring down the cost of living and keep down expenditure. How can entrepot trade be preserved if expenditure keeps mounting up? Naturally the wage-earner, in order to exist, must demand wage increases. In the face of all this, the entrepot trade will vanish. So the only way to meet the situation is to bring down expenditure bring down the cost of living, and make the handling charges competitive.

Sir, on the second point - industry and manufacturing. We have no materials of our own. So from what are we going to manufacture? We have to import everything from other countries in order to manufacture our goods. Then again we have to pay high labour charges. Sir, everyone knows that even England is unable to compete with countries like Germany and Japan. Anyone can find in the book "Trade Commission's Report of 1932/33" that Japanese shirts were sold in the London market. Then again, Sir, because we have no materials with which to manufacture goods, when our charges are so high, how can we compete with others? It is impossible to compete with countries which can mass-produce goods and where the people contribute their bit towards the upliftment of their own country. Even the shipping companies there are subsidised by the Government. But here everyone is out to get the maximum out of the country for oneself and in such circumstances you cannot have thriving industries.

Stress has been laid on the Federation and on the politics of the Federation. At this stage when the Federation is on the way to merdeka, I would not like to touch on this subject. Our future is still undecided and there is a lot of time to talk on that topic. Therefore, Sir, if the future of Singapore is dark, it is Government's responsibility to do something about it.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, there are only two points to which I wish to reply. Costs, of course, have a bearing on the entrepot trade, but the present situation is such that some countries do not give due regard to costs. They can buy goods cheaper in Singapore but they refuse to do so. They prefer to buy them from the country of origin, even though they may be dearer, because of political considerations. We have had personal experience of that in talks with other countries.

It is true, Sir, that we have no raw materials of our own, but England, although she has no raw materials of her own, is one of the leading manufacturing countries in the world. Sir, if we can get capital, if we have the know-how, and if we have people with a will to work, I am sure we can build up our industries. Even though we might have to face tariff barriers across the causeway, we can still compete in other parts of the world.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Sir, the Minister for Commerce and Industry has not answered my question, and that is, whether it is possible now to have a policy for pan-Malayan economic development.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: My answer is that I also wish it myself. We have been trying in the past to set up a pan-Malayan Industrial Development Corporation. Hon. Members will be glad to know that I am going to introduce legislation to set up a Singapore Industrial Development and Promotion Board. That will indicate to Members that we have not yet been able to reach a solution on a pan-Malayan economic planning basis.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $388,420 for Head 31 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

The Deputy Chairman: I think this is an appropriate time to suspend.

Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the Assembly.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr R. C. H. Lim): The sitting will be resumed at 2.30 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 12.15 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. SITTING NO: 13

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head 32-

Question proposed, "That the sum of $111,520 for Head 32 stand part of the Schedule."

2.31 p.m.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Mr Chairman, Sir, although the money in this category is just slightly over $100,000, the Minister for Commerce and Industry declared, at the last Agricultural Show, that through agricultural products we had obtained millions of dollars worth of revenue for this country. Despite the great success achieved by the Agricultural Show last September. I wonder how many hon. Members in this House really believe that our agricultural plans have made much improvement. My personal experience with the farmers is to the contrary. At present they are facing a most critical situation. Their poultry, pigs and vegetables fetch very low prices. Feeding stuffs have to be purchased at a very high price. Many Farmers have been making representations to me saying that they cannot carry on with the state of affairs at present. I would like to take this opportunity to request the Government to find out whether the livestock of the country and the farmers' income are increasing or decreasing.

Further, we have in this territory a certain institution established to study how to improve our agricultural activities or developments, and yet I know very little of how the Government is going to utilise fully the research work done by this institution, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of the farmers.

In conclusion, I wish the Government would take steps to impart the technical knowledge gained to the farmers so that they can make full use of the limited farmland at their disposal.

2.35 p.m.

Mr Goh Tong Liang (Bukit Panjang): Mr Chairman, Sir, I have just discovered this morning that the Agricultural units are giving visual demonstrations at the Yio Chu Kang and Sembawang stations in the use of cheap fertilisers or chemical fertilisers and local waste products. I just wonder why this has not been done in the case of Lim Chu Kang Experimental Station? I think, Mr Chairman, Sir, this matter of demonstration is not generally known to the farmers and I suggest that action should be taken to publicise this. I have in mind the Rural News which I hope can help to assimilate this information.

The next thing, Sir, is about the tracks and roads leading to farmlands. They are generally in a very bad state of repair and this is not something that can be dealt with lightly as this is an urgent matter for it is a matter of profit or loss to the farmers.

Another matter which is very important is that I think the Government should make loans to co-operative societies so that they can help their members to buy the necessary things like tools, implements, apparatus and all other things as advised by the department. Then only I think will they feel that they are not a neglected community. Indeed, Sir, they do feel that they are a neglected community.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy rose -

The Chairman: Is it on a point of order?

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: If it please you, Sir, may I ask the hon. Member to repeat what -

The Chairman: Order. Carry on, Mr Goh Tong Liang.

Mr Goh Tong Liang: That is why, Sir, the last time they grasped at the opportunity to join an association thinking that they had at last found their saviour. I have no quarrel with the figures here, Mr Chairman. I only hope that the Government will do more for the farmers so that it will raise their standard of living.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Mr Chairman. Sir, the time is very brief in my hands and I will just answer the points. The Member for Changi (Mr Lim Cher Kheng) raised the point that the farmers were in difficulties because they had to buy dearer feeding stuffs. Well, that matter is being looked after now. If Members had read the newspapers of last Monday, they would have seen that, at the opening of the co-operative conference, I made a statement that the Government will be willing to support as much as possible the farmers and that I will consider granting them loans provided they band themselves together into co-operative societies. There has only been one approach made, Sir, to my Ministry for the granting of loans and we are trying to work that one out now.

Members will be glad to hear that I am personally visiting as many kampongs as possible to interview the farmers personally to talk to them about their difficulties and I hope that I will be able to grasp the facts more thoroughly than at present.

Then again, Sir, the emphasis in Singapore is not so much on agriculture as on poultry-rearing and pig-breeding. We are very short of land and therefore we cannot have agriculture to a very great extent. But what we want is that with the small bits of land the farmers should be encouraged to rear as much poultry as possible and rear as many pigs as possible.

Mr R. C. H. Lim (Nominated): Mr Chairman, Sir, I should like to recommend for Government's consideration the establishment of a model farm to which farmers of Singapore could go and learn how to cultivate in a most scientific manner.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: The answer is: The Sembawang Station will give demonstrations of the best methods of agriculture and so on. There is a demonstration farm at Serdang up in the Federation too.

Members would be glad to hear that I am trying to arrange for the visit of a hydroponic expert to advise us on possibilities of soil-less culture.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $111,520 for Head 32 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 33-

The sum of $112,130 for Head 33 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 34-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $237,390 for Head 34 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Mr Chairman, Sir, I am not speaking on the Exchange Control but I would like to point out that in two days we have rushed through a lot of business and we have more time to spare. Instead of allowing us ten minutes or one minute on each Head can you give us more time for each Head as we have saved a lot of time during the last two days?

The Chairman: That point of order has been raised and I am, as I say, bound by the Standing Orders. The Standing Orders are quite clear. The Speaker is to allot time to Heads of expenditure and, in fact, I allotted less time for different Heads of expenditure as was requested by hon. Members. It is unfortunate that some hon. Members asked for more time than they really needed. The result, of course, is that we are, in fact, saving time but I cannot help it. Under the Standing Orders, that time is lost.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $237,390 for Head 34 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 35-

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr John Ede -

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 5, Fisheries Regional Research Laboratory Administration and Staff, on page 169 of the Estimates.

2.43 p.m.

Mr John Ede: Mr Chairman, Sir, since filing this amendment affecting one aspect of the Fisheries Department and as I also wish to speak on this subject under the main Head, I have been wondering whether, in order to initiate a debate on "Fisheries", I might have your permission and the permission of the House to withdraw this amendment and to make my point regarding the Research Station as a whole under the main Head. I think it might be more convenient and a better use of the time at our disposal.

The Chairman: If the hon. Member is not, in fact, moving the amendment, the amendment will not be before the House and so leave will not be required. I take it then that the hon. Member is not moving the amendment?

Mr John Ede: I am not moving the amendment, Sir.

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $695,330 for Head 35 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr John Ede: Mr Chairman, Sir, in my speech on the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill, I pointed out that money must not only be spent on social services but also for productive purposes to provide employment and increase the general wealth of the country.

Now, due to our lack of raw materials, we are extremely limited in the number of what I would call indigenous industries. There seem to be three main ones: that of agriculture which, of course, is extremely limited by area; there is the tourist industry of which I have already spoken and there is the fisheries industry. Fisheries seems to me to have the greatest potentialities but the production of fish is not nearly equal to Singapore's requirements - about 40 per cent if I am not mistaken - and fish has to be imported from the Federation and from Indonesia although the wide seas are open to us as much as they are open to our neighbours. There are three types of fishing possible: the inshore fishing round our own coasts; the outshore fishing to distant waters, and pond-fishing both fresh water and sea water. I believe I am correct in saying that inshore fishing has been exploited to the fullest extent and not much increase can be expected. But, Sir, much more can be done and must be done to fish in more distant waters with the use of larger motor vessels and more modern equipment. Whether private industry can be encouraged to invest in such ships and gear to a large enough extent, I am not competent to say, but I am certain that private enterprise will not come forward unless better fish landing facilities and a central wholesale market are set up. I believe that this is a project that has been under consideration for many years and I would like to know from the Minister why it is being delayed? If the only reason is one of finance, then is it not the case of fisheries being regarded as a poor relation? My own view is that the Government may have to show the by building their own powered vessels and training our people to man them and getting a return on their investment through the increased sales of fish in a central wholesale market.

I come now to the third type of fishing, namely, pond-fishing. The Economic Mission in their Report made specific reference to the mangrove swamp area of Singapore, stating as follows:

"...There are about 900 acres of such ponds and a potentially available area of several thousand acres.

The fresh Water and brackish water facilities and operations, particularly the ponds, are capable of very considerable expansion..."

Now, Sir, if we turn to the 1955 Report of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, page 185, we find the following:

"In the field of brackish water fisheries, two experimental prawn ponds were built towards the end of 1954 (that is before the coming in of the present Government) with a view to encouraging the utilisation of the extensive swamps of Singapore Island. The cost of building the bunds, sluice gates and huts was $12,840. ...During 1955 the total catch of fish, prawns and crabs amounted to 8,614 katties and realised $8,194. This experiment demonstrated conclusively that a small family would be able to operate such ponds on an economic basis provided capital was available for the building of bunds and gates."

Now, to the question for Written Answer put to the Minister on the catch so far this year, I received the reply that for the period January to October 1956, the total catch was 6,638 katis and the sum realised therefrom was $7,802. The Answer went on to say:

"In 1955, the ponds were operated at the maximum level of production in order to determine basic data. It is not expected that the catch for that year will be exceeded in 1956 because experiments during the current year are being conducted on the basis of fewer operations with the object of reducing labour costs and obtaining a more economical yield."

Fair enough, but the figures are sufficient confirmation that there are great opportunities for the development of this type of fishing and I have no doubt that, through more research, it should be possible to increase the yield of prawns per acre; thus increasing the return to the fishermen and, at the same time, reducing the market price.

Sir, my point is this: The Government has established that a small family can operate these ponds on an economic basis, provided the capital of less than $6,500 per pond is advanced for the building of bunds and gates. Why delay one moment from putting this into action so that we can provide more employment and increase our fish supplies? I am sure that if the work was put in hand on a large scale by the Government numbers of families would come forward to learn how to operate the ponds and, if done on a large scale, the costs might even be reduced. As it is, the number of fishermen engaged in the prawn pond industry dropped from 182 in 1954 to 165 in 1955.

Now, from an examination of the Estimates, I charge the Government with giving insufficient thought and money to an important and productive industry which is urgently needing development. The Minister, a few days ago, talked vaguely about a phased programme covering some years. What we want to know is, what is the programme for 1957 and is it adequate? Perhaps, Sir, the trouble is due to the inadequacy of the Research Station, for I am not convinced that the money being spent on this Research Station is at present justified. You will notice from the Estimates that the amount is being increased this year from $148,000 to $253,750 of which $217,500 is to be paid by this Government. Even the Minister in his speech on Monday implied that it was working on a long term basis and that he was going to change it. What we want is not pure research but practical research; not more books and articles on fish, but more fish. Is this not the policy of the Government? Will the Minister tell us what this Research Station has contributed to this practical problem so far to justify the money we are spending on it, why he is dissatisfied with the present policy and what changes he proposes to make and as this is a pan-Malayan enterprise, would he state whether the other Governments involved are also dissatisfied and if they are in agreement in making a change?

2.50 p.m.

Mr Francis Thomas: Briefly, Mr Chairman, Sir, there is one aspect of this prawn-ponding and fish-ponding which my Ministry has had to take note of. We have had our Chief Drainage Engineer dealing with the flooding problems of Singapore and one part of the cause of flooding in some places is the building of dams or bunds either in a valley or perhaps in an estuary or in the swamp lands for the purpose of impounding water and creating fish-ponds, either fresh or salt. We therefore have been consulting with both the Ministry of Lands and the Ministry of Commerce and Industry on the possibility of more economic layouts for fish-ponds through the use of planned heavy earth-moving equipment and that kind of thing so as to get the whole estuary planned first and then I presume that it would be possible to sublet it so that individual families or, if you like, companies - however it works out best - could operate the ponds once they were prepared. I think that there would probably be benefits though I have not yet got a report on the details of all the possibilities. It will be worth considering in due course as to whether it would not be better to do the whole construction job first on a large scale and then to sublet rather than to hand out small sums of capital to people who can not easily control, and may contribute to, flooding by putting a dam in the wrong place; or, of course, their dam may break and they lose their fish.

2.53 p.m.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I am sure that both sides of the House must be grateful for the clear picture painted to us about our fishing industry by the Member for Tanglin. He has made it very clear that the fishing industry is divided into three categories: inshore, deep-sea and rearing.

I will touch on inshore fishing which is not only very little developed but I would like to add, from my personal experience of the fishing at Padang Terbakar and Mata Ikan, that the inshore fishing industry is slowly dying. Although we see many kelongs along our sea coast, the catches are so poor that the proprietors running them are near to bankruptcy. I am sure the Minister for Commerce and Industry knows about this better than I myself. The identity cards of these fishermen show that their occupation is fishing, but actually you can term them as being unemployed. The fishermen who stay in the so-called fishing villages who rely on inshore fishing are practically unemployed because their income is so low - about $100 a month - and they have big families to support. Therefore I wish to take this opportunity to urge the Government to take stock of the serious situation facing us. I would like to ask a question: since we proclaim that we believe in Socialism, then I think it is high time for us to encourage the development of co-operatives. The Co-operative Development Department in the past has merely served in an advisory capacity. If the Government believe in Socialism, they should take an active part to encourage more co-operative societies especially among the fishing villages which would cut down the middlemen's chances of exploiting the fishermen's hard-earned money and, at the same time, the Government can render direct aid by way of imparting technical knowledge to the fishermen so that the inshore fishing industry can be saved in time. Deep-sea fishing should also be fully encouraged. We should not wait for the report of the research in the fishery industry. We must do something about it at once. It is a shame that an island like Singapore can only, as the Member for Tanglin said, supply 40 per cent of its own consumption of fish, the balance having to be imported from our neighbours.

2.58 p.m.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Mr Chairman, Sir, arising out of the complaint of the last hon. speaker that the catch of the inshore fishing is dwindling very rapidly, may I enquire from the Minister for Commerce and Industry whether he would consider, by legislation, to control the size of the mesh of nets used for catching fish round the shores of Singapore? I have often seen pukat boats with the men pulling in the nets and the mesh is so fine that not even the smallest spawn has a chance to escape. Naturally, such a procedure which goes on year after year is bound to affect the catch of the fish in the inshore waters. I think nearly every country in Europe has a law ensuring that the size of the mesh of nets should not be less than an inch or something to that effect and, possibly, if this measure were taken in time, the catch might improve.

I would also like to congratulate the Minister for Communications and Works on the plan of the Public Works Department to proceed as rapidly as possible to build bunds so that not only would they help the flow of flood waters but also they would be used for making ponds for fish and prawns. That, I think, is a very useful suggestion. Not only will it save money for the people who wish to rear prawns but it will also help in the economy of Singapore.

3.00 p.m.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Chairman, Sir, I am particularly attracted by the idea of the Minister for Communications and Works wanting to build prawn ponds for these fishermen. This is a very novel idea. It will help them a great deal, but one point arises: if we are going to encourage the prawn pond industry, two departments will have to decide on it, that is, the Fisheries Department as well as the Land Office. Land must be granted by the Land Office and then sanctioned for fishing by the Fisheries Department. As far as I know, a great deal of our marshland is still not being made use of, and most of such land is being given under Temporary Occupation Licences or other licences for the purpose of agriculture. When the marshland is brackish in nature, very little will grow there except mangroves, and I think that the department concerned should reconsider granting such land for purposes of fishing as this has been considered as most important by so many Members.

On the question of flooding of land by these prawn ponds, I think that there is some confusion there, because once fresh water comes into these prawn ponds, they will not be very productive. Prawn pond owners usually want to preserve their bunds from being destroyed by torrents of water, and let out water even before the rains come so that there is not much danger of blocking up of drainage. The most important thing, Sir, is that in order to encourage fishing, the fishermen must be able to realise a decent income, and in order to do so, they should be able to market their fish easily. We now come to the question of a central market which is really overdue. I remember that I asked that question of the Minister for Commerce and Industry some time ago in a debate in this House, and since time is getting short, I will not repeat it. If the Minister would refer to what I have spoken and act on it, I think it will be very beneficial to the people here. At that stage, I mentioned also about deep-sea fishing and I consider that if people are willing to invest money in deep-sea fishing on their own without any charge to the Government and seeing that the only thing that deep-sea fishing will ever do is to bring in more fish, I see no reason for limiting such an industry. If there is a greater supply of fish, then it will give rise to another industry, probably that of fish-canning.

3.03 p.m.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Mr Chairman, Sir, on the question of why was the wholesale fish market delayed, I explained at the Assembly sitting in September that we had difficulties to find the proper site for it. In fact, we had five successive sites and each of them was either wanted by the Army or the Navy or someone else. The last site was at the side of Merdeka Bridge but it was found that the land there was too soft and required heavy piling with a great deal of unnecessary cost. We have now discovered a site at the end of the old Kallang airport runway. We have not acquired the site yet but we are working out figures to find out how much it will cost. The jetty alone might cost over a million dollars and probably the whole market might cost in the region of $4 million as far as I know but, of course, the figures are still being worked out.

The other point which was raised was: why do we not build our own powered vessels and train people for offshore fishing? The offshore fishing, Sir, in the southern portion of the China Sea is very poor and you will not get much fish there.

On the subject of encouragement of co-operatives amongst the fishermen, Members will have read that the Government gave a loan of $4,000 to the Ponggol Co-operative Society of Fishermen and that seems to be a great success. I have said that that was a pilot scheme. Basing on the results of that scheme, Government will consider further grants of necessary loans to other fishing villages.

On the point of controlling the size of mesh of the nets, I will have to consult with my Chief Fisheries Officer because that is a technical thing that I do not know much about. I must confess.

Coming to the fish ponds, the question was: why do we not increase the number of fish ponds? We are now, Sir, working on it and, in fact, experiments are proceeding but they are not yet finished. There has been objection from fishermen in Johore Straits who have been affected by the curfew and they are not keen to let any ponds be opened up in their areas because their livelihood has been limited due to the curfew. We are now working with the Chief Drainage Engineer to utilise all the swamp land on a co-operative basis. There is not much of swamp land. The present haphazard development has caused flooding and therefore we have to have the co-operation of the Public Works Department on it.

Now, Sir, we come to the Fisheries Research Station. At one time, I myself considered that this was a white elephant and I still consider that, on the basis on which it is run, it is not going to be of much use to us. The present arrangement is that the Colonial Development and Welfare Fund met the total capital cost and is meeting 50 per cent of the recurrent expenditure. The rest of the 50 per cent is shared by the Federation, Singapore, Sarawak, North Borneo and Brunei. The Federation has now indicated that they are not interested in keeping up with their contribution and therefore it is a question of whether we are to close down the Research Station entirely or whether we have to shoulder more of the contributions ourselves. My own intention is that we should carry on with the Research Station because we are still not sure whether it will not, in the end, prove beneficial to us and since so much money has been spent on it and work is half done; but we should carry it on on a different basis. At present, the Research Station is directing its attention to fundamental research and that is long-term research. It goes into detailed studies of hydrological and biological conditions influencing the breeding of fish and the habits of fish, and so on. We have a vessel Manihine of 213 tons. We are at present discussing with the various Governments concerned and the Colonial Development and Welfare Fund on the change that we desire in this Station. My idea is that we should direct the activities of this Station to obtaining more tangible and immediate results. There has, of course to be a change in the ratio of contributions because the Federation is withdrawing from it and it is possible that we may have to bear a greater part than what we have been paying now and I hope that if that comes up, hon. Members on the Opposition will give me their support. It is proposed that the Fisheries Division should take over the administration of this Station. Those are my new proposals which are still being worked out: some of the expatriate scientists should be replaced by U.N.O. or Colombo Plan or local scientists and staff.

Sir, coming to the question of fisheries generally, we have 5,500 fishermen in Singapore out of whom 4,500 are inshore fishermen and out of the remaining 1,000 only 600 are working in offshore units. They are very reluctant to undertake training in navigating ocean-going fishing vessels. Most of our fishermen are reluctant to go into offshore fishing because of the long delays away from home. That is a difficulty that we have got to persuade them to overcome. But the position regarding fish is generally that the inshore fishing grounds have been fished to the limit. The offshore areas in the south portion of the South China Sea are not sufficiently rich for economic operation. We have therefore to meet increased demands by imports but we have got to see that our imports are not of such size as to upset the livelihood of these 4,500 fishermen who are depending for their livelihood on the inshore fishing because otherwise we will create a social problem. That is why we have got to balance the two: the imports against the reduction in price which may be due to imports and which may affect the livelihood of these fishermen. Otherwise what will happen is that we will have to subsidise these fishermen and that will be a strain again on the Colony's finances. But I am trying now to work out a scheme in which it might be possible to subsidise these inshore fishermen from the industry itself. As I said earlier this morning, the Fisheries Department is working now on a plan to expand the fishing industry and we hope that we will not only be able to concentrate on offshore fishing but also on deep-sea or oceanic fishing. If we can succeed in this, then we can hope to get secondary fishing industries in the Colony too. The advantages, of course, will not only be secondary industries but it will also mean that we will be able to expand our exports of salt-fish. If we can go for whale-fishing, we might be able to manufacture whale oil and blachan and other sorts of salt-fish.

Mr John Ede: Mr Chairman, Sir, in the Report of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, 1955, it states:

"On present information there are not large aggregations of fish in the South China Sea, ...hence our fishing units must penetrate into the Indian and Pacific Oceans in order to produce more fish."

Is this being followed up?

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Sir, the licences granted to the three fishing companies are not limited to any particular areas except that they should not come within a certain distance from our shores and we hope that these three companies will operate far away from Malaya in Indian and Pacific Oceans and other areas.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $695,330 for Head 35 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 36-

The sum of $80,890 for Head 36 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 37-

The sum of $342,210 for Head 37 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 38-

The sum of $1,361,320 for Head 38 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 39-

The sum of $247,760 for Head 39 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 40-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $287,450 for Head 40 stand part of the Schedule."

3.15 p.m.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, yesterday I said that broadcasting should be scrapped. What I meant was that it be turned into a corporation and I say again that the Broadcasting Department should be entirely scrapped now and immediately in that sense. It is the same with the Department of Supplies. This Department is a drain on the finances of the Colony. It has outlived its own usefulness. The staff can be absorbed into other departments. I understand that this Department is kept simply for the stockpiling of rice. Formerly, it included sugar and flour too. This Department was very essential after the British re-occupation of this Colony, that is, 1945 to 1947, when supplies were short. Various countries were buying on a percentage basis from the few sources of supply. Today, the position is quite different, Sir. It has been very different since the last two to three years. Sugar has been decontrolled and only rice is controlled. I hope to move a motion for the decontrol of rice at the next sitting of the Assembly.

Sir, the only argument in favour has been - and I think possibly so now - that this stockpile is maintained for the purpose of emergency. Well, it has been ten years since the last war ended. We have a lot of competition from the rice-producing countries to sell their rice to us - Siam and Burma: we will forget the extra that we import from Communist China. Now, what is this question of emergency? Is it a shortage of supply? That is not so. There are plenty of supplies available. There is competition to sell. The only other emergency that may arise is war. If war is expected in this area, I do not know from whom and by whom. For many, many years, I do not think that there will be a war in this part of the world. Certainly not! Who is going to attack? Our neighbours are peace-loving countries and besides we have the influence of the United Nations Organisation. So it is useless that on mere fear, you should maintain this Department. It will he surprising from figures given to know how much money has been lost on this stockpile, wastage of rice, etc. Of course, that will be a question which I will be asking at the next sitting of this Assembly: how much money the Colony has lost in the trading of rice alone, excluding the maintenance of this Department? In addition, Sir, this is stopping the free movement of trade. We have heard a lot of complaints from the rice dealers' associations. Of course, I will bring this up in a motion later in the coming month after getting some answers to my queries which I will be putting up very soon. I ask this further question: is it necessary now to maintain another "white elephant" and our revenues drained away in salaries, emoluments, and so on?

3.20 p.m.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Sir, on the question of maintaining this Department, may I refer the hon. Member to page 19 of the Estimates? There is a note at the bottom which reads:

"(iv) The cost of the Supplies Department is borne on the Colony's Estimates and Government advances the capital required for the purchase of stocks of rice. The reimbursement covers interest on this capital, the cost of the Supplies Department and part of the cost of staff of the Department of Commerce and Industry which deals with Supplies Department matters."

Sir, on the question of the stockpile, I am entirely sick of it myself but it is a precaution that we have got to take to maintain supplies for the Colony in case of an emergency.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, the whole of Singapore is thoroughly disgusted with this Department running this stockpile. It should be scrapped immediately. I am bringing up a motion for the decontrol of rice after getting some facts and figures from that Department later.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $287,450 for Head 40 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 41-

The sum of $109,810 for Head 41 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 42-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $636,960 for Head 42 stand part of the Schedule."

3.23 p.m.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, on this Head 42, there is one question I would like to ask. From which countries do we get our vets, and what are their qualifications?

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Sir, that will require a detailed answer. If the Member would ask a Question I would give the Answer, but, offhand, I would say that we have got our old staff and some of the staff has been recruited recently. There are many Asians on the staff in the department, too.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $636,960 for Head 42 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 43-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $184,280 for Head 43 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Chairman, Sir, under the control of the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing comes the election of local district councils. I would like the Minister to inform us as to when this will happen and whether provisions or plans have been made for such matters?

Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat: I wonder whether the question of local district council elections comes under the province of Head 43, but I am happy to reply to the Member for Serangoon that that depends on how soon The Select Committee of this Assembly will complete their deliberations during the course of their work in the Select Committee. I cannot say, Sir, but that depends on the Select Committee of which the Member for Tanglin is also a Member.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $184,280 for Head 43 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 44-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $3,580,310 for Head 44 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr John Ede: Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to raise one matter under this Head. On the Land Office falls the brunt of the work connected with resettlement, development, and eviction from land which is the inevitable story of our expanding Singapore. Now, this movement is going on the whole time and it entails a great deal of hardship and anxiety for our rural and farmer population. I believe that much of this anxiety could be reduced if more foresight and understanding of the people's difficulties were exercised. I have come across numerous instances where the rural people have become, so to speak, the victims of this or that development, and they have been put to great straits because they have not been told what their future is, whether they can stay put, whether they are to move, whether they are to get compensation, and so on. I have brought cases to the attention of the Minister in the past. Another recent one the Hon. the Chief Secretary knows about which has caused great difficulty and embarrassment and two more cases, where a lack of consideration was shown, were brought to me only last week, which I will pass on to the Minister to look into.

Now, Sir, it should be Government policy, whatever Party is in power, in this very delicate matter of moving and resettling families, to see that the approach is a humane approach, if the support of the rural population is to be won. It has also to be a swift approach, so that unscrupulous people have no time to jump in and exploit the situation. I discovered only the other day that a certain association, run by the People's Action Party, which has now been dissolved, was measuring the assets of a group of farmers due to be resettled and telling them that the areas of their houses, sheds and outhouses on which they would receive compensation were double what they really were. I do not wish to impugn the Land Office unduly in this whole matter. Theirs is a difficult and heavy task and their officers are only carrying out instructions. But I would ask the Minister to see what can be done, in advance of the development plan, to ensure that the people know what is going on and what is going to happen to them? Government departments tend to be inhuman and soulless; sometimes perhaps they have to be if they are to be impartial but if the Chinese speaking rural population is to be won over to feel that they belong to Singapore, much more has got to be done to appreciate their difficulties.

3.29 p.m.

Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat: Mr Chairman, Sir, the question of evictions and resettlement of squatters in Singapore is a very huge problem and I am sure that hon. Members of this Assembly will realise that it is a problem which cannot be easily overcome. When we first took office, resettlement and evictions in the island of Singapore were done haphazardly; there was no proper system, although I must say that officials of the Land Office tried to do their best in order to see that the resettlement and evictions were carried out according to the law. But since we came into office, particularly since late last year, as Members will probably be aware, too, Government has appointed a working party to go into this whole question of land clearance and resettlement and, as a result of the report submitted by this particular working party, Government has adopted the recommendations of this party in forming the authority called the Land Clearance and Resettlement Authority.

Now, in this Report too, Sir, recommendations have been made with regard to compensation which should be paid to squatters and you will see in this Report that compensation is even being paid for fish-ponds, banana trees, coconut trees, pig-sties, and so on. It is possible that during the course of their work by the officials of the Land Office, occasions may arise where it is almost an impossibility to measure a particular pond right up to a particular square inch. I do admit that these anomalies will arise but then I must say that the officials of the Land Office are really devoted to this kind of work. As from the 1st of January next year, this Land Clearance and Resettlement Authority is being transferred temporarily to the Singapore Improvement Trust to be a body which will work in close co-operation with the Singapore Improvement Trust because, firstly, it has been recommended by this working party and, secondly, on questions of evictions and resettlement in Singapore, the Singapore Improvement Trust is mostly concerned because they are the people who would require more land in Singapore for the building of houses in Singapore. I said temporarily, Sir, because as you probably know, we are now in the process of forming a new Housing Authority which will eventually eliminate the Singapore Improvement Trust as an agent for Government in the building of houses in Singapore.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $3,580,310 for Head 44 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 45-

The sum of $1,089,180 for Head 45 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 46-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $58,425,910 for Head 46 stand part of the Schedule."

3.33 p.m.

Mr John Ede: Mr Chairman, Sir, in view of what I have said and other Members have said in this House regarding the need to expand our education system, it would, I think, be difficult to criticise the general line of the Government's programme for 1957 and I do not propose to deal with this today. Further, I do not think that it will be helpful to refer to the problems of Chinese schools at this juncture except to express admiration for the way in which the Minister is tackling a most difficult problem with firmness and, I hope, ultimately, with success.

Sir, I wish to initiate a debate on another aspect of education which, at the moment, seems to be receiving inadequate consideration, namely, the encouragement of games and the use of playing-fields in our schools. That the Government wishes to see the younger generation playing games is evident from the support that they have given to the Youth Sports Centre but is enough being done in our schools? It perturbs me considerably to see so many Government school playing-fields lying vacant and unused in the evenings. I believe that if one were to make a survey of the number of games being played on Saturdays and Sundays on school playing-fields throughout the island, it would be very small. The schools are shut and so the fields must be too, seems to be the argument. I submit, Sir, that this is absolutely wrong. If every playing-field in Singapore is fully occupied every evening in the week, so far as weather and ground conditions allow, by our young people, this country will be a healthier place in every sense of that word. I know it will be said that the students live long distances from their schools, that they go home in the middle of the day, and the expense of transport to and fro is involved, but young people are going to the Youth Sports Centre in hundreds. When you are young and you are keen enough, you will cycle miles to get a game. I know I did. I will go further, Sir. A school playing-field should not necessarily be reserved for the use of the students of that school. If the students do not wish to utilise it every day of the week, let the old boys of the school have a chance. If they do not want it, let youngsters living in the vicinity get a game or the local boys' club. I know that this sort of thing needs organisation and enthusiasm, but it is not more than a corollary of what we have all endorsed in the Youth Sports Centre. Difficulties exist but they could be overcome and should be. I hope that the Government will see what can be done to get the fullest use out of the limited number of playing-fields at our disposal. I hope the prejudice and red tape regarding their use will be swept to one side. If more of our young people played more games on more days of the week than they do now, we would be building up a better, fitter and healthier generation to supplant the paunch, under-exercised old gentlemen who sit in this Assembly.

3.37 p.m.

Mr R. C. H. Lim: Mr Chairman, Sir, I support what the Member for Tanglin said about playing-fields being allowed to be used, if not by the school boys or the old boys, by boys who are not in schools, especially boys' clubs. I have noticed quite a few playing-fields not used on Sundays. Government could make arrangements that on Sundays, playing-fields of schools which are not used should be made available for boys' clubs.

3.38 p.m.

Mr Francis Thomas: I would like to add my voice in support of this, Mr Chairman. The school of which in happier days I was lucky enough to be a member, and to which I hope to return some time, did allow and had always, as a matter of policy, allowed its fields to be used by anybody around that area, provided, of course, if the school team turns up to play, then others have to get out of the way. We had hoped to get boys' clubs organised in the area but then I was swept away into a different sphere of activity. They are still frequently using it, though it does mean that occasionally gangsters get on as well. We had a boy jumped on by a party of gangsters. He had done something to annoy them and so they whistled up the gang and they jumped on him. They knocked the breath out of his body but they ran away as soon as the authorities appeared on the scene. Otherwise, no difficulty has occurred as far as I know.

Mr John Ede: On a point of clarification, Sir. It seems to be a question of more games and less gangsters.

3.34 p.m.

Mr Chew Swee Kee: Mr Chairman, Sir, as regards playing-fields, I wish to inform the House that already we have a committee looking into this question. Our instructors on physical education have conducted a survey but due to the end of the year, they have to conduct examinations and do some other work and that survey has been dropped temporarily. I endorse the opinions expressed by the Member for Tanglin and the hon. Mr R. C. H. Lim about making use of playing-fields on Sundays. I have, in fact, invited many schools, especially Chinese schools without playing-fields, to let me or my officials know the number of days in a week they would like to make use of our playing-fields and I have extended many invitations of such kind. I am glad to say that some schools did come to us and we have given them time in our playing-fields. In addition to this, I would also like to say that Government is making a survey of other public fields where we can convert them into playing-fields not only for school boys but also for young children and youths working in conjunction with the Youth Sports Centre and other youth clubs.

3.40 p.m.

Mr R. C. H. Lim: Mr Chairman, Sir, I should like to recommend very strongly an investigation into those Chinese schools not having enough playing-fields. Playing-fields for youths are most essential. Youths have so much energy and if the energy could be discharged on playing-fields, we shall, to some extent, solve some of our problems.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $58,425,910 for Head 46 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 47-

The sum of $364,410 for Head 47 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 48-

The sum of $156,900 for Head 48 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SITTING NO: 13

Head 49-

The following amendments stood in the name of Mr Lim Koon Teck-

To reduce by $20,040 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (6) , Assistant Director of Medical Services (Tuberculosis), Grade E, on page 227 of the Estimates.

To reduce by $4,080 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (106) , Registrar (Tuberculosis Registry), on page 235 of the Estimates.

To reduce by $18,240 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 68 (1) , Medical Superintendent, Grade E, on page 247 of the Estimates.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Mr Chairman, Sir, on page 227, Head 49, items (4) , (5) and (6) of the Estimates we have two Assistant Directors of Medical Services and one new appointment of Assistant Director of Medical Services (Tuberculosis). Now, the Assistant Director -

The Chairman: Is the hon. Member on item 1 (6) ?

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Yes. May I suggest that all these three items can be taken together because in making my address, I shall have to refer to all three at the same time?

The Chairman: Is the hon. Member going to debate the policy of engaging new staff? I am not quite certain what is in the hon. Member's mind.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Sir, I think it will save time if, instead of moving the amendments, I speak on the general Head.

The Chairman: Thank you. Does that apply to all the three amendments which the hon. Member has put down under this Head?

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Yes, Sir.

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $31,522,760 for Head 49 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Sir, on page 227 of the Estimates, we see three appointments two of which are for Assistant Director of Medical Services (Hospitals) and Assistant Director of Medical Services (Health) and we also see a new appointment of Assistant Director of Medical Services (Tuberculosis). Now the Assistant Director for Hospitals covers the Tan Tock Seng Hospital and the Assistant Director for Health can cover the prevention side of tuberculosis. Why is it necessary then to have a new third appointment? It seems to us that this is top-heavy in the administration of "Medical and Health". While we like to see more doctors and more hospitals, we think that their duties should be confined to medical work itself instead of administration.

We have also another appointment on page 247, a new appointment of Medical Superintendent, Grade E. Now if the Assistant Director for Hospitals has a Medical Superintendent (General Hospital) under him, then he should have plenty of time to look after the Tan Tock Seng Hospital and T.B. Clinic. In other words, there may be an argument to support one new appointment but not two. Again, the Ministry appears to be setting up a whole new department called "Tuberculosis Control Unit" at page 235 of the Estimates which shows a whole new list of appointments. Not only is there to be a new Registrar under this Head, item 1 (106) but two new Senior Registrars are required under "Tan Tock Seng Hospital and T.B. Clinic" which appears in item 68 (140) . Why is it necessary to have all these Registrars and other new appointments partly under Tuberculosis Control Unit and partly under Tan Tock Seng Hospital and T.B. Clinic?

If the Ministry has in mind a new policy in connection with tuberculosis, then the Minister should give the House full details of it so as to justify this extra expenditure. Again finally, I would like to ask whether all these new appointments will be filled through promotions and, if so, whether they will be filled by Malayans?

4.49 p.m.

Mr Braga: Mr Chairman, Sir, I think there has been some confusion of thought by the Member for Paya Lebar because, if I heard him rightly, he said that the Medical Superintendent of the General Hospital (when he was referring to the page on the General Hospital) could look after the Tan Tock Seng Hospital as well as do the administrative work. I was quite prepared to answer the motions which were originally intended to be put before the House individually, but the hon. Member has now coupled all his amendments together. I therefore think that I might explain to the House the reasons for the new appointments and the new Tuberculosis Control Unit.

Until now, the Chief Medical Officer has been combining the duties of Medical Superintendent (General Hospital) with those of the Chief Administrative Medical Officer for all hospitals and out-patients services in Singapore. The expansion of this service has been considerable, fantastically so, over the last few years and I will, in a moment, illustrate that by giving a short table of the overall increases in our 4 main Hospitals from 1938. In 1938, the in-patients were 25,913 and the out-patients were 87,447. I will skip over a few years because each year shows us an increase. In 1951, the in-patients increased to 40,833 and the out-patients increased to 612,095. In 1952, that went up to 48,550 in-patients and 726,310 out-patients. In 1954, it jumped up to 58,859 in-patients and 1,169,689 out-patients and in 1955 it rose to 62,024 in-patients and 1,271,165 out-patients.

Now, since the beginning of 1955, 522 hospital beds had been added to existing institutions and the buildings now under construction will produce another 672 beds before the end of 1956: that is, by that time, there will be 1,194 hospital beds. Besides that, there are three new outdoor dispensaries which have also been added to the hospitals and during the coming year, a start will be made on a new 500-bed acute general hospital and on a chronic hospital for 200 beds. It is hoped also to establish two new out-patient clinics.

If administration and supervision is to be efficient, a post for another administrative medical officer must be created. The Chief Medical Officer's post is now to be renamed Assistant Director of Medical Services (Hospitals) and his office will be transferred to the Ministry of Health. Now the newly created post, that of the Medical Superintendent (General Hospital) is to administer a hospital at present of 1,005 beds which will shortly increase to 1,250 beds. So there is a need for a full-time Medical Superintendent for that hospital alone and to illustrate the necessity, I will give the table of the General Hospital. In 1947, the in-patients were 15,021 and the out-patients were 160,388. In 1952, that increased to 23,421 in-patients and 358,769 out-patients. That went up fantastically until 1955 when the in-patients were 28,222 and the out-patients were 691,064. As I have pointed out, it is absolutely necessary to have a full-time officer as the Medical Superintendent of the General Hospital and an Assistant Director of Medical Services in respect of co-ordinating all the hospitals. He will now be transferred to the offices of the Ministry of Health. I would like to inform hon. Members that a local officer is available for consideration for promotion to the post of Medical Superintendent (General Hospital), Grade E and I have no doubts in my mind that he will be so accepted.

Now on tuberculosis, I will answer the query raised by the hon. Member on the Grade E post at page 227. That tuberculosis is a serious menace in Singapore is well known. This appointment of Assistant Director of Medical Services (Tuberculosis) appearing at page 227 is a new appointment. For some years, an effective control organisation has been under consideration. In 1954, a request was made for expert advice from Australia and in May 1955, after I assumed office, Sir Harry Wunderly, the Director of the Division of Tuberculosis of the Australian Commonwealth Department of Health came to Singapore to assess the problem. After a preliminary survey, he recommended that we should set up a control organisation to trace, register and keep under surveillance all proved cases of tuberculosis so that we can ensure that all these patients will continue under treatment until the disease is arrested. Secondly, he advised that once such an organisation was established, it would be worth while commencing a short-term intensive case-finding survey with the help of Australian experts and that after they had withdrawn, we should maintain the organisation and case-finding programme to the greatest extent possible within our own resources. I referred these recommendations to the Medical Advisory Council and after their approval, this was accepted by the Council of Ministers. Government has now decided that as we have now sufficient beds, it is time to start the campaign with the unit set out at page 235, that is, the unit to which the Member for Paya Lebar referred. It is now considered necessary to have an experienced officer to organise this campaign and to co-ordinate all the anti-tuberculosis work in Singapore so that we can ensure that infective cases of tuberculosis are properly provided for and looked after either by Government services or by S.A.T.A. (who will work in co-operation with Government) or by private practitioners. Here again I would like to inform hon. Members of this House that a locally domiciled officer, a very experienced man, is available for this important post.

It might also be of interest to hon. Members to know that Government gave S.A.T.A. a hundred per cent capital grant to build a hospital home for chronic infectious cases. The Government believes that, in co-operation with S.A.T.A. and with general practitioners, an effective campaign against tuberculosis can be successfully launched by this proposed organisation.

There is now the post of Registrar which the hon. Member also referred to. This officer will be responsible for maintaining a highly confidential register of known cases of tuberculosis and for liaison with private practitioners and S.A.T.A. to ensure that such patients are maintaining regular treatments. This is a highly confidential post and the person holding it must be able to deal with private practitioners and voluntary agencies amicably and helpfully. A man of integrity, personality and experience is essential. It is not merely a clerical post. It is important to have a complete record of all known cases of tuberculosis and I am sure that hon. Members of the House will appreciate that that record is highly confidential.

The Chairman: Order. Moment of interruption.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the Assembly.

Mr Hart: Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have made progress in the Appropriation Bill and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Speaker: Tomorrow it will be.