APPROPRIATION BILL

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day]:

Resumption of debate on Question (22nd November, 1956) proposed on Head 49 in the First Schedule of the Bill,

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

FIRST SCHEDULE

Head 49-

The Chairman: We are on Head 49 and I have to remind hon. Members that there are now 35 minutes more to go for that Head.

Question again proposed,

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

The Minister for Health (Mr A. J. Braga): Mr Chairman, Sir, I am ready to answer the request made by the Member for Paya Lebar (Mr Lim Koon Teck) in his motion yesterday. He intimated to me after the adjournment that he would like a little more information about the tuberculosis scheme which we intend to carry out in our Ministry. It is intended that all known cases of tuberculosis be followed up so that we can be sure that they are obtaining adequate treatment either as in-patients or as out-patients. As soon as such an organisation which I explained yesterday has been established, then it is worth while intensifying in Singapore our case findings. Effective tuberculosis control is likely to be an expensive undertaking, and for this reason it is most important that we should have a clearly defined estimate of the extent of the problem which faces us, and this is where Australian assistance comes in. We have asked for a team of experts with equipment for mass miniature radiography to undertake a short-term survey to cover about 50,000 persons. Subject to further consultation with the Australian experts, it is proposed to select three sample areas in Singapore - two in the city area and one in the rural area. Such a survey of complete groups to a total of 50,000 persons will take at least six months and the results will give us a very much clearer knowledge of the real incidence of tuberculosis in a densely populated and less densely populated area. When this intensive survey is over, the Australian experts will withdraw, leaving their equipment for our future use. Thereafter we shall continue with the case-finding programme, inevitably at a much slower pace but as quickly as available staff and funds will permit. There is no intention to nationalise tuberculosis. We shall welcome and need all the help we can get from S.A.T.A. and from private practitioners, and there is no intention to dictate or interfere with treatment being given by non-government practitioners. We wish only to ensure that if a person has tuberculosis, he is given treatment and to ensure also, if he is infective, that the public are adequately safeguarded from his spreading the infection.

It is interesting to note that a study group on tuberculosis control sponsored by the World Health Organisation met at the end of November 1955. The technical report of their findings has just been published. In that study group were represented experts from ten countries, and in their report they stated, inter alia, that "The establishment in each country of a Central Tuberculosis Register covering notified and re-notified cases will be of great value for the study of the epidemiology of the disease." and that "Complete pulmonary examinations of sample groups are necessary to obtain a reliable index for the prevalence of tuberculosis." It is also interesting to note that their recommendations represent, in fact, the programme which we have now formulated in Singapore. I think, Mr Chairman, I have covered all the points which the Member for Paya Lebar wishes to know.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim (Sembawang): Mr Chairman, Sir, I look at page 227, sub-head 1 (4) and I see there the post of Assistant Director of Medical Services. Previously this title was the Chief Medical Officer, General Hospital. The job is still the same, that is, that the Chief Medical Officer of the General Hospital looks after all the hospitals in Singapore. Sir, the Government has created a new post called "Medical Superintendent". You can see this at page 247, sub-head 68 (1) . What is the idea of having this new appointment, Sir, when the work of the Chief Medical Officer, General Hospital, is to look after all the hospitals in Singapore? I see no reason why there should be a Medical Superintendent to take over part of the duties of the former Chief Medical Officer, General Hospital. I hope the Minister can explain this.

Mr Braga: Mr Chairman, the Member for Sembawang was probably not in the House yesterday or he was not paying attention, but I gave a very full explanation of the reasons why, owing to the fantastic amount of work, we have found it necessary to have a full-time Medical Officer in charge of the General Hospital and a full-time Administrative Officer to co-operate the work of all the hospitals.

Mr John Ede (Tanglin): Mr Chairman, Sir, may I seek one point of information from the Minister? Will the persons to be X-rayed in the sampling of the three areas to which mention was made be selected, or will they be asked to come forward on a voluntary basis, or how will the sampling be done?

Mr Braga: I think the Member for Tanglin is fully conversant with the arrangements that have been made. I would only remind him of the conference which he and Mr Garlick of S.A.T.A. had in my Ministry. It is, in fact, our intention to give free X-rays on miniature radiography in these three areas. Option will be given to the people in these areas to be either X-rayed by us or by S.A.T.A. X-rays will be on a voluntary basis.

Mr John Ede: Mr Chairman, I am sorry the Minister has not understood my question. I was not referring to any conference which has taken place. That point was not made clear to me at that time. What I want to know is: I think there are going to be three areas in which about 15,000 people are going to be X-rayed. Now is that going to be done on a voluntary basis as far as the persons who are going to be X-rayed are concerned? Are they going to be invited to come forward, and is it going to be done through propaganda; or have they got to be X-rayed; or how is it going to be done?

Mr Braga: Yes, we hope to do it successfully on a voluntary basis.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $31,522,760 for Head 49 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 50-

Mr Lee Choon Eng (Queenstown): Mr Chairman, Sir, I move,

To reduce by $29,990 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (1) , Minister, on page 269 of the Estimates.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I hope that it will not be construed that I am trying to take away the salary of the Minister. The Minister for Labour and Welfare is also concurrently the Chief Minister, and as the salary of the Chief Minister is far higher than that of the Minister for Labour and Welfare, I am sure that he prefers to draw the salary of the Chief Minister rather than that of the Minister for Labour and Welfare.

I would refer you, Sir, to page 161, the "Remarks" column against subhead 1 (1) which says:

"No provision entered for 1956 as the Chief Minister then was also Minister for Commerce and Industry."

Sir, the Member for Cairnhill then was Chief Minister and concurrently Minister for Commerce and Industry.

Sir, in this case, as the Budget shows a deficit, I do not think it is fair to put the figure of $30,000, shown against sub-head 1 (1) , Minister, on page 269, in the Estimates because it will misguide us. However, rather than take away that vote altogether, I would much prefer to put in a token vote of $10 in its place, because the Assistant Minister for Labour and Welfare may be promoted to the post of Minister if there is a vacancy in due course. If that happens, we can, without any difficulty, re-insert the figure of $30,000 against the post of Minister. Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr R. Jumabhoy(Telok Ayer): Mr Chairman, Sir, the Chief Minister has been good enough to take over the portfolio of the Minister for Labour and Welfare. This has saved the Colony a lot of money - a Minister's salary, allowance, entertainment expenses, etc. The former Chief Minister, the Member for Cairnhill, also did the same thing in the beginning when he held the portfolio of Commerce and Industry. His was a difficult task when he began to work the new Constitution. I remember his words at, I think, the first Assembly sitting - that there was not even an ink-pot or a sheet of note-paper, or even an office for the Chief Minister. I also remember that he had to try and wrest power from the ex-officios. I also remember that he had to put up a fight with the Colonial Office. The first Chief Minister's task was difficult, with the result that he had to give up later on the portfolio of the Minister for Commerce and Industry. But now things are well under way, and we are grateful to the present Chief Minister for taking up both this portfolio and that of the Minister for Labour and Welfare, thereby saving the revenue of the Colony. He might be able to give us information why this post of Minister for Labour and Welfare is kept open. The fact is that he has to go to London, and his is a minority Government. I wonder whether other parties will co-operate with him when he goes to London, or whether the Colonial Office will accept what a minority Government says. Sir, I believe there is something in the minds of the present Coalition Government or in that of the Chief Minister, and I would like to hear why this post of Minister of Labour and Welfare is kept open. If the vote is reduced to a token $10, he will still have the same chance, but it is no use carrying such a big item in the Budget. Sir, I would like to have an explanation from the Chief Minister.

The Chief Minister (Mr Lim Yew Hock): Mr Chairman, Sir, the Member for Queenstown has rightly said that I am not drawing salaries from two Ministries. The reason why this vote remains in the Estimates is because I am not so sure what is going to transpire in February. As hon. Members know, if this time we go again and we do not succeed in our mission, Singapore will have to find a new Minister for Labour and Welfare.

The Member for Queenstown also referred to the Member for Cairnhill when he was the Chief Minister and at the same time Minister for Commerce and Industry. In his case, Sir, I would like to point out to the Assembly that, under the then Rendel Constitution, the Chief Minister had to hold a portfolio. So he became the Minister for Commerce and Industry, who is also the chief of all the other Ministers. But as a result of his talks with the Secretary of State last December, his Government was able to get a concession, that, in view of the heavy responsibilities of the Chief Minister, he should not be loaded with another Ministry. His Ministry of Commerce and Industry was therefore separated from him and so the portfolio of Minister for Commerce and Industry was created. Now when I accepted the Chief Ministership, I said that my spiritual home was in the Labour Ministry, and it still is. I will not give that up. But one must not forget that although I may not want to do it, I might be forced to do it, may be in February when I come back from London. Or I might be forced to do it earlier, may be on account of reasons of health. But I can say that, as long as there is life in me, and as long as I am allowed to hold it, I will hold it. But the amendment proposed by the Member for Queenstown, Sir, means nothing. The vote is still there. What the hon. Member wants is to see a reduction of a comparatively few dollars in the Estimates. It is just $29,990 - it is nothing in an Estimate of millions upon millions of dollars. Sir, we cannot accept the amendment on this side because of the uncertainty of the situation.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, I think this side of the House should be satisfied with the explanation given. The position, of course, appears to be very uncertain, as the Chief Minister has pointed out, and I think we should remain contented for the time being.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I do fully appreciate what the Chief Minister has in mind where his appointment is concerned, that someone should be there, whether he himself or the Assistant Minister if and when he is promoted. But the fact is that in my amendment I am not trying to take away the vote altogether. Where a token vote is concerned, if it is passed, it gives authority for the money to be spent. But if a token vote is taken away altogether, then authority has to be sought for. And when the Chief Minister appoints a new Minister for Labour and Welfare or appoints a new Minister, he may have got to go to the Governor in Council or Council of Ministers to seek approval for that appointment. I feel, Sir, that where an estimate is concerned, I would prefer a token vote rather than an imaginative figure. When such time as the appointment has actually been filled, we could then easily release that token vote where the actual amount is concerned. But since the Member for Telok Ayer has said that he is prepared to overlook it, and in order to save time, may I have your permission and that of hon. Members to withdraw my amendment?

The Chairman: Is it the pleasure of the Committee, then, that this amendment should be withdrawn?

Hon. Members: Yes.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $153,560 for Head 50 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 51-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $1,102,330 for Head 51 stand part of the Schedule."

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Mr Chairman, Sir, on page 270, sub-head 1 (5) , "Deputy Assistant Controllers of Immigration, 29," - may the Minister inform us what is, first, the vacancy position at the moment; second, how many of the 29 appointments have been filled?

Mr Lim Yew Hock: Mr Chairman, Sir, I must have notice of that question.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, the question of immigration is causing grave concern amongst the Chinese population in Singapore. As a matter of fact, it is more of a puzzle, because the man in the street is not fully aware of the actual functions of this Department or what is the system of application for entry into this country. Sir, I have known of cases where applications for entry for wives or aged parents met with great difficulty as compared to the ease with which strip- teasers and singers can enter this colony. It is, of course, a fact that these stripteasers and singers come here for a very short period, say, six months or so.

Another surprise is that the application for extension of the visas of these entertainers meets with no difficulty. I have known of cases where singers in night-clubs have been here for more than three years. I wonder how they manage this - may be they are females! I think that is why the immigration authorities take such a lenient view! But I have known of cases where technicians have found much difficulty in applying for entry visas for even a short stay here. I have known of a permanent wave expert - a man, in this instance! - who was quite prepared to come down to Singapore and give the benefit of his knowledge and experience to our local people. He has tried, but without success, to get an entry visa. If the Minister for Labour and Welfare desires it, I can one day bring this case to him.

Sir, our Chinese custom is that we prefer to have our wives and aged parents stay with us as a family unit rather than that they live apart from us. Where immigration is concerned, there is a proviso that a marriage photograph must be produced. Sir, in olden times, there was no question of a marriage photograph because the man and his wife were too shy of each other and more so of exposing themselves to the public. I think this proviso should be relaxed in such cases. There are also cases of aged parents wishing to come to Singapore to join their sons or daughters, but the reply from the Immigration Department is always the same - they are not within the category to be considered. I wonder what are the categories to be considered, Sir, because it is very difficult to say the actual categories. Now a son may have a well-established business here and is able to maintain his parents, but they are not staying with him, and it will naturally be a cause of much sorrow to them all if they are kept apart, instead of living together as a happy family. This son, Sir, who is a business man, is also prepared to give a guarantee to the Government that his parents, if they are allowed to enter the colony, would not be a burden to the State. There are cases, Sir, where the applicants have estates and certainly in their position they are in a position to maintain their parents. I hope that the Government will be prepared to let the public know what are the categories which they consider immigrants should come into before they are allowed to enter here, because as far as I know, it is only the wives who are considered and they are only subject to the production of documents of family photographs. But what about aged parents? I may get a reply from the Minister that above the age of 60 -

Mr D. S. Marshall (Cairnhill): Hundreds are coming in.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: I do agree with that. Even thousands are coming in! It really surprises me, Sir, that in some cases they are considered and in other cases they are not. What is the difference then? I can tell you, Sir, that although the age of entry for children is 12, I have known of children 15 or 16 years old coming into this colony. How did they manage it? I wonder if the Minister for Labour and Welfare, who is in charge of the Immigration Department, can explain this. At one time I went into a shop and I was surprised to see a boy of this height [Indicating.] who told me that he came from China only a few days previously and I asked him how old he was and how he came into the colony. To my surprise he replied that his age, by Chinese reckoning, was 16. To account for the difference between 16 and 12 years of age is beyond me. Is it not surprising then how a boy of 16 was allowed to come in? As I have said earlier, it is a puzzle - in some cases, they are allowed in and in other cases they are not. I think there should be a change of system in the Immigration Department. I wonder whether the Minister for Labour and Welfare could institute an investigation into the functions of that Department so that there will be no more discrimination.

I may also point out in the Member for Cairnhill that it is not hundreds or even thousands of aged parents who have come in. Millions of wives, I should say, have come in through some way or other! So I do hope that the Minister could set up a committee to investigate into the workings of that Department.

The Minister for Labour and Welfare (Mr Lim Yew Hock): Mr Chairman, Sir, as the Minister for Labour and Welfare but not drawing the salary of the Minister for Labour and Welfare, may I now attempt to justify or give an answer to the attack on the Immigration Department? The Member for Queenstown seems to be concerned with the immigration policy. He asks for information, which he could easily get from the Immigration Ordinance, of the categories of people who are permitted entry into the colony. Sir, before I became Minister for Labour and Welfare, I had been toiling and toiling for the people of Singapore in so far as their immigration problems were concerned. This was ever since 1948, and so if I claim to know a lot about that Department, I hope hon. Members will understand that it is a claim based on personal knowledge.

The hon. Member says that marriage photographs are insisted before entry is permitted. I think his information is incorrect. A marriage photograph is not insisted upon. It was insisted upon in 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951 I think, 1952 maybe, so much so that if a marriage photograph is asked for and if the sponsor of the immigrant has it, it will help to substantiate his application for entry; but if there is no marriage photograph, it does not mean that his case is that much weaker. I would say that it was because of the insistence of marriage photographs that photographers in Singapore made a lot of money by imposing one photograph upon another, so much so that when the sponsor (meaning the husband or the wife; the applicant is the person who desires entry) was asked, "Why did you forge this photograph?", he replied, "I do not know. I was told that I must produce a marriage photograph and so I produce a marriage photograph!" It was because of that that the production of a marriage photograph is no longer insisted upon. If the sponsor can produce one, it will help his case; but if he cannot, well, that is that.

The Chairman: Order. The time has expired.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $l,102,330 for Head 51 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 52-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $1,024,280 for Head 52 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I think it is a wellknown fact that labour is the economic backbone of this colony and it also plays a vital role in the stability of this country. Without labour, industry would not be able to progress. Government, I believe, is trying to see that there is less unemployment. It is trying its best to ensure that there is no unemployment in this colony, and that is why a labour exchange has been created. But, Sir, in my opinion, the system of operation in that labour exchange is rather unsatisfactory. I have known cases where long queues have stood alongside the Havelock Road building waiting either to be registered or sent to employers or firms which require labour. The coordination between the employers and the labour exchange is not very satisfactory. There may be cases of a firm which requires a large number of carpenters but the labour exchange is unable to supply them; whereas, in fact, there are thousands of unemployed carpenters who are not prepared to register or have not registered themselves at the labour exchange. So this is the reason why I say the system is not satisfactory. It is either the employers or the unemployed who are not making much use of the labour exchange. I presume they do not know the benefits to be derived from the use of that exchange. Or it may be that the staff there is inadequate so that they are unable to set up a new system whereby the employers, the unemployed and the exchange could have co-ordination. The answer to this problem, if I may say so again, is to appoint a committee to go into the functions of the labour exchange with a view to making recommendations for improvement.

Mr Lim Yew Hock: Sir, it is again the Member for Queenstown who speaks and the Minister for Labour who labours for no reward! Sir, he brought up the question of the work of the labour exchange. I agree that the work of the labour exchange is not as satisfactory as I should have liked to see, but I am sure he himself realises the limitations under which the labour exchange has to work.

In the first place, there is no compulsion on employers to seek to fill vacancies through the labour exchange. In the second place, there are a number of private employment agencies, about whom I have already asked for more information, who appear to be able to do better business in this particular line. It has been reported to me, Sir, that more and more people would like to make use of these agencies because, through their own organisations within the offices, they are able to know in advance of any vacancy that may arise in any particular office. In some cases, it has been reported to the Labour Department that there have been a good number of illegal practices going on in these so-called private employment agencies and I have therefore, as I have said earlier, asked for further information about them.

The Member for Queenstown asked for a committee to be set up to look into and improve upon the work of the labour exchange. I would like to inform him, Sir, that there is already a small committee on the job and I hope they will be able to make recommendations to me which will improve the working of the labour exchange.

In regard to the long queues of people waiting at the labour exchange for registration, perhaps the Member for Queenstown has confused them with the long queues waiting for relief at the Social Welfare Department. The labour exchange and the Social Welfare Department are on the same floor, Sir, and the queues could have been enlarged because there is only one entrance.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I am glad that the Minister is calling for a report on the working of these private employment agencies. I think the Government should take very strong action against them. To my knowledge, these agencies are, in fact, exploiting the workers rather than assisting them. A registration fee is levied whether you get employment or not; and as soon as employment is found for persons who have registered with them, a certain percentage of the first month's salary has to be paid to them. This is nothing but corruption and exploitation. Unemployed persons are trying to find work and in the process a certain fee has first to be paid. I do not think that is fair. These unfortunate people want work to keep themselves alive and yet a certain amount of money is extracted from them. I hope the Minister will ask Government to be quick about the action to be taken against these agencies and see that they are not allowed to exist.

Question put, and agreed to,

The sum of $1,024,280 for Head 52 order to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 53-

Mr Lim Choon Mong (Serangoon): Mr Chairman, Sir, I move,

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (46) , Community Centre Organisers, on page 281 of the Estimates.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I must draw the attention of the House to the fact that Community Centre Organisers are new innovations in this Budget. They have been here for only a few years. May I suggest to the House, Sir, that this type of employment is not necessary? It gives me a queer feeling to have that title "Community Centre Organisers" put into the Budget. It gives me the idea that people in Singapore must be organised. It gives me the feeling that people cannot organise themselves before; but, Sir, nothing is further from the truth. In fact, people have always organised themselves and will organise themselves when they want to. But they will not want to organise themselves if they are forced into it. Sir, we find that in every locality in Singapore little associations have come up. We have little guilds coming up. People have formed themselves into sports associations, benevolent associations, clan associations and associations to promote a certain type of welfare activity or social activity; and in all such cases they have never had any prompting from anybody. In fact, it is the interest in these people which causes them to band themselves into whatever organisations they want. Now it may be said by the Department concerned that this can only apply to many decades ago, say, before the second world war, when everybody was staying in a fixed place for a very long time; but after the war, we have the growth of new estates and the coming of this event has brought people from all parts of Singapore to stay together. Then, of course, there will be problems which are common to them and which they want to solve, but because of the shortness of time, they are not able to come together; so we must have somebody to look after such things for them. But, Sir, I say this is not true. In this case of new estates, where the people have common problems, they usually organise themselves into community centres to fight their own battle. They need no urging from the Department concerned.

Sir, let us now look at the work of these community centre organisers during the past few years. I happen to be pretty familiar with the work which they are doing and in most cases I think they have nothing much to recommend themselves for the maintenance of their jobs. A community centre is built in a place which is not conspicuous enough to attract attention and in such a way that people will find it quite inconvenient to make use of it. In such centres there will be a few types of activities - boys' club activities, girls' club activities - and there will be a little library in the corner and occasionally the members will meet there for a lecture or a short talk. But invariably, Sir, these centres are empty - empty for the most part of the month, for the most part of the week, and for the most part of the day. You can say, "Yes, we have a centre and it is catering for the needs of the young children. We run classes." Yes, these centres run classes, but classes for about 20 or 30 or 40 people and no more; and if you can call them community centres, when they are being made use of by only a very small number of people, then I wonder if there is not something wrong with the title. However, even if we confine ourselves to the subject of the centre being made use of by these young people, let us see how the work is being done. Sometimes an association will come in and ask for the use of the place, and in one case that I know of, the organiser said, "You will have to write in officially." I quite agree, Sir, that community centres deal with all sorts of people, and such people will also include those who are illiterate, and to ask illiterate people to write in officially is, I think, the height of folly. Or you may have an organisation asking, "You are not going to use this place for a few days. Let us have it for the purposes of weight-lifting." This organisation is prepared to guarantee that the building will not be spoiled, the floor will not be chipped, and should there be damage, the association is prepared to compensate for such damage. But even then the association is not allowed to make use of that centre. A community centre, according to that type of organiser, should be kept as a white elephant, white-washed and cleanly swept, nobody making use of it because it will then not be dirty.

Let me point out another fact. Invariably we find that organisers are sent into a community about which they know nothing. I put it to you, Sir, that if you are sent in to organise a certain community - in fact, they do not need your assistance at all - then the very least that you must know is that you should know the people and the conditions there. If you do not, then you can do no work at all. In fact, the work that has been done has nothing to recommend itself. I have known of one centre where, instead of the organisers making everybody happy to go into it and drink coffee, talk together, read the papers, discuss the day's work, these people have divided them into factions. The organisers in this case did not bring the people together, but had split them into various camps.

Then, Sir, I must say one very interesting thing. It is said that in community centres there must be no politics, absolutely no politics. We agree with that.

Mr Marshall: Do you?

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Yes. In fact, there was a case where a group of people were interested in forming a community centre, but the Department concerned said, "No, you cannot form a community centre. We do not agree with you because it is political." Then the organisers had to produce a list in which they said, "We have so many people coming into this project; there are so many from one Party, and so many from another." In fact, many of the Parties were represented, including quite a number of people who had no Parties at all. That was actually the case. They came from all sorts of Parties. I should even say, they have people coming from the Labour Front! Let us say now that we agree that there should be no politics in community centres. We agree with that, but I would ask the Government to read an article by a journalist writing under the name of Aster Gunasekera who gave prominence to an event which happened in one of the community centres. It is not my opinion, but it is the opinion of an independent observer. He says, "If that is not politics, what is it?". Here, Sir, is a case where what the Government can do, the other people cannot do. I think that is absolutely wrong.

Sir, there are also other instances where people want to form community centres but instead of the Department sending along organisers to help them in a positive way, they have done so in a negative way. Take the case of the Tiong Bahru community centre. Some people wanted to form a community centre there. They had interests there and they wanted to come out and do work for the community, but I doubt whether there was any positive help given to them. Take another case, the Serangoon Garden Estate. There is a community centre there and it came into existence to fight the Estate Department who was levying dues or charges which the community thought were unjust and should be classified as -

Mr Marshall rose -

The Chairman: Is it a point of order?

Mr Marshall: I want the hon. Member to remember the question of time -

The Chairman: Is it on a point of order? The hon. Member has not given way yet.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: I am not giving way, Sir. I have 35 minutes here and I know my time.

Mr Marshall: On a point of information, Sir.

The Chairman: If the hon. Member will give way.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: I am not giving way, Sir.

The Chairman: In fairness to other hon. Members, I think I must indicate that 35 minutes has been allotted for Head 53. I had indications that three Members wished to speak, and there are now 22 minutes left.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: To continue, Sir, it was the same case with the Serangoon Garden Estate. That community centre organisation received no help whatsoever from the Department concerned. I should like the House to know exactly how this Department is carrying out its work. Instead of helping those people who are interested in community work, which should, in fact, be the most logical way, an organiser is posted to a place. This organiser then uses his discretion and goes round and invites people whom he thinks fit to form an advisory committee. This advisory committee will then advise the Department as to what is good and what is bad. There is, however, one point to remember about this, Sir. In a place where people do not want advisory committees, then advisory committees must be done away with. In a place where the people wish to call a meeting of the whole district to elect democratically those whom they wish to run their community centre, I think the Government should give way to the popular wish of the people. I am certain, Sir, that in a matter like this, where there is still a denial by the Government to accept the principle that the people must be trained at the lowest level so that they may know what is the meaning of an election and how to select the best men to represent them, it is something that I think should never have occurred. I say to this Assembly, Sir, that should any hon. Member require further facts, I shall be always willing to give him real and solid examples.

Question proposed.

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Mr Chairman, Sir, I have only two very small points to make to the address by the Member for Serangoon who seems to have emptied his own side of the House. It is the policy, I understand, of community centres that no public meeting of a political character can be held in them, and that, I understand, is also true of schools. Sir, the concept of polities has been something unclean. It is a Colonial Office concept in respect of colonial territories. It is not a healthy concept in a territory which seeks democratic development, and I would urge upon Government to reconsider the question of permitting political meetings in community centres and in schools with a fair apportionment to the various political Parties.

The Assistant Minister, Chief Secretary's Ministry (Mr M. P. D. Nair): Sir, I hold no brief for the Department of Social Welfare, but I must correct some of the misapprehensions which the Member for Serangoon has expressed to the Assembly. As a Member of the Assembly who has taken pains to organise one of these community centres, I must refute every word of what the Member for Serangoon said.

Sir, community development went the wrong way as early as 1950. These centres were then used for political purposes and there were difficulties arising as a result of this. But a year or two back, Sir, the Department realised the position and, as a result, they have tried to obtain trained and experienced staff as community centre organisers. They are doing a very good job, Sir, as far as my place is concerned. I have every praise for their work. I think community development has been considerably misunderstood by the Member for Serangoon, Sir, and I hope that the Department of Social Welfare will publish some material for the information of all concerned which will be of immense help not only to Members of the Assembly but also to the population as a whole.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, with due respect to the Member for Serangoon - I understand he is a youth leader - I am afraid I cannot agree with him that community centre organisers are not necessary. I believe that he was referring to the Government-sponsored community centres -

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Exactly.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: - rather than the community centres that have been set up in S.I.T. estates by the residents themselves.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Confined to Government only.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: These centres are set up, as a matter of fact, for the co-ordination of residents within the estate and to assist them in case of need; but the officials of such community centres are treating these centres more as associations than as community centres. That is why I do not agree when the Member for Serangoon says that community centre organisers are not required. The community centres should have wardens to guide the officials, and, as such, it should be the responsibility of the Government to provide such wardens.

I understand that Government has established within the Social Welfare Department a little section called the Community Development Section under the Assistant Director for Community Centres, but what I would like to say is this: that the liaison between this section and the community centres is unsatisfactory. This section within the Social Welfare Department waits for the community centres to come to it for advice rather than that it should go to the centres and give them advice. These centres are, in fact, in great need of financial help. The only concession that they do get is not from the Government but from the S.I.T. who gives a special rate of $20 rental for a shop-house at the premises of the centre. The rental of that shop-house may be $160 to $200. I think it is the duty of the Government to go round to these centres - the privately established ones and not the Government-sponsored ones - to find out what is required. Most of them, I may say, live on cinemas. In each of the different estates you will find an open-air cinema set up charging an entrance fee of ten cents. Without such cinemas, the community centres would have to close down long ago.

The Assistant Minister to the Chief Secretary (Mr M. P. D. Nair) has said that in 1950 the question of community development was raised. I remember that sometime in that year or the year after that a committee called the Community Development Committee was set up and on it were represented members of public bodies like the City Council, the Legislative Council and the Rural Board. That committee must have wound up because I have never heard of it again. I would urge, Sir, that Government revive this committee, but the representation on this committee should not be on the basis of Government or local organisations. Privately established community centres should be asked to come on to this committee so that there could be an exchange of views on community development. They could easily ask two representatives from each community centre to sit on this committee. There has been no trouble with Government-sponsored community centres, as the Member for Serangoon has alleged. In Yio Chu Kang there is a beautiful and well-established centre which will be opened tomorrow by the Labour Minister. It is not the Government-sponsored centres that we should look after; it is the privately-established centres that we should look after. I hope the Government will bear my suggestion in mind to revive the Community Development Committee so that a chance could be given to private community centres to air their views and their needs.

Mr Lim Yew Hock: Sir, I see that the Member for Queenstown is very committee-minded! For the three departments in my Ministry - Immigration, Labour and Welfare - he has been suggesting one committee after another!

The Member for Serangoon started his speech by saying that he objected to the appointment of community centre organisers. He said that there was a sinister meaning given to organisers when they are officers of the Government; but later on in his speech he told us that his dissatisfaction arose out of the alleged inefficiency of the organisers themselves rather than because the centre organisers were there. Sir, I would like to say that community centre organisers are very necessary to help and advise in the management of centres. They are trained people and experience has shown that without a competent professional staff the premises tend to be put to insufficient use and government money is therefore wasted. Sir, it is Government's policy to provide community centres and children's social centres within them, and to appoint advisory committees to run them, and to appoint members of the general public to serve on these committees, with the object of establishing at the earliest possible moment a community association formed by persons who use these centres. In this way, Sir, the management of all appropriate functions of the centre can be undertaken by a committee and this could be separated from the Social Welfare Department.

The Member for Serangoon and the Member for Cairnhill have touched on the use of community centres for political meetings. Political meetings in community centres and in schools are allowed during election time, and in community centres they will be allowed when more than one Party is represented. It could not be given to any political Party at any one time, but if there is a joint political meeting organised by more than one Party on a matter of general interest to the community, permission will be granted to hold such a meeting.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

Question proposed.

"That the sum of $11,020,270 for Head 53 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Sir, I rise to speak on a matter of very considerable importance to a considerable number of people, and that is the Legal Aid and Advice Ordinance; but before I do so, Sir, I would ask whether the Minister for Labour and Welfare has any information that he would like to add to our knowledge of the implementation of this legislation.

Mr Lim Yew Hock: Mr Chairman, I am sure the Member for Cairnhill will be pleased to know that it is proposed that Part I of the Legal Aid and Advice Ordinance will come into operation without any further delay. The Director of Legal Aid can then be appointed and an office set up. Sir, I propose to hold further discussions with the Bar Committee as soon as possible. The discussions which I have already had with them indicated to me that the Government can be assured of their co-operation, and in the operation of this law, Sir, it is most necessary that we have the co-operation of the Bar Committee in order to give the utmost benefit to those desiring legal aid.

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Mr Chairman, Sir, indeed I think all sides of the House welcome the announcement of the Minister of the immediate implementation of Part I of the Legal Aid and Advice Ordinance.

There are two points which I would like to make, Sir. First, I see no provision to cover this implementation in the Budget, Sir. Do I take it that the House will be asked for supplementary provision at a very early date? Secondly, Sir, on the question of the necessity of co-operation from the Bar. I think the Minister is fully aware that this was completely thrashed out among themselves at the time prior to the introduction of the Bill and that though it is recognised that the co-operation of the Bar would be most helpful, the Bill is so framed that it is not essential.

Mr Lim Yew Hock: Mr Chairman, Sir, an application for supplementary provision will be tabled early next month.

Mr Marshall: Thank you.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I think I should now give credit and thanks to the Government in having a section called "Public Assistance". Without this section, I am afraid the number of beggars on the streets will increase; but what I would like to say is this, Sir, that the amount of money given by this section is inadequate.

The Minister for Education (Mr Chew Swee Kee): More tax!

Mr Lee Choon Eng: More tax. On the other hand, I feel that this section should be decentralised rather than that it should all be concentrated in the Havelock Road building. The Minister for Labour and Welfare said earlier that I might have mistaken the people who go to that building for public assistance for people who want to register themselves for employment. Sir, that is the reason why I am now referring to the men and women who sit on the doorsteps of that building waiting for their turn to receive public assistance. People coming from Queenstown, Alexandra, Changi and Pasir Panjang to town have to cover about five to eight miles, and to do that and receive only $15 to $25 as assistance from the Department is, I think, a waste of time and transport.

The Chairman: I think the hon. Member is now embarking on a debate on the policy of the Public Assistance Section. If he wished for a debate on that particular section, he ought to have moved a conventional reduction of the vote. All that he can do now is just to ventilate what he wishes to ventilate, but he should not enter into a debate.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I am not trying to originate a debate, and neither am I debating any particular item under that Department. I am only referring to the policy of the Government in regard to public assistance. As I have said, it is rather heart-breaking to find women and children waiting in the hot sun for a whole day -

The Chairman: That is exactly what I am asking the hon. Member not to do. A debate on the policy of the Public Assistance Section is completely out of order, because he has not given notice of a reduction of the vote with reference to that particular Head.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: I am sorry, Mr Chairman, Sir.

Mr Lim Yew Hock: For the information of the Member for Queenstown, the Social Welfare Department is already decentralised to make payments of relief under the public assistance scheme. More and more centres will be opened as soon as experience is gained as to the benefits and the use to which these centres are being put.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $11,020,270 for Head 53 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 54-

The sum of $135,600 for Head 54 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 55-

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

To reduce by $1,000 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 21 (5) , Entertainment of Distinguished Visitors, on page 296 of the Estimates.

Sir, I find that this vote is required "for refreshment supplied in the V.I.P. Room". I am rather puzzled as to who are "Distinguished Visitors" and who are V. I. P. 's. I thought V. I. P.'s cover everybody of importance, but now I find that out of that category of persons there is a new classification called "Distinguished Visitors", and these may be people who come to Singapore either on some urgent business or on consular business.

Sir, the people going into the V.I.P. room are only in transit. They make use of the room while waiting for their planes. The room itself is not a canteen where drinks are supplied, and it should not be made into a canteen. Because there are "Distinguished Visitors" and there are V. I. P.'s, there will be discrimination against V. I. P.'s if this vote is passed. But if the vote is to cover all V. I. P.'s, then $1,000 is not enough. I do not know who are actually V. I. P.'s. I presume every Member of this Assembly is a V.I.P.

Mr Chew Swee Kee: Including you!

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Thank you! If, as the Minister for Education has pointed out, I am considered a V.I.P., then I would rather enjoy my tea in the V.I.P. room than in the C.P.A. room! I trust the Government will be more careful about such things and not turn a room for passengers in transit into a canteen. A canteen is entirely different. There is a restaurant at the airport, and if V. I. P.'s want a drink, they can easily have it at the restaurant rather than in the V.I.P. room. Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

The Minister for Communications and Works (Mr Francis Thomas): Mr Chairman, Sir, I do not think I need go into details because it will be a waste of time. If the Member for Queenstown envisages wild parties of Assemblymen gathering to quaff champagne, watched by the Customs at one door, the police at the second and the Press at the third, he is living in a fool's paradise.

The object of this vote is to ensure that, when some important personage passes through Singapore either stopping or on his way perhaps to Australia, there should be a possibility that the Airport Manager or the Airport Commandant or the Director-General should be able to say, "Would you like a drink?"; and if the important personage says "Yes", then it does not fall on the pocket of the permanent official but can properly be carried on the hospitality of the colony -

The Chairman: Order. The time has expired.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

The sum of $3,081,620 for Head 55 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

The Chairman: I would like to suggest to hon. Members that they keep their eyes skinned not only on the clock but also on the little "gadget" which the Clerk keeps turning on this table, so that if hon. Members wish to have replies from Ministers, they should give them adequate time to reply.

Head 56-

The sum of $1,119,590 for Head 56 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 57-

The sum of $9,762,390 for Head 57 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 58-

The following amendments stood in the name of Mr Lim Choon Mong -

To reduce by $18,240 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (8) , Senior Quantity Surveyor, Grade G, on page 305 of the Estimates.

To reduce by $6,000 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1 (29) , Lady Supervisor, Government Holiday Bungalows, on page 306 of the Estimates.

The Chairman: Mr Lim Choon Mong? He is not here?

The sum of $4,797,590 for Head 58 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 59-

The sum of $7,137,400 for Head 59 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 60-

The sum of $4,723,710 for Head 60 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. SECOND SCHEDULE

Head D 9-

Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar): Mr Chairman, Sir, I move,

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 2, Division I Quarters, Jurong, on page 369 of the Estimates.

Under this item, Sir, the sum of $45,000 is asked for building Division I quarters. To my mind, this is a high figure, unless some explanation can be given to us why the cost is so high. I have in mind particularly those houses built by the Ideal Homes in Whitley Road. There are about 200 houses there and they were sold to the public at $30,000 per house -

The Chairman: Order. I have, in fact, drawn the attention of hon. Members to the relevant Standing Order which says:

"On any question in the Committee of Supply debate shall be confined to the policy of the service for which the money is to be provided...".

The point raised by the hon. Member will be quite relevant when I come to propose the Question on the Main Head, but if he can develop a debate on policy on his amendment, then he is in order.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Sir, I was coming to the policy of the high cost of building, but as time is so short, I think I will not proceed with my amendment but will speak on the Main Head.

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $64,000 for Head D 9 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Sir, I just want to point out that all these houses were sold at $30,000 each and they included 10,000 square feet of land in town, making of roads and provision for sanitation and septic tanks, and to my mind $45,000 for a bungalow alone is fantastic. I would invite the authorities to go and see this house and have an estimate made later on.

Mr Francis Thomas: Very briefly, Mr Chairman, Sir, these are standard Division I quarters providing for two bedrooms, a lounge, a dining room, servants quarters, W.C, sanitation and a garage, and are of very simple construction using 4� inch walls of hollow concrete blocks, and if you built the house by itself, it would cost about $28,000. But the cost, in fact, includes $10,000 to $12,000 extra for water and electricity supply and sewerage disposal. There is also the cost for furniture included in the $45,000 - that is $3,500 - and supervision charges for a clerk of works at the site. You will realise, Sir, that Jurong is a remote area where one has not got all the services and you have to put on the ancillary costs which are a very large element in the total cost of the house. A similar house completed only six months ago worked out to a little over a dollar a foot cube and a similar house at Mount Pleasant was built at a cost of $38,000, that is, a saving of $7,000. There is not enough time, Mr Chairman, Sir, to give a much longer speech on building costs, but I hope to do so as soon as sufficiently long time is allotted to this Head.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $64,000 for Head D 9 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim rose -

The Chairman: Is it on a point of order?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: I just want to ask one question, Sir, on Head D 9.

The Chairman: I am afraid the hon. Member is too late.

Head D 10-

The sum of $30,000 for Head D 10 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 12-

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I move,

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 2, Royal Malayan Navy - Shipbuilding, on page 371 of the Estimates.

Sir, unlike the Member for Cairnhill -

The Attorney-General (Mr C. H. Butterfield): On a point of order, Sir, from the terms of the motion and indeed on the Order Paper itself, His Excellency's recommendation or consent must be signified to this motion.

The Deputy Chairman (Mr R. C. H. Lim): I was just going to ask that. Has the hon. Member the recommendation or consent of the Governor to proceed with this motion?

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I would enquire from the Hon. the Attorney-General, or is it the Chief Secretary, whether the Governor's consent has been obtained?

The Chief Secretary (Mr W. A. C. Goode): This is my Ministry, Sir. I do signify that the Governor has consented.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Sir, unlike the Member for Cairnhill, who objects to the provision made for the Royal Malayan Navy in this Budget, I strongly support the retention of this fine body of men who, I am sure, will carry on the fine tradition handed down by those who saw action during the last war. We have already spent many millions of dollars to create that force. It will indeed be a tragic waste of public money to disband it now. When we achieve independence and self-government, surely a country like ours, surrounded by the sea, must have a navy of our own, no matter how small? Rather than have two infantry battalions and scrap the Royal Malayan Navy, I would have one infantry battalion and the Royal Malayan Navy, because the Navy, besides patrolling the seas around us, can always come to the assistance of the Government in case of any threat to internal security. I do, however, agree with the view of the Member for Cairnhill regarding what he contemptuously described as a "toy Navy" for which we are asked to provide $15 million, but for very different reasons. Sir, I think $15 million is a very, very large sum to spend at this time on a method of warfare which, to my mind, will never be used again.

Today, with the development of atomic energy, warfare is moving into another stage altogether. With guided missiles, atomic war-heads and, in a few years' time, aeroplanes and warships propelled by nuclear energy, we must think of different types of warfare. To my mind, minesweeping will be out of the picture, for in any big conflict, the nation that controls the air will control the sea and hardly any ship will be able to move. Besides, I can think of other ways of removing mines instead of using these cumbersome minesweepers which were developed before the last war. Sir, we now have helicopters which are being used by the Army for detecting land mines. There is no reason why two helicopters cannot, between them, pull a mine detector over the sea for the purposes of mine detection. Then again these helicopters can use those devices which at present are being used by ships for spotting shoals of fish, and the discovery of any mine by the helicopters can be left to "frogmen" to dispose of. What I have suggested may seem to be a bit silly, but many of these suggestions have been adopted in warfare and have proved to be completely effective.

Sir, even if my surmises are incorrect, the sweeping of mines will be principally for the benefit of the Commonwealth nations, and I see no reason why they should not assist us by lending us minesweepers, now lying idle, for training our men and supplying us with minesweepers in time of war. I think we should use obsolete vessels for obsolescent warfare instead of having to build warships which may be useless by the time they are completed. This $15 million can then be allocated for the benefit of the social services or even to prevent an increase of income tax on the lower income groups in the years to come, instead of spending it on the Royal Malayan Navy. The Hon. the Chief Secretary has informed us that it is possible that the Federation, on her attainment of independence, will take over this responsibility now assumed by us. Until that question is settled, we must record our objection to this expenditure.

Question proposed.

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, when one defends the undefendable, the proper technique which has always been recognised is to indulge in platitudes with one's hand on one's heart. We have heard from the Chief Secretary, in tones of ringing emotion, of the wonderful work being done to build the spirit of these men in accordance with the tradition of those who did so magnificently during the war. The Chief Secretary did not, of course, point out that the men who did so magnificently during the war were not the Royal Malayan Navy but the Malayan Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve; nor did he point out that I did not criticise the allocation for the Malayan Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve of $744,710 but, in fact, voted with the rest in accepting it without demur. Those are the men who did good service and it might well be a valuable service for local needs.

The Royal Malayan Navy, Sir, is another kettle of fish. The Chief Secretary did not also tell you that 85 per cent of the personnel, who are small in number, come from the Federation, and it is for these that we have to spend $4 million annually recurrent and $15 million for these minesweepers.

The Chief Secretary also told you of the wonderful work which was done during the war in minesweeping. I am not aware, Sir, and perhaps he will term me ignorant, of any enemy power which dropped any mines in any territory connected with the Federation or Singapore. It is true that the Royal Navy planted mines in the approaches to Singapore, and I suppose it will be anticipated that mines will be planted in future wars; but let us recognise the fact, Sir, that this enormous expenditure is a horrible waste of money with no relation to the needs of this territory; because it is said we are surrounded by water, we need a Navy for internal security. I do not know if it is going to go up Kallang River to subdue Bukit Timah. Is the Navy small enough to go up the canal? I do not know the type of work which the Member for Paya Lebar has in mind in suggesting that these little boats can be used for internal security, but let the voice of experience speak, Sir. They have been of no value to this territory in that matter. In respect of customs, we have very expensive programme of ships to assist against smuggling and they can, in time of need, be turned very rapidly for offensive purposes. I cannot understand how any Member in this House can complacently view this great expenditure annually recurrent and this provision which calls upon us to accept it as a matter of principle - an expenditure of $15 million for four very small ships to sweep mines. Sir, I would much rather see this $15 million used to sweep poverty, which has existed, instead of imaginary mines which never did and cannot exist. What kind of war do you think, Sir, will ever occur in which the provision of four minesweepers by this territory could be of any value to itself.

Finally let us not forget the basic principle. The United Kingdom has insisted, and its insistence has been acceded to, on the control of external defence of this territory. It wants complete, absolute and unquestioned control and it has got it, and it will get it again if there is any merdeka at all. So long as that is true, Sir, is it fair to call upon the people of this territory to give a substantial part of the public revenue to purposes over which they have no control?

Mr Goode: Sir, there seems to be some conflict of opinion between the two hon. Members who have spoken. One clearly supports the continued existence of the Royal Malayan Navy, which is consistent, of course, with the line that was taken by the previous Government. The other, the Member for Cairnhill, obviously does not like the Royal Malayan Navy or to have anything to do with it. I have not the time to answer in detail, Sir, but I would like to make one or two quick points.

The first point is whether or not it is quite a waste of money to have any vessels to sweep mines here. It may be that people will not drop mines in a future war. It may be that it will not be necessary to lay a defensive minefield around Singapore. But if it is necessary to lay a minefield, or if enemies do drop mines from the air, then you will have to have minesweepers, just as minesweepers had been used right up to the last day of the recent hostilities. I rather doubt whether it is possible to use an aircraft to drop frogmen. I also -

The Deputy Chairman: Order, please. I am afraid the time is up.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

The time allotted for Head D 12 having expired, the following amendment, understanding in the name of Mr John Ede, was not proceeded with:

(Governor's recommendation or consent to be signified.)

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 3, Singapore Military Forces - Equipment for Singapore Battalion, on page 371 of the Estimates.

The sum of $3,469,000 for Head D 12 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 16-

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

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1, Garages for Radio Vehicles, on page 372 of the Estimates.

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 3, New Divisional Headquarters, Queenstown, on page 372 of the Estimates.

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 4, New Headquarters, Special Branch, on page 372 of the Estimates.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, may I withdraw all the three amendments which I have put down under this Head and speak on the Main Head?

The Deputy Chairman: The hon. Member does not intend to move all his three amendments?

Mr Lim Koon Teck: I do not intend to move them, Sir.

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $1,873,000 for Head D 16 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Sir, the amendments filed by me under this Development Head are mainly for the purpose of getting information from the departments concerned and criticising any unnecessary expenditure if we can spot it. I have therefore asked to speak on the general Head instead of on the different items, but I shall come down to the items themselves later.

On the question of expenditure for building, I spoke quite a lot about it last year, but then I was still a greenhorn and my experience regarding methods of building was rather limited, but during the present year I have taken pains to go into costs and I think I can now speak with more authority. It is gratifying to me to know that in certain aspects costs of building by the Public Works Department, particularly where primary schools are concerned, have come down a great deal, more particularly so when I found that the expenditure for converting a boys' hostel into flats for nurses was $100,000 instead of $200,000, after repeated arguments between the Minister for Communications and Works and myself in this Chamber last year. While I will admit that costs have come down, I still say that there is room for further reduction. The debates that we have during this week have shown us how tight money is going to be and how pressed we shall be for finances to be able to carry out the programme for our schools and hospitals and other social work. I must therefore keep on hammering at this House and insist on the most economical method of building for the public services, taking away all the trimmings if necessary. We have come to a stage where we must, I think, build for utility and not as a monument for posterity.

I will come now to the items on which I wish to speak. The first one is the $100,000 that is being asked for garages for radio vehicles. This seems to me to be a very large sum for garages. The second item is $700,000 being asked for to provide new Divisional Headquarters for Queenstown. For this sum I visualise a rather sumptuous office and I should like to know some of the costs for this building. Then we come to the super building - $2 million for the new Headquarters of the Special Branch. If we were to spend millions of dollars for all these items, I am afraid the finances of the colony will not be able to stand it, and I would like to have some explanation of the money asked for under this Head.

Mr Francis Thomas: I will try and answer the queries of the Member for Paya Lebar as quickly as I can, Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir. I had better try and put this in perspective first by referring to the Public Works Department's Report of a comparable territory where I find they have done the equivalent of about (Malayan) $62 million worth of work, and personal emoluments and similar overheads amounted to $18� million - in other words, 14.9 per cent of the total expenditure. Sir, Singapore is only 6 per cent. So, in regard to that particular territory, we are very much more economical in personal emoluments, which is an important factor, of course, in the final cost of the building. Just as a matter of interest, the expatriate staff in that territory's building works totalled 176 persons, at a total expenditure equivalent to (Malayan) $62 million, compared to (Malayan) $48 million here where we are using only 28 expatriates, which is a very considerable difference. In other words, we are doing 80 per cent as much work and we are using only 16 per cent of expatriate staff. In fact, I think half the -

Mr Marshall: On a point of information, Sir. Could we know the name of this territory?

Mr Francis Thomas: It is Hongkong. Sir, I think this reflects well on the progress of Malayanisation achieved so far in this territory and also on the general efficiency of the department. I must pass on as quickly as I can, Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir.

I wish to point out that I have given details in the past of the machinery by which we try to effect our policy of economy and austerity - we have various committees at different levels - and I have also given details of the achievements which we have made in economy, and very handsome achievements they are. I will not waste time repeating them. I just wish to point out that we do control the designs of our buildings, but we cannot control the prices, which depend on the tenders offered. There is a suggestion that the quarters may be too lavish. I have with me the agreed scale of quarters for medical staff: housemen get 310 square feet per person at a cost of $13,000; matrons in charge get 825 square feet per person at a cost of $24,500; student nurses get 80 square feet per person at a cost of $4,500. But whatever we agree as to the standard of building, the price will still depend on what the building trade is able to produce in the way of tenders which are competitive; and in that connection must remark that the building trade is not at the moment producing as man tenders as it used to in the past. In fact, for one large job no tenders were received and we had to put it out for tender again.

Costs are also rising, partly as a result of the current Suez crisis, and whilst I will give some figures in a minute, I cannot guarantee that they will be figures which will exist when the next lot of tenders come in, because the situation is too fluid.

I will pass on to some more figures for buildings. Let us take hospitals again. You divide them into three categories - A, B and C. That part of the hospital which has to be scrupulously aseptic, with a high standard of finishes, operating theatres, and so on, category A, we build at a cost of $1.41 a cubic foot. In category B, mostly wards in major hospitals, where you have to make sure that they are clean and where you do not want to spend money on cleaning and on maintenance which you have saved on building, we build at $1.05 a cubic foot; and for the places where you can omit the expensive finishes, category C, we get the cost down to 84 cents a cubic foot. We can vary our standards in accordance with what we can get the department to accept. That is one variable factor.

Another variable factor is, of course, that we cannot necessarily choose our sites and say, "We will choose a site where we can build economically." We may have to put a school or a hospital where it will serve the public needs, and the only site we can get may be a difficult one. I will refer to the piled foundation costs for schools -

The Deputy Chairman: Order, please. I am afraid the time is up.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $1,873,000 for Head D 16 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 17-

The sum of $50,000 for Head D 17 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 18-

The sum of $137,000 for Head D 18 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 28-

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

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 1, Quarters for Preventive Staff, on page 375 of the Estimates.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I would like to withdraw my amendment because, from the explanatory note against this item, it would appear as if 46 houses were going to cost $1,750,000; but I have been assured by the Hon. the Financial Secretary that 300 houses are to be built for this sum, and I am satisfied with that figure.

The Deputy Chairman: The hon. Member is not moving his amendment?

Mr Lim Koon Teck: No, Sir.

The sum of $545,000 for Head D 28 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 38-

The sum of $907,000 for Head D 38 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 42-

The sum of $480,000 for Head D 42 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 44-

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $17,615,350 for Head D 44 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Marshall: If it please you, Sir, I note with some regret that the provision for the acquisition and development of sites for resettlement is less for 1957 than it was for 1956. It may well be that we will be provided with a wholly satisfactory reason, but for myself I would like to hear of an imaginative approach to the problem of the acquisition of existing insanitary kampongs and the rehabilitation of those areas to make them fit for human beings. Sir, large masses of people live in these clusters of insanitary homes without adequate hygienic provisions and sometimes without water, and it is in these regions that there is a very wide field for the implementation of the Government's programme of socialist assistance and welfare for the under-privileged. I do ask the Government to consider thoroughly the immediate acquisition of a few kampongs purchased from the owners of the land, and to provide roads, sanitation and water and realign the houses in these areas. Sir, in that field lies the most fruitful endeavour for assistance of the under-privileged and to meet the threat which we all fear can only come through the frustration of unfortunates who have nothing but their misery to lose.

The Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat): Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, on the point raised by the Member for Cairnhill - why is it that the provision for the acquisition and development of sites for resettlement is less for 1957 than it was for 1956 - the position is this: that although for 1956 the sum of $4,800,000 was voted by this Assembly, it is not expected that that amount will be expended by the end of this year; so the amount asked for - $4,000,000 - for 1957 is the probable amount that would be expended by the Land Office for the acquisition and development of sites for resettlement.

On the second point raised by the Member for Cairnhill - that Government should purchase kampongs in Singapore in order to rehabilitate the people living therein - I personally think that his suggestion should not be debated under item 1, because the amount asked for in this item is for the acquisition and development of sites for resettlement of farmers and squatters in various parts of the island, particularly in relation to the building programme of the Singapore Improvement Trust. However, I can assure the hon. Member that his suggestion will be considered favourably by the Government.

Mr Marshall: Thank you.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $17,615,350 for Head D 44 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Mr R. C. H. Lim(Mr Deputy Speaker);

Head D 46-

Mr John Ede: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, I move,

To reduce by $10 the sum to be allotted in respect of sub-head 6 (3), Primary Schools - Group D, on page 379 of the Estimates.

Sir, in response to my written question for information on the cost of building a school in 1955 and 1956, I have received a detailed answer which provides a number of interesting facts. The cost of schools finished in 1956 ranges from the Tanjong Katong Secondary Technical School at $1,047,229 to a group of three primary schools at Bukit Merah which average $236,000 each. It is notable that $185,000 was spent on the piled foundation for the Tanjong Katong and $26,000 for the three Bukit Merah schools. The former site seems to have been somewhat ill chosen. Taking the average for the 21 primary schools completed in 1956, $30,000 per school was spent on piling and $190,000 per school on the building, that is, omitting the cost of the sites and the expenditure on grounds, fencing, drainage roads and so on. Piling has become expensive because of the three-storey construction which is now fashionable.

Regarding the bringing down of costs, the Minister for Communications and Works said that he would welcome suggestions, and I have a suggestion to make regarding schools in the rural areas. In Ulu Pandan the new barracks for the Singapore Battalion are being erected as temporary buildings. These are cheaply built one-storey buildings with walls made of some specially treated hardboard, but they look solid and serviceable. I have no doubt that in ten years' time they will still be standing, they will still be serviceable, and they will still be called temporary. The advantage is that they can be built with the minimum of site clearance and they need not be built on a large piece of flat ground, and no piling is required. I know that the Minister for Communications and Works will look at me rather sadly and repeat that I have not done my home-work, and like the painstaking school-master that he is, he is going to tell me about higher maintenance costs all over again. But, Sir, I think there is too much of this fetish of erecting buildings to last for a century. In this rapidly changing world and this rapidly changing Singapore, there is something to be said for planning for ten to fifteen years instead of the next generation or two in certain types of building for certain purposes. Building techniques change. Teaching requirements in a certain area can change, and I can see no harm in allowing for them and in trying to use cheaper materials on an experimental basis for some of our schools. What is good enough for the Singapore Battalion should be good enough to try in our schools, bearing in mind that it is the character and the ability of the teacher which matter in education and not the material that the walls are made of. This is not to say that I am not appreciative of the economy of school building. The Minister gave us facts about it the other day.

I am also mindful of the enormous changes which have come over Singapore in ten years since the war. The changes in the next decade will be equally enormous, probably even more so. Sometimes I think that we are caught too much in the grip of expert planners who wish to plan our future much further ahead than we ourselves can see. I know, Sir, that for expressing these awful heresies, I should probably go down to the bottom of the class, but nevertheless I hope that the Minister for Education and his educational experts will remember that many students on this island today are being taught quite successfully in schools not made or bricks and mortar.

Lastly, I want to refer to one small matter on page 379 of the Estimates - the point on which I am moving this amendment. It seems to me a question of primary school mathematics. Under "Group D - fifteen schools", there is an estimate of $4,680,000; whereas under "Group C - eighteen schools", there is provision for a similar amount. It would seem to me, therefore, that it is proposed to spend more per school under Group D than Group C.

Question proposed.

Mr Chew Swee Kee: Mr Deputy Chairman, Sir, as regards the same provision for Group C and Group D, perhaps I can explain to the Member for Tanglin that the 15 primary schools in Group D are designed to accommodate as many pupils as the 18 schools in Group C. By reducing the dimensions and simplifying the structure, it was the aim to reduce the total cost of the schools in Group D. Each of the new type schools in Group D has 18 classrooms and the cost is expected to be reduced by a considerable amount at least, but the costs of material and labour have remained unchanged. In fact, in certain respects, costs have increased by 16 per cent. The Suez crisis has caused contractors to be somewhat nervous about the prices of steel and cement and also other important building materials. Moreover, the best sites have been used up and I think future sites will cost even more, especially in regard to piling, levelling and filling.

The suggestion that cheaper buildings be built has been gone into by my Ministry and the Ministry of Communications and Works. We have not lost sight of it. We have, in fact, a building committee meeting very frequently to deliberate on the question. Some people have advocated to me that, in the interests of economy, wood and attap buildings be put up. When we went into this question, it was found to be more uneconomical, as both wood and attap have to be imported from the Federation of Malaya, our nearest neighbour, and they would therefore cost us more than they do the Federation. Vacant land is also scarce and we have to build three - or four-storey schools and plan for the future.

We have also to take into consideration the Master Plan. New satellite towns are being planned. Areas have been ear-marked for green belts and open space, and we have to plan our schools accordingly. Instead of putting up cheap wooden huts or attap buildings, we have now planned to put up cheap smaller schools in the rural areas, so that they can last for ten to twenty years, by which time, of course, we may plan for bigger buildings if the demand justifies it.

Sir, I should also like to mention that bricks and tiles are manufactured in Singapore, and if we build schools with bricks and tiles, we are actually giving employment to thousands of people. However, I wish to assure the Member for Tanglin and the House in general that we are always trying to reduce our costs but, at the same time, taking into consideration the cost of maintenance, sites, and other questions related to the building.

Mr John Ede: Will the Minister for Education take into consideration the building of the Singapore Battalion at Ulu Pandan? He has not mentioned that point They are prefabricated buildings and I am quite certain they will last for several years and will be used for several years.

Mr Chew Swee Kee: I will certainly consider that point, but, of course, I have to get the advice of experts.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

The Deputy Chairman: There is another amendment put down by the Member for Paya Lebar (Mr Lim Koon Teck) under this Head which, I think, could be taken up after the suspension. I will suspend the sitting now.

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 12.21 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.