SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISION (Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 34 of 1957)

10.02 a.m.

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

That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $903,821 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 34 of 1957.

Sir, the majority of the items in this Schedule refer to revotes. They have all been explained in the Schedule and I shall be happy to amplify the explanations if hon. Members so require. Before I move the motion, Sir, I should like to draw attention to a printing error which has crept into the Summary of Totals on page 12. There, Sir, you will see printed under Application Nos. 181 and 182, Head 47, Raffles Library a total of $240,000. The correct total should be $343 as will be seen if hon. Members examine the two items to which I have referred. What has happened, Sir, is that the printers have inadvertently repeated the figure of $240,000 printed above. Otherwise the Summary is correct. The total of $903,821 does include the revised figure of $343 under Head 47. Sir, I beg to move.

The Minister for Education (Mr Chew Swee Kee): Sir, I second it.

Motion accordingly committed to Committee of Supply.

Motion and Schedule considered in Committee of Supply.

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

10.05 a.m.

The Minister for Education (Mr Chew Swee Kee): Schedule

The Chairman: The summary is at page 12.

Head 12 -

The sum of $775 for Head 12 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 13 -

The sum of $11,500 for Head 13 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 15 -

The sum of $1,023 for Head 15 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 21 -

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $8,988 for Head 21 stand part of the Schedule.'

Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar): Sir, may we have further information on this Special Expenditure, item 174, appearing on page 1? It reads:

"Supplementary provision of $8,988 is required to pay damages and costs awarded against the Crown in a civil action for false imprisonment in the High Court."

We would like to know whether any offer for compensation was made which would have made it unnecessary to go to court.

Mr Hart: The case was put to the law officers, Sir, and they advised that the petitioners should be allowed to pursue the matter in the High Court. The law officers did not think that there was any justification for endeavouring to compromise the matter out of court. As it happened, the judgment went against us and we were required to pay damages to the extent of $1,000 in each case with costs of $6,000 odd.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $8,988 for Head 21 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 25-

The sum of $240,000 for Head 25 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 47 -

The sum of $343 for Head 47 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 49 -

The sum of $99,080 for Head 49 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 54 -

Question proposed,

"That the sum of $8,000 for Head 54 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar): Could the Hon. the Financial Secretary tells us why this expenditure has to be incurred when normally the Public Works Department could carry out this service?

The Minister for Communications and Works (Mr Francis Thomas): Sir, I do not know whether the hon. Member was in the House or not on 17th July when I dealt with this point. I did in my speech on the Architects (Amendment) Ordinance explain that there was a need for a survey of building standards and that it was necessary to pay a professional fee to this officer who was retiring under the Malayanisation scheme and consequently was available for a short period to do the job. It is explained in the notes here that the Public Works Department has no spare officer at the moment. Our capacity is overtaxed already by the amount of work we have to do in ordinary building works and it seemed appropriate to get a spare body to do the work which could not be done by the Public Works Department.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Do we understand then, Sir, that what in fact happened was that an officer was paid his compensation under the Malayanisation scheme and he is then paid another $8,000 for one or two months to do an extra bit of job?

Mr Francis Thomas: It is perfectly correct that officers who retired under the Malayanisation scheme received their compensation as they are legally entitled to do. That does not affect the fact that where you need a job done and you have a man who is willing and able to do it, he should be employed to do it. It is a marked economy over bringing out some expert from the United Kingdom, Australia or India and paying his passage and a comparable fee as well, if the hon. Member wishes to suggest that this is an ill-judged decision, I think he might consider what other decisions would have been possible in the circumstances.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Was no attempt made to appeal to the higher sense of responsibility and duty to this officer that he should retire and collect compensation after he has done his job?

Mr Wong Foo Nam (Pasir Panjang): May I ask the Minister why $8,000 is to be paid to the officer concerned for two months' work whereas I know that the officer concerned did not have anything like that in salary?

Mr Francis Thomas: In my speech on 17th July, I said:

"I do not wish to prejudge in any way the findings which may appear in his report, which I hope will be available in about two months - possibly a little longer, not more than three months.".

It was impossible before he started work to say how long the job would take. The fee was calculated on the basis that he might have to spend three months on it and is a lump sum payment for a single job. To pay him month by month would of course open him to the temptation of lingering on the work so as to go on drawing the pay for an indefinite period of months. Consequently, the reasonable thing was to pay him a professional fee for doing a professional job and to get the job done as quickly as possible.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $8,000 for Head 54 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head 57 -

The sum of $7,460 for Head 57 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 46 -

The sum of $319,290 for Head D 46 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 49-

The sum of $48,000 for Head D 49 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 57 -

The sum of $33,970 for Head D 57 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

Head D 62 -

The sum of $125,392 for Head D 62 ordered to stand part of the Schedule.

The sum of $903,821 for the Heads of Expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule ordered to stand part of the motion.

Motion and Schedule reported, without Amendment.

Question,

"That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $903,821 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 34 of 1957.".

put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $903,821 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 34 of 1957.