FACTORIES BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

11.08 a.m.

Mr A. J. Braga (on behalf of the Minister for Labour and Welfare, Dr Lim Yew Hock): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's consent to proceed with this Bill and move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Government has for some time considered the minimum standards of health, safety and welfare of workers in factories, and a factory is the place where workmen spend the greater part of their lives. Up to now the standards of safety have been laid down in the Machinery Ordinance (Chapter 223), which was brought into operation in 1921, and amended by Ordinances No. 11 of 1931, No. 34 of 1935, No. 14 of 1937, No. 33 of 1952, No. 37 of 1952, and No. 4 of 1954. That Ordinance provides for the inspection of boilers, engines and other machinery and the re gulation, control and working of such machinery. It has however no provision relating to electric or portable machinery.

The Protection of Workers Ordinance (Chapter 152), amended by Ordinance No. 37 of 1952, provided for protection against disease and accidents of workers engaged in dangerous occupations, but it has never been implemented.

Neither of these two Ordinances is really suitable for present-day conditions. It is considered, therefore, that they should be repealed and the Factories Bill introduced to make working conditions in factories in Singapore conform with internationally recognised standards as laid down by the Inter-rational Labour Organisation.

It must be realised that in passing such a Bill we are looking after the interests of more than 120,000 persons, who represent about one-quarter of the total population who are gainfully employed. This Bill is primarily based on the United Kingdom legislation which follows closely the International Labour Organisation's convention and recommendations. It is necessary in a legislation of this magnitude to have some modification to suit local conditions. This has been done in consultation with the Singapore Labour Advisory Board, the City Council and representatives of consulting engineers.

Representatives of the armed services are in agreement with the proposed application of the provisions of the Bill to their establishment, as sub-clause (4) of clause 73 has been incorporated at their request.

The main purpose of this Bill is to set down the minimum standards of health, safety and welfare of workers in factories.

The operation of the Bill will involve Government in an expenditure of the order of $146,000 per annum of which $59,000 is largely made up of the salaries of extra staff which, together with the present staff in the Factories Inspectorate of the Labour Department, will be needed to implement the provisions of the Bill. To a large extent, however, this is offset by an anticipated revenue of $98,000 per annum.

The interpretation of the expression "factory" covers premises in which manual labour is used for a wide number of purposes. The remaining parts cover provisions for health, safety, welfare, administration and penalties for offences against any provisions of the Bill. The explanatory statements briefly cover the purposes of the various clauses.

As it is proposed, Sir, should this motion be carried, to submit the Bill to a Select Committee, it is hardly necessary for me to go through it in detail. I now move that the Bill be read a Second time.

Question proposed.

11.13 a.m.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Speaker. Sir, while we welcome the introduction of the Factories Bill, I must draw attention to the large number of premises or trades which will come within the definition of "factory". We must always remember that in Singapore there are niany small traders who have a little place where they earn a living for themselves and their families. In many such places you will probably find that the workmen consist of members of the family and maybe one or two more other workers. I refer to the premises as defined in clause 6 (1) (a). Sir, tailor shops and dress shops, whether they are big or small, come within this category. Sundries shops - they do a bit of packing of articles to be sold - will also come under this category. Even fishermen repairing their nets seem to come within this definition. If this Bill is going to cover such a wide range of trades, I believe it is not going to encourage people to expand their business or try to earn a living.

What people hate most, I think, especially the small people, is to have a health officer coming along and poking his nose into their houses and saying, "Look, you may be carrying on a business on your own, but this is under the definition of `factory' and you must not have this done here or that done there. Also, you do not have a sufficient amount of safeguards." These pinpricks should be removed. We all know that health, safety and welfare are very important factors, but I certainly feel that we must not overdo it. This is the East and it has to learn. We are adapting a great deal of things from the West, but until we progress to a certain standard where we can be compared with the West, it should be our duty to encourage the small businessmen to expand their business and help them along. If this Bill has this in view, I am for it, but if it is going to be another source of nuisance for the people of Singapore, then I think we will have to fight it out in the Select Comniittee to see that small businessmen are allowed to carry on their business without interference from the Nosy Parkers.

11.17 a.m.

Mr Tan Siak Kew (Nominated): Sir, on a broad principle, there is not very much in this Bill that we can quarrel with. It is properly the concern of Government that factory conditions are such that the workers' health and safety should be properly protected. But we must remember that Government is at the same time trying to encourage industry, and therefore care must be taken to see that the small industries especially are not too much affected, and that not much hardship is involved in the implementation of the regulations of the Bill. The cost to the small industries would increase if they have to observe these regulations, and there are some regulations where they cannot even afford to put up the capital in order to comply with them. I think it is clearly the intention of the Government to exempt certain small industries from these hardships.

I notice that clause 6 (4) says:

"No premises shall be deemed to be a factory in which less than six persons are employed ...".

Therefore, the figure that will come within the scope of this Bill is six. Imagine a small business employing six persons of mixed sexes - male and female. Under the Bill it will have to provide items like separate sanitation, washing facilities and so forth, as laid down in clauses 17 and 51. In a small business there might easily be no space for these facilities, and even if there were, these could easily cost quite a few thousand dollars in order to qualify for the meaning of "proper separate accommodation".

I think the solution is that until we can clear the major portion of our slums in Singapore, the average working place is still a better place from the health point of view than the congested cubicles in which the major portion of the workers have to live, and we certainly will be depriving the worker of a job if there is no common sense balance struck between the conditions existing here and the conditions as envisaged in the Bill.

I do not know whether the Government has taken a careful survey of the small industries and the number of people employed in each of them, but in order to avoid possible hardships to these industries which the Government is trying to encourage, I would strongly urge that the number to be exempted from the interpretation of "factory" should be 12 instead of 5.

11.22 a.m.

Mr Speaker: Mr Minister, in reply?

Mr Braga: Mr Speaker, Sir, the sole intention of this Bill is to protect cottage industries and the workers who work there. As was pointed out by the hon. Member who spoke last, clause 6 (4) says:

"No premises shall be deemed to be a factory in which less than six persons are employed or in which no mechanical power, steam boiler, steam container, steam receiver, cast iron underfired vulcaniser, air receiver, refrigerating plant pressure receiver, or gas plant is used, or in which no highly inflammable or noxious substance is manipulated, used or created."

That in itself indicates Government's intention to protect the small industries.

With regard to clause 17, Sir, which again was raised by the last speaker, it says:

"Sufficient and suitable sanitary conveniences for the persons employed in the factory shall be provided, . . . such conveniences shall afford proper separate accommodation for persons of each sex."

If the latter is objectionable, it can be taken up by the Select Committee. All the points which have been brought up by the two speakers will no doubt be considered by the Select Committee. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and seven Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection. (Mr Braga).