INDUSTRIAL EXPANSION (RELIEF FROM INCOME TAX) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

10.26 a.m.

The Minister for Commerce and Industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy): Sir, I do not have much to say on this Bill since it is just a consequential Bill to what has gone before on the Order Paper. I have, Sir, His Excellency the Governor's consent to proceed with this Bill, and I move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The object of this Bill, which can be regarded as being complementary to the Pioneer Industries (Relief from Income Tax) Bill, is to encourage and stimulate the expansion of existing industries in Singapore by means of the grant of special allowances for income tax purposes for a period of five years in respect of new capital expenditure incurred by an industry for expansion purposes.

Only approved enterprises manufacturing approved products are entitled to such tax concessions. Where the Minister for Commerce and Industry is satisfied that the increased manufacture of a product would be to the economic benefit of Singapore and generally in the public interest, he may declare by order that such a product is an approved product. Before making such an order, however, full account will be taken of all relevant considerations, including the existing capacity for manufacture in relation to the demand, and whether increased manufacture would utilise raw materials or skills available in Singapore.

The criteria to be applied for approved enterprise status to be accorded to a firm which intends to manufacture an approved product will be that it will incur new capital expenditure of not less than $10,000; it is adequately financed; it has adequate trained personnel in its employ or is able to obtain the services of such personnel; it has access to the necessary technical information; it is able to obtain adequate raw materials, it possesses or will possess the necessary factory; and it will be able substantially to increase its production capacity.

The discretion to grant or refuse approved status to a product or enterprise is vested in the Minister for Commerce and Industry.

The amount of the special income tax allowances will be in proportion to the new capital expenditure incurred by the approved enterprise during the period of three years from the coming into operation of the Bill. These allowances will be granted in addition to allowances which firms are already eligible to receive under the provisions of sections 16 to 22 of the Income Tax Ordinance.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

10.30 a.m.

Mr R. Jumabhoy (Telok Ayer): Mr Speaker, Sir, I had no intention to speak at all for the very simple reason that those who now bring up these Bills are not going to remain in or see this House again - and this will happen very soon! Although these Bills will be passed, the new Government will follow its own policy and will replace them, and do whatever they want in the light of their requirements. Therefore, there is no harm in passing these Bills. I could not see the reason for the Minister for Commerce and Industry bringing up my name when I have not talked at all on this, except in connection with travelling abroad.

Sir, I have seldom criticised the Ministry of Commerce and Industry all these three and a half years. The reason is obvious. If I have criticised, I have done so because of the deficiency of the Ministry as a whole and I will do so as long as they stay in office. The people will judge what this Ministry has done or what the other Ministries have done. The voters will know that while these people were in office, the people were made to pay higher taxation and higher prices on everything else so as to relieve the economy of the country.

10.34 a.m.

Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar): Mr Speaker, Sir, what I say now can apply to both Bills - the Pioneer Industries Bill and the Industrial Expansion Bill. Sir, the Minister for Commerce and Industry has given us a grim picture of rising unemployment and the difficulties which we shall have to face, and I think all of us must also realise, and in our own hearts must agree, that the picture for Singapore in the coming years is very grim. We all know that our entrepot trade is shrinking, our unemployment figure is rising and, added to that, we have a population of nearly 30,000 every year coming out to look for work.

Sir, while I support these Bills and every Bill which is designed to help and encourage industry and trade, I must say this: that the prerequisites for more factories or expansion in factories are peaceful conditions and security and only with these prerequisites can industries thrive and grow. Sir, there must be peace with neighbouring countries, peace in this country, that is, internal security, and peace in industry itself. That last item, Sir, is our biggest problem today - peace in industry.

We recognise the dignity of labour. After all, all of us in this country are the children of labourers. I dare to challenge anyone who claims that he was descended from a Mandarin who came to this country. We are not far removed from the labourer. We admire him, and we agree that he should be adequately remunerated for the work he does, and that he and his family should live in reasonable circumstances. But whatever we do in this country, we cannot isolate ourselves from the countries around us. Whatever conditions we have here we have to compare with the conditions prevailing in the countries around us. Whatever wages we get in this country, they must also be related to the regions around us.

If in this country there is industrial strife, I am afraid there will be no encouragement for people to put up capital for new industries or to expand existing ones. We in Singapore are in a very precarious position, because we live on trade and we must remain a free port if we are to exist at all. To be a free port, there are very few goods which we can stop from coming into Singapore, otherwise that action will endanger our entrepot trade. We can only do so when there is clear evidence of dumping to upset the economy of the country. Bearing that in mind, I would ask both capital and labour to realise that they must come to an understanding so that goods can be produced at prices competitive with those of goods that are being imported into Singapore. From what I can see, Sir, wishful thinking and Bills and Acts are not going to help us at all. What is going to help us is an understanding between capital and labour for them to meet round the table and work out between themselves how to run an industry and produce goods so that there can be some return for the man who invests his money and an adequate return for the man who produces the goods.

10.40 a.m.

Mr William Tan (Tiong Bahru): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Federation Government has had the foresight to introduce a Tax Holiday Bill for their industry in the Federation. After the introduction of the Bill by the Federation Government, the Singapore Government decided to introduce this Bill. I must congratulate the Federation Government, because it is a land of plenty. But the Singapore Government, after looking at and studying the advantages and disadvantages of the Bill introduced in the Federation, decided that we should introduce a similar Bill in Singapore.

We all know that Singapore is an island, and that we have no resources whatsoever. No matter how deep we dig, we will only find water. The Government should have introduced this Bill much earlier and not now. It should have been introduced three or four years ago, when the Government first took office, in order to protect the factories and, ultimately, to provide employment for the people of Singapore. Look at the unemployed today, Sir. The figure is mounting higher and higher, and what are we doing about it? I remember some time ago the Rubber Goods Manufacturing Companies appealed to the Minister for Commerce and Industry to prohibit the import of shoes into Singapore because of the dumping of cheaper-priced shoes. The Bata Employees Union also appealed to the Minister to introduce such legislation. But his reply was, "Singapore is a free port and we either live by it or die by it", and he said he was not going to do it.

Now we have this policy of protection from income tax. Sir, look at the answer the Minister gave this morning. He was talking about the new ruling of the City Council. He said the City Council is an elected body. What has the Minister done? Has he approached the City Council and pointed out the defects of the new ruling? Sir, any person who wants to build a factory, as I said yesterday, if the cost is $1 million, the City Council wants him to pay 50 per cent. Who will invest money to build a factory if he has to pay this sum, whereas previously he was not asked to pay? We have the case of tariffs also. The Federation Government levy a tariff on all goods manufactured in Singapore crossing the causeway. Shoe factories have closed down here. They have moved to the Federation where they know the Government will protect them and safeguard the manufactured goods. May I ask the Minister for Commerce and Industry how many shoe factories operate in Singapore today? How many of the people working in these shoe factories have been thrown out of work? How many of these families has he visited? Look at those people who crowd around the compounds of these shoe factories! Has he visited their dependants?

Mr Speaker: Order. We have had trouble, I think, with the loudspeakers, and we will have more trouble if the hon. Member will not modulate his voice.

Mr William Tan: No, Sir, he has not done that. It is up to him to do so, if he has the interest of the workers at heart. It is no use blaming the City Council or any other body. Why should the Minister waste our time by introducing this Bill in this House? The Minister is always fond of words, words and words. May I remind him that we want action, not words?

10.42 a.m.

Mr R. C. H. Lim (Nominated): Mr Speaker, Sir, we in Singapore will have to admit that to a very large extent we are at the mercy of the Federation Government. The Federation Government has thought fit to impose tariffs on certain manufactured goods of Singapore imported into the Federation. These tariffs have caused a certain number of our factories to close down in Singapore and to remove to the Federation. I refer in particular, Sir, to the 20 per cent tariff duty imposed on soap. This has resulted in a terrific loss to the soap manufacturers in Singapore. In addition to this tariff, Sir, the Federation has been able to export its soap into Singapore without tariff.

Talking about dumping, Sir, I understand one of the largest soap manufacturers in the Federation of Malaya is also doing some dumping here. For every 10 cases of soap sold, three cases are being given free, to the grave detriment of soap manufacturers in Singapore.

Now, Sir, what can we in Singapore do except to appeal to the Federation Government to be merciful, to allow his little brother at the foot of the Federation to be able to earn a living to support its increasing population! We cannot challenge the Federation. We must, therefore, appeal to the Federation, before the merger - if they will allow a merger - to give Singapore a chance to carry on to feed its own population.

10.45 a.m.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, Sir, the air of hysteria, the wild moaning and bewailing of some of the speakers that we heard this morning, are signs that time has run out on this Assembly, and more and more they become anxious for their immediate future. These last two Bills - the Pioneer Industries (Relief from Income Tax) Bill and the Industrial Expansion (Relief from Income Tax) Bill - illustrate one simple point. The Federation Government sets the pace, because that is the body of the Malayan economy, and there is very little of principle for us to debate. For the benefit of the Minister for Commerce and Industry (who is as agitated as all the other speakers this morning) as to why his issues have not aroused public attention and interest, I have this to say. However hard the Minister and all his officials work into the night, businessmen who invest money want to be sure that the conditions proferred them will be honoured. The one thing, which this Government cannot do, is to offer them., guarantees which are acceptable. Whatever the Minister for Commerce and Industry may think about his political future, people with a lot of money to invest have considerable doubts as to the continuity of the policy of the present Government.

The one single factor under our control, which will set at rest the uncertainty of those wanting to invest capital, is a firm decisive government with a clear-cut majority, and it is my hope that the next elections will produce such a government. A Government which in four years has not only changed its name and changed its component parts, but has from time to time shown signs of disintegrating, is not one that is likely to inspire confidence anywhere in the world.

As for the City Council, let me say this for the benefit of the Minister for Commerce and Industry. He must be aware that the business of the City Council is to run public utilities on an efficient basis. It is not the business of the City Council to subsidise housing estates, business, factories or other undertakings.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy rose -

Mr Speaker: On a point of elucidation?

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Yes, Sir.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister will have plenty of time to reply. The trouble with the Minister is that very often he cannot contain himself. If he would only contain himself and hear me out to the end, he might save himself the embarrassment of having made a rash statement.

Sir, it is the business of the City Council to sell electricity and run the public utilities on an economic basis. If the Government believes that in the interest of economic expansion it should subsidise industry, or should subsidise those who build housing estates, there is nothing to prevent the Minister from taking a large slice of money and paying it to the City Council for the electricity consumed by the interested parties concerned. If he thinks that that is justifiable, let him do so. But the business of the City Council is to sell electricity and run public utilities on an economic and husbandlike basis.

Sir, all the Bills, all the attractions, and all the bribes that the Government can hold out are only worth it, if the man for whom they are intended believes that the Government will be there to honour its pledges or its promises. I hope, when we reach the last item on today's Order Paper, we will set at rest the speculations that are taking place as to when we are going to have a new and fresh government; first, with the will to govern; secondly, to govern in the interests of the people; and thirdly, with the drive and ability which this Government has not evinced.

10.50 a.m.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have, in fact, spoken quite enough this morning, but after listening to the Member for Tanjong Pagar, to the statement that he made that only a strong government can solve all the problems facing Singapore, I cannot contain myself. Sir, the Member for Tanjong Pagar forgot what he had repeatedly said - that all problems must wait until the question of a merger with the Federation has been solved. And now he has the cheek to come and tell this Government that all these problems have arisen because the Government is weak and because it has changed its name.

Sir, coming from such an important political leader as the Member for Tanjong Pagar, this is a most harmful and irresponsible comment. This is going to mislead the people of Singapore into believing that if you vote for the P.A.P. at the next general elections, then all the questions - including unemployment - can be solved, because the P.A.P. can assure you of a very strong government - a government with purpose and principles. But the Member for Tanjong Pagar has forgotten what he has repeatedly said on the P.A.P.'s platform - that the only solution to our problems is linked with a merger with the Federation of Malaya.

Sir, I am happy to hear the Nominated Member, Mr R. C. H. Lim, point out certain facts in connection with the soap and shoe factories in Singapore. I raised a question about industrialisation this morning, but unfortunately the Minister for Commerce and Industry did not reply to it.

Sir, I support this Bill. I do not care if accusations are levelled at the Government that its period of office is short or long. What I wish the Government to do is to assure us if it is able, either openly or secretly, to arrive at an understanding with the Federation of Malaya to formulate a long-term Pan-Malayan economic or industrial development plan. If Malaya is more suitably placed to produce soap and shoes, all right, let it do so. If the Federation of Malaya does not want to set up certain industries, or it can do without them, it can let us have them. That is the sort of long-term policy to formulate. Without such a plan, a local investor who puts up money to set up a plastics factory may find, reading the papers a few months later, another plastics factory being established in the Federation. This Federation plastics factory may be much bigger than his own, it may even be supported by R.I.D.A. or the Colombo Plan. He may even find that since a Federation plastics factory has been set up, the Federation Government may impose a tariff on plastics entering its territory. In the face of all this, the local investor may either have to shut down his factory or remove to the Federation. The money spent on installation will have been wasted. Of course, labour can emigrate to the Federation since there is no passport or visa system yet in force. But money will have been wasted on installation. And all this happens because there is no Pan-Malayan industrial development plan. So I wish to repeat the question which I have earlier asked the Government: is there any possibility of this Government to reach an understanding with the Federation Government in the near future on the formulation of a Pan-Malayan industrial development plan? Let us be fair to the Federation. "All right, we agree you have to solve your unemployment problem. You can reserve certain items of goods for manufacture. But there are other items which you do not want, and which we can manufacture in Singapore. Let us have them." If that understanding is reached, a proper solution will have been achieved.

10.56 a.m.

Mr Lim Choon Mong (Serangoon): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill today has one aim, and that aim is to attract more capital into this country and so create more opportunities for employment. It is strange, Sir, that the tune which we hear now is very different from the one we have heard one or two years ago. Those who have been loudest in crying out, "Down with capital! Down with capitalism!", are now also joining in the song of asking capital to come into Singapore. They are asking capital to watch out as to who would be coming into power in the next elections. But all of them want capital to come in in order to help Singapore! I suppose as politicians live and learn, they become wiser and more responsible; but if we recollect what has been going on all these years, we can pinpoint where the trouble comes from and how the problems created have arisen.

However, coming back to this Bill, I would like the Minister to note that at present every undeveloped country is holding out a lot of promises to capital, giving it as attractive terms as possible in order to induce it to come and build factories here. I just want to make a comparison between Singapore and our immediate neighbour, the Federation of Malaya. Both countries hold out promises; both of them have tax holidays; both of them have all sorts of other things which give benefits to the manufacturers. But we must think from the investors' point of view. "Two territories asking us to invest our capital there. Where shall we go?" The investors will definitely weigh all the factors. Which territory is more beneficial to them? Factors favourable to the Federation are tariff protection, a large and expanding market and, most important of all, a stable political climate. What do we have in Singapore? We have easy means of transport, but that is about all. We are the focal point of communications. We are an entrepot. We have nothing more to offer them. I think the only thing which Singapore can offer those who want to come and invest their money here will be a sense of security. That can only be achieved with Government in the lead creating it and the people of Singapore following sanely. The people of Singapore must realise that the problem of unemployment is one that is facing them and not those people with money. We must see that our children have a means of earning their living when they grow up, and the only way of doing that is to see that sensible people will always hold the reins of government, not those who shout slogans to frighten away people who wish to come to give us jobs and to give us prosperity in the matter of business. I have always said that I am all for labour, and yet you may ask me, Sir, why I am saying this. I say this in order that we might give capital a little benefit. Yes, Sir, we must give capital some benefit in order that we might benefit ourselves. We are helping capitalists not because we want to help them just for the sake of helping them, but because by helping them, they will help the labourers. We want to give them a fair share of the profits so that we may have a fuller share of employment and the people of Singapore will have a chance of feeding themselves and not rely on social welfare benefits.

Sir, the next general election is about the most important in Singapore. By that election, the people of Singapore will know whether their rice bowl will be broken or whether it is going to be filled. If those who have proved themselves to be irresponsible and have chased away capital are going to come into office, there will be no future for the workers of Singapore. They will go unemployed and whatever money Government will have will be insufficient for social welfare benefits.

Let us look, Sir, at those other facilities that Singapore can offer. Previous speakers have spoken about the City Council. I personally feel, Sir, that if the Government is responsible for promoting business and bringing happiness and fuller employment to the country, then the local government should also be as responsible. If the Government wants to attract capital knowing that it is good for the people, I believe, Sir, that the local government too should realise that. They are just as responsible to the people and if they put obstacles in the way of progress, then I think they are not serving the people. They are only looking on the symptoms of a disease to effect a cure and not curing it by knowing what actually causes the disease. If a person is suffering from T.B. and the doctor says, "Take a cough mixture because you are coughing", then he is doing the patient a great deal of harm. But if the doctor knows that it is T.B. and then treats him for that so that the patient has a chance of recovering then he is doing his duty. If the doctor knows that a person is suffering from T.B. and yet gives him a cough mixture, that doctor ought to be struck off the register and not be allowed to practise! If the City Council want more employment for the people but yet obstruct opportunities for increasing employment, then they are not a responsible body and are not beneficial to the people!

Sir, coming back to this Bill, I certainly feel that it is one which shows that the Government today is aware of what it is doing and that it is striving to do its best in order to attract people to build factories here. However, I would like the Minister to note that although we want to attract new factories into this country, we must also help or protect our existing industries. Let us conserve what we have and at the same time strive to make new gains. Let us tell the Industrial Promotion Board, which has received the blessing of this Assembly, to go ahead with the job of helping locally established industries, or those industries in Singapore that need financial assistance. Let us help the shoe factories; let us help the beehoon factories; let us help all the existing factories that need a helping hand from the Minister for Commerce and Industry.

11.06 a.m.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy rose -

Mr Speaker: In reply?

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: In reply, Sir, I am glad that at this late stage I have been able to arouse some debate in this House on economic matters. Usually it is political matters which appeal to the public and the Gallery and which arouse a lot of debate. I am particularly glad, Sir, that I have been able to draw out the Member for Tanjong Pagar because up till now he has been a big question mark as far as economic matters are concerned.

Sir, before I come to the serious part of the debate, I just want to correct what might perhaps be a misapprehension in the mind of the Member for Telok Ayer, and that is I have no inclination to criticise or attack him. I was only giving a factual reply to a reportedly actual statement which I read in the Press on my return. Sir, I have great regard personally for the hon, gentleman - for obvious reasons - but not for his politics, and I would not want him to get the impression that I attacked him personally.

Sir, the Member for Tiong Bahru in his usual way tried to give the credit to somebody else rather than to the Government. He proclaimed loudly that he thanked the Federation for introducing its Pioneer Industry Bill first, and that we were mere stooges who followed the Federation. But in point of fact that is not correct because - memories are not short - it was in November 1956, in a statement on industrial policy which I made to this House (if I remember the date rightly, it was 11th November, 1956) that I announced amongst other things, that capital repatriation would be guaranteed, profit remittances would be guaranteed, and so on. I said then that the question of giving tax holidays to industry was being considered. Since income tax is a Pan-Malayan subject, we then approached the Federation. In fact, I can truthfully say that it was our move first, We approached the Federation first and put the idea to them. Whether or not they first originated the Bill is immaterial. The time difference is very small. I am not trying to say this to steal the credit from the Federation, but I am just trying to correct an impression which the hon. Member tried to create, and that is that we just followed the Federation like "stooges". In fact, it was our idea first.

The hon. Member then waxed and waned over the delay in introducing this Bill. I can only say, Sir, that the machinery of government does not run as quickly as an individual's can run. Because it is a Pan-Malayan subject, there had got to be consultations between the Federation and Singapore, and that of course has meant delay.

Then the hon. Member asked, "Has the Ministry approached the City Council on the electricity problem?" That was the stage, I think, Sir, where you indicated that the microphones might not be able to bear up with such a loud voice. Sir, on this question of the City Council, how does he know? Has he access to my files? How does he know that we have not approached the City Council? Has the Minister got to inform the Opposition of every action performed by him and his officials - that I have done this and my officials have done that? There are hundreds of actions that we have to take. Even matters which are beneficial directly to the trade and which have resulted in great profits, and matters where we try to smooth out difficulties that arise in our day-to-day transactions with Indonesia, are not heard of by the public at all, because those are matters of routine for us. If we start making a song and dance about it, you will have to sit here for days and days listening to a recital of what we have done in the Ministry.

Sir, the Member for Changi - I will come to the Member for Tanjong Pagar last because that is the juicy part of my reply -

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: A great man!

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: - has repeatedly tried to pin me down on one question, and that is whether we have approached the Federation on the question of consideration of economy on a Pan-Malayan basis. Sir, I wish I could give him all the inside information but I am afraid I cannot do that. It is not considered right for me to do that, but I can just tell him in one word, and that is, 'Yes' and that yes is pregnant with meaning.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Thank you.

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: We have made such approaches.

Now, Sir, I come to the Member for Tanjong Pagar. I am sorry, Sir, to see that he is not here and I do not like to talk behind a person's back, but I suppose he will be able to read what I have to say in the Hansard, or his hon, colleague will convey to him, I hope, without due embellishment, what I say and in its proper perspective.

The first thing, Sir, was that he launched into a tirade against me for attacking the City Council, but if he had only let me elucidate at that moment he would have saved his breath and would have been saved the embarrassment of showing to others that he had not followed the debate. In fact, I defended the City Council. Sir, the attack on the City Council came from the Member for Tiong Bahru. I defended the City Council and said that they are an elected body, that whatever they do is their business, and that the Government cannot do anything about it. However, as a result of that, Sir, he has given me an opening which I had not taken before in past debates, and that is that the P.A.P. have never come out with what their economic policy is or is going to be if they come into power; and if what is happening in the City Council during the last year is an indication of what their economic policies are going to be, then the P.A.P. Government will have no hope of attracting capital at all. Sir, in the past - I would not say the P.A.P. - but sources closely connected with the P.A.P. have been responsible for alleged anti-White and anti-capital activities - especially anti-White activities. Let me make it very clear, Sir, that I have no love for the British but the PAP, must recognise this fact and, in spite of running the risk of being unpopular, I am going to ask the House and the public: who are the capital exporting and importing countries today in the world? No Asian country has got surplus capital. Every Asian country, whether it is India, Ceylon, Indonesia, Malaya or any African country for that matter - Egypt and Ghana - is capital importing. They all need capital. The exporting countries are the European countries - the Whites - that is West Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and, to a certain extent, Australia and Canada. Now. Sir, I remember distinctly the day the Member for Tanjong Pagar turned round to Mr Sutherland, who represented British capital interests, and said, "You wait till we come into power." That, Sir, had a very great scaring effect on capital.

Mr Lim Cher Kheng: Good show!

Mr J. M. Jumabhoy: Now, Sir, I do not say that I love the British any more than the Member for Tanjong Pagar does, but I am in my right senses. Sir, I recognise where the benefits come from and where the exploitation is, and I will fight exploitation at every step, for example, my plan for a People's Cigarette Factory, but where they are beneficial to us, we want their co-operation and we must give them that co-operation without strings attached, because if you attach strings, there are other countries which are willing to give them that co-operation without strings attached. It is to our own advantage. The real reason why capital is scared and is not coming here is not because, as has been suggested that this Government is not stable and subject to permutations and combinations in its composition, but it is because of the P.A.P. The investing public are scared as to what will happen to them if the P.A.P. come into power. That is a big question mark which the Member for Tanjong Pagar has never thought fit in the interest of Singapore - never mind his Party, Singapore is a bigger interest - to answer and to inform the public what the P.A.P. attitude to foreign capital will be.

I can conceive of one Party being in power in two bodies - both in the Government and the City Council. If the City Council is only thinking of how to sell electricity at an economic price, without caring that the Government is trying to encourage industry, the policy of the P.A.P. in the City Council may come into conflict with the policy of the P.A.P. in the Government. The hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar has suggested that the City Council will only consider their job: and that is how to sell electricity at an economic price, and if their Government policy was, if they were in power, to encourage industries, then what would happen, Sir? The City Council would say, "Sorry, we will put the electricity rates up." The Government would tell the City Council, "Please do not, because we want to encourage industry." What would happen then? If their policy in the City Council is an indication of the shape of things to come in the economic field, the people will be scared. They are scared not because of the present government not being stable.

Sir, the Member also suggested that if the Government wished, it could subsidize industries. In fact, this Bill is for an indirect subsidy. That is exactly what we are doing. We are inviting capital. Government says, "Go ahead, come in for five years. You do not have to pay any taxes." That is an indirect subsidy.

I think, Sir, I have said enough on this subject, but I am glad that I have been able to excite the interest of Members on such subjects. I hope in future we will have more views from the Member for Tanjong Pagar on economic matters, especially his Party's policy on the economic front.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly.

Committee Wednesday, 14th January, 1959.