SINGAPORE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Order for Committee Stage read.

Bill considered in Committee.

2.31 p.m.

Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 4-

The Chief Secretary (Mr E. B. David): Sir, I beg to move,

In page 2, line 25, to leave out "(4)" and insert "(3) of section 13, subsection (3) of section 18 and subsection (5)".

Sir, the purpose of this amendment is, firstly, to rectify a drafting error in that the figure "4" should appear as figure "5", and, secondly, to include a reference to new sections 13 (3) in clause 7 and 18 (3) in clause 11, both of which contain provision for the names of persons disqualified to be expunged from the register of electors.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr David: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 2, line 28, to leave out "(7)" and insert "(8)".

This is a drafting amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 4, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 5 to 8 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 9-

Mr David: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 3, line 20, at end, to add- "(2) When a direction has been given by the Governor in Council under the preceding subsection compliance with the provisions of Ord. 23 Of 1957. this Ordinance relating to the register revision of the shall, notwithstanding the provisions of Ord. 23 the Local Government Elections of 1957. Ordinance, 1957, be deemed to be compliance with the provisions of that Ordinance and the register as so revised shall be deemed to be the combined register for the purposes of this Ordinance as well as of the Local Government Elections Ordinance. 1957.".

Sir, if this amendment were not made, an obligation would rest on the Returning Officer to prepare what are called Lists (A) and (B) in respect of the register for the Assembly Elections and of the register for the Local Government Elections. List (A) consists of those persons who have died or for any other reason have to be struck off the register, and List (B) consists of those persons who have become qualified to come on to the register since the previous year's register was prepared. Now that it has been agreed that there shall be a common franchise, this enables a combined register to be prepared for both sets of elections, and if an order is made to provide for a combined register, then it is clearly a saving in time and work to provide that there need only be one set of amendments to the previous register when the registers are revised annually.

This amendment, Sir, will also entail consequential amendments* in numbering the following subsections.

*Amendments to be made consequential on the addition of a new subsection (2) to new section 15A:

(1) In page 3, line 21, to leave out "(2)" and insert "(3)".

(2) In page 3, line 24, to leave out "(3)" and insert "(4)".

Amendment agreed to.

The Chairman: The consequential amendments will be made.

Mr David: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 3, line 29, at end, to add-Ord. 23 of "(5) No such combined register shall contain the 1957. name of any person who under the provisions of this Ordinance or of the Local Government Elections Ordinance, 1957, has for any reason become disqualified from having his name entered or retained in any register prepared under the provisions of either this Ordinance or of the Local Government Elections Ordinance. 1957.".".

Sir, the object of having a combined register instead of two registers will be one register for all electoral purposes, and since there is separate provision or will be separate provision under the Assembly Elections Ordinance and under the Local Government Ordinance for electors who fail to record their votes to be struck off the register, it follows that if this sanction has to be applied under either of the Ordinances, then the name will be expunged from the combined register and it must therefore be rejected for both purposes.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 10 to 16 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 17-

Mr David: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 5, line 28, after "inspect", to insert "and retain".

Sir, as I explained in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, it is proposed that the operation of this section, which provides for the Returning Officer to check which electors have failed to record their votes, should be implemented from the marked copies of the registers kept at the Polling Station. As the clause is at present drafted, it is not clear that the purpose is to enable these marked copies of the registers to be retained by the Returning Officer, so that if at any future date there is a dispute as to whether or not any particular elector recorded his vote, then the record will be available for scrutiny. That is the purpose of this amendment and of the following amendment+ which I shall shortly be moving.

+The amendment is as follows:-

In page 5, line 30, after "section", to insert "and of any inquiries

connected therewith".

The Chairman: The two amendments are connected, and if the Chief Secretary has anything further to say on the second amendment, perhaps this is the appropriate time.

Mr David: I have nothing further to say, Sir, on the second amendment which merely provides, as I stated just now, that the marked copies shall be available for any enquiries which may be connected with the question of whether or not any person has recorded his vote.

The Chairman: It has been moved as an amendment,

In page 5, line 28, after "inspect", to insert "and retain".

The Question is "That the words proposed to be inserted, be there inserted". Members may, as indicated, range over both the amendments in the debate.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, I should like to have an explanation. Those people who do not vote have their names in the copies of the register. It has happened in the past, and it may happen in the coming elections, that the names of many people who are dead and gone may still be found in the register. Now, there is a penalty imposed on those living people who do not come to vote, but how will the Returning Officer know that such a person has purposely not voted, or that he is dead, or has left this country?

Mr David: Sir, the explanation which the hon. Member for Telok Ayer requests is to be found in clause 17 of the Bill which sets out the procedure after the conclusion of the elections. The marked copy of the register will be passed to the Returning Officer, who prepares a list of the registered electors who have failed to record their votes. That list is then passed on to the Registration Officer who expunges the names of all those persons from the electoral register. In the case of persons who are already deceased, their names will remain expunged. In the case of those who are still alive, if they wish to have their names restored to the register, they are required to apply to the Registration Officer in writing and to furnish an explanation as to why they failed to record their votes. If the explanation is acceptable to the Registration Officer, their names will be restored without penalty. If the reason for failing to record the vote is not regarded as satisfactory, then a penalty of $5 is imposed.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment made: In page 5, line 30, after "section", to insert "and of any inquiries connected therewith" .-[Mr David].

Mr David: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 6, line 17, after "dollars.". to add Such names shall be restored to the register at the next ensuing revision of the same.".

Sir, the purpose of this amendment is a purely practical one. As I explained just now in reply to the hon. Member for Telok Ayer, it will be open to every person who has failed to record his vote to apply to the Registration Officer at any time by written application to have his name restored to the register. It would clearly be quite impracticable if, when a by-election was in progress, a large number of persons should apply at that time to the Registration Officer and have the right to have their names restored to the register. It would be quite impossible to make the necessary arrangements for the by-election. The purpose, therefore, of this amendment is to provide that these names shall be restored at the time when the election registers are next revised.

Amendment agreed to.

Clauses 17, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 18 to 22 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 23-

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

In page 8, line 35, to leave out from "family" to the end of line 37.

The clause, as amended, will stop at line 35 on the word "family". The words to be left out are "or borrowing a motor vehicle from a member of his family to be employed for that purpose."

Mr Speaker, Sir, if there is to be a prohibition on the use of motor cars as an inducement to get voters to the polls, then I feel it right and proper that the word "family" should be restricted, otherwise the provisions will be circumvented by people allegedly lending their motor cars to alleged members of a very big class of persons who are defined in sub-clause (3) as "family". Together with this amendment is the one* which I shall be moving shortly, in which "family" will be restricted to mean only a person's spouse, parents and children instead of, as at present, including grandparents, grandchildren, brothers and sisters. I do not think I need further say anything as to the purpose of the amendment. This is an agreed amendment. The intention was agreed. The draft has also been agreed between the Attorney-General and myself.

*The amendment is as follows:-

In page 8, lines 40 to 42, to leave out ", grandparents, children, grandchildren, brothers and sisters" and insert "and children".

The Chairman: The hon. Member has indicated that his first amendment and the second amendment are connected, and if the hon. Member has anything further to say on the second amendment he may do so now.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: The only further point I would like to make is that whilst the original draft was based on the English Representation of the People's Act, I consider that in the context of the society that we have, the word "family" becomes so elastic and so omnibus a phrase that almost anybody is a member of someone's family. If we are to prevent the wholesale flouting of the laws regarding transport, then the word "family" must be restricted to the immediate family, which is really the purport of the whole amendment.

The Chairman: It has been moved as an amendment, in page 8, line 35, to leave out from "family" to the end of line 37. The Question is, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out." As indicated, hon. Members may be permitted to range over the next amendment, in page 8, lines 40 to 42, to leave out ", grandparents, children, grandchildren, brothers and sisters" and insert "and children".

The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, the wording of this particular subsection is taken from the wording adopted by this Assembly when it considered the Report of the amendment to the Local Government Elections Ordinance. That amendment was as a result of discussion in Select Committee on which the hon. Member was represented. It would seem, Sir, that after further consideration, the hon. Member now feels that the tightening up of this particular section is in the best interest of the elections, and in this I thoroughly agree with him, and the Government accepts the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further amendment made: In page 8, lines 40 to 42, to leave out ", grandparents, children, grandchildren, brothers and sisters" and insert "and children". -[Mr Lee Kuan Yew].

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

In page 8, line 42, at end, to add-

"(4) Between the hours of 8.00 am and 8.00 p.m. on polling day no person shall park a motor vehicle within one hundred yards of any polling station.

(5) Any person who contravenes the provisions of subsection (4) of this section shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars.

(6) A police officer in uniform may, save as hereinafter provided, arrest without warrant any person in charge of or driving a motor vehicle, who has committed or is suspected of having committed an offence under this section.

(7) The power of arrest under the preceding subsection shall not be exercised if either-

(a) such person on the demand of the police officer produces his driving licence so as to enable such officer to ascertain the name and address of the holder of the licence, the date of issue and the authority by which it was issued; or

(b) such person, not being a paid driver or the driver of a motor vehicle used for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward or for the carriage of goods, gives such officer his name and a place of address within the Colony:

Provided that if such officer has reason to suspect that a name or address so ascertained or given is false he may, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this subsection provided, exercise the power of arrest under the preceding subsection.".".

Sir, this somewhat comprehensive provision is, in short, designed to ensure that the entrance to any polling station shall not be blocked or cluttered up by motor vehicles. This is a new provision. The reason for its introduction is that in past elections we found that polling stations were invariably obstructed by motor vehicles parked in front of the polling station. Although we shall not be having competition to provide free transport for the voters, nevertheless, it is quite possible that people who own cars will still park their cars outside polling stations, thus causing general congestion. I had originally drafted the amendment by way of reference to the Road Traffic Rules so that to park a motor car within 100 yards of the polling station, shall be an offence within the Road Traffic Rules, like parking a motor car within so many feet of a fire hydrant, so many feet of a bus stop, or so many feet of the corner of a street. But I am told by the Attorney-General that he considered the Road Traffic Rules a highly inelegant piece of subsidiary legislation, and he intends, in the not too distant future, to dispose of it. That being the case, he has helped to draft this very comprehensive, elaborate, but I am sure equally effective, series of clauses to make it possible to impose a penalty if anybody should breach this provision. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Sir Ewen Fergusson: Sir, may I ask this question? It appears that if one parks within 99½ yards from a polling station, one creates an offence for which one can be arrested. Who is going to be responsible for carefully delineating this boundary of 100 yards?

Mr Shanks: Mr Speaker, Sir, the same persons who are responsible for measuring 30 yards from a fire hydrant, for a motorist who parks on a road which contains a fire hydrant.

Sir, may I make one comment on what the mover of these amendments has said with regard to the drafting? One of my objections to the draft originally prepared was that it was putting an offence into this law by a cross-reference to another law. It is, I think, undesirable that we should seek to amend laws by references made in other pieces of legislation. When a piece of legislation is unsatisfactory or requires amplification or an amendment, that piece of legislation should ordinarily be itself amended. It is only confusing to do it by, as it were, a cross-reference.

Mr David: Sir, I wish only to say one thing in connection with the amendment. It does impose a further duty on the police force. In connection with the remarks made by Sir Ewen Fergusson, I would wish to reiterate what I said in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, that the success or otherwise of these provisions which are being made will depend on the voluntary observance by the people concerned. We cannot expect the police force who have only limited numbers to cover all their duties and to cope with very substantial or numerous breaches of these different provisions which we are making under this Ordinance.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Regarding the point raised by Sir Ewen Fergusson, Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not see any difficulty arising on that score. It is a common sight along any street to find a "No Parking" sign with a blue background, a white "P", and a red line across it meaning no parking, and an arrow indicating "Starting from this point". I can trust the police force to measure accurately and fairly. All that they really need do is to take two such posts and place them outside a polling station.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, the Ordinance may be defective and it is the Government's duty to put it right. But in the meantime, there is no reason why we should not accept this amendment specially for the purposes of this election. As such, I support this amendment.

Sir, the Hon. Chief Secretary says that it will be an additional duty on the police force. One should not forget that an election is held once in four years and this will be the most important election so far. Every precaution should be taken to see that no one abuses the loopholes that are left, and the purpose of this amendment is to plug those loopholes in the cases of motorists who possibly and intentionally try to obstruct roads and so on.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, I am not saying that this amendment is no good. But what I want is a point of clarification. I do believe that there are car owners who do live within a radius of 100 miles - [Interruption]

I am so sorry. It is 100 yards. If such owners do normally park their cars within 100 yards of a polling station, it may be just in front of their houses. Are we to prohibit, or are the police or some authority to see that they should take their cars away from the frontage of their houses? If this is so, then should it be covered in this amendment or not? And if it is not covered in this amendment, I think it is subject to abuse, because car owners can claim that they have the right in that they do pay road taxes to have their cars parked in front of their houses. I would like this to be clarified.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I was of the fond opinion that when I dealt with the Chief Minister, I dealt with a person who had the necessary credentials to speak on behalf of the S.P.A. I am sorry to learn today that he did not speak on behalf of at least one member of the S.P.A.!

Sir, I am quite sure that the leader of the S.P.A., namely the Hon. the Chief Minister, is a man who is quite circumspect in these matters, and has considered the possibility of inconvenience to people who have motor cars and who happen to park them continually outside their houses, which may be within 100 yards of a polling station.

All these things have been properly considered, on one occasion not only by the President of the S.P.A. - or is it the Chairman? - but also by another accredited leader who has just entered this House. I should imagine that if he finds the Chief Minister an unworthy member of his Party he should at least accept the Member for Serangoon a person worthy to represent him at these talks.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I am afraid that the Member for Tanjong Pagar only consulted the Chief Minister and it is so unfortunate that I am not the Chief Minister!

My question arose out of the question raised by Sir Ewen Fergusson and it struck me that such an important issue should also be clarified. I am rather surprised that a man like the Member for Tanjong Pagar, who has all the legal training behind him, is now anxious to know that we should speak with one voice with the Chief Minister. If I were the Chief Minister and the hon. Member had consulted me, I think I would not have brought up this point. A Member has the right to bring up any question in this Assembly on the spur of the moment. I am surprised that the Member for Tanjong Pagar himself is not aware of it.

The Chief Minister: It would appear, Sir, from what the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar said in reply to the hon. Member for Queenstown, that whenever he moves an amendment to any Government motion or any Government Bill, he would like to seek the assistance of the Chief Minister to help him to paddle it through. And when any questions, either embarrassing or not, are asked, it will have to be the Chief Minister who will have to come to his rescue.

Sir, while it is true that there have been consultations with me and my Ministerial colleagues on the amendments proposed by the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar, we did not take into consideration the point raised by the hon. Member for Queenstown. A question has been asked of him. This is his amendment and no doubt he has a reply to the point raised.

I have, Sir, given further thought to the amendment proposed and I have an amendment to propose to the amendment. This amendment which I am going to move seeks to give special consideration to the aged, the sick and the infirm to have motor cars bring them right up to the gate of the polling station.

I said, Sir, during the Second Reading of this Bill last month, that the Bill incorporates everything that was agreed in the amendments to the Local Government Elections Ordinance and that the amendments proposed in that Ordinance were as a result of the deliberations in the Select Committee on which the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar sat as a Member. It would appear, Sir, that he has had further thoughts on the matter and felt that further improvements could be made - hence the proposed amendment. I agree with him that his second thoughts now appear to be better and, apart from the amendment which I am going to propose to his amendment, Government supports his motion.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, elaborating on the Chief Minister's remarks, may I use the very words used by the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar - that we do not want to be rubber-stamped in this House? It was he who said this morning that anyone who moves any motion in this House should be able to clarify it. This amendment is moved by the Member for Tanjong Pagar and it is his duty and responsibility to answer questions raised by any Member in this House.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Having been terrorised into making a defence of myself, may I say, with temerity, that the Member for Queenstown has every right to ask anybody any question? But I had assumed that the S.P.A. is a properly organised Party and that the leader speaks on behalf of his Party.

When I went to the series of meetings with the leaders of other Parties, I thought I was dealing with plenipotentiaries. It now appears that I was dealing with people who are playing marbles, and are incapable of pledging their Party to anything.

However, I would like to explain for the benefit of the Member for Queenstown that there was nothing that he had raised which had not been carefully considered by his able leader, the Member for Havelock. He had considered all the points, including the one raised by the Member for Queenstown, and had decided that my second thought - as he had chosen to call it - is, to say the least, an improvement on the first draft of the Government. But if the Member for Queenstown would like to know why we did not raise the matter earlier, I will tell him that I never believed that there were going to be local government elections within the lifetime of this Government, and that I saw no reason why we should debate things which we were not going to use.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Arising from the remarks of the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar that he thought he was dealing with a cohesive Party-

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Coherent Party!

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Coherent then. I would like to say this - that at least it indicates that we are a democratic Party; that the members of this Party are allowed to ask questions, especially when there are points to be elucidated. We are not a Party whose members suffer dictation and who cannot raise any points whatever.

The Chief Minister: It seems, Sir, that we are having a preview of the elections that are to come! The hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar said the S.P.A. is not a cohesive organisation. I do not know what I should say of the P.A.P., Sir. When discussing the Local Government Elections (Amendment) Bill, they had certain ideas which they put forward and which were adopted. And then whatever cohesion they may have had at that time was no longer cohesive last month, and the poor Member for Tanjong Pagar had to stand up and propose further amendments to improve on what he thought was already very good! He now states that he did nothing. He did not feel it was necessary for him to strain himself over the question of the amendments to the Local Government Elections Ordinance, although he knew full well that whatever amendments were proposed and accepted to that Ordinance would be incorporated in this Bill. He knew it was to be so. He did sit on the Select Committee. He did help to bring about considerable improvements to the Local Government Elections (Amendment) Bill.

Now he has given the matter further thought. He feels that further improvements should be made. And because we are prepared to concede that there could be further improvements, it would now appear that he is the only one who knows how to make proposals to tighten up the Elections Ordinance so that the elections in May could be clean.

Sir, I have said I propose to move an amendment to his amendment. Shall I do it now?

The Chairman: By all means.

Amendment handed in.

3.15 p.m.

The Chairman: The amendment as it stands is in order. There is a point which I shall raise when copies are handed round.

Copies of the amendment distributed to hon. Members.

The Chairman: Before the Chief Minister moves, I would like to indicate the point which is in my mind. The original amendment speaks of "a motor vehicle". The prohibition is against a motor vehicle parking within one hundred yards of any polling station. The Chief Minister's amendment has reference only to "a vehicle". Is the amendment meant to refer to "a motor vehicle"?

The Chief Minister: Yes, Sir.

The Chairman: Perhaps the word "motor" should be inserted before the word "vehicle"?

The Chief Minister: Yes.

The Chairman: I trust that hon. Members have followed that.

The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

In line 3, after "station", to add "other than a motor vehicle used for the conveyance of any sick, infirm or disabled person for such time as is reasonably necessary to enable such person to cast his vote".

Sir, as compulsory voting will be introduced during the general elections, it is felt that sick, infirm and disabled persons should be given special sympathetic consideration and be allowed to ride in a motor vehicle right up to the gate of the polling station.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I am gratified that the Chief Minister admits that his Government also continues to keep thinking, and to arrive at second thoughts which add to the general effectiveness of the provisions that he has proposed. I have no objection to this clause being added, but I would like to remind him that when his draftsmen first prepared the original draft, they had altogether forgotten about the sick, infirm and disabled or other such unfortunate people. I would like to add this for the benefit of his colleague, the Minister for Commerce and Industry, who is very fond of coming out with bright first ideas. Bright ideas can always do with some polishing up.

Mr Shanks: It may be that the Member for Tanjong Pagar has forgotten that I mentioned to him the sick, the aged and the infirm before his amendment was drafted.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Not to my recollection.

Mr Francis Thomas: I wonder whether I can seek clarification on the amendment to the amendment. I presume that a motor vehicle conveying a sick person would be the motor vehicle of a wife driving her husband or her child, or something like that. It does not imply that I can take a sick person in my car and say, "I am now authorised by this section." I would like to be quite clear that it does not vary the law and that it only permits a further thing for the sick. It does not give them special rights which are not otherwise allowed.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew rose-

The Chairman: Is the Member for Tanjong Pagar explaining for the Chief Minister?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I am always ready to oblige him. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Attorney-General pointed out to me, after I had proposed my amendment, that in fact I had left out the sick, the infirm and the disabled. I then pointed out to him that in his original draft be never had the sick, the infirm and the disabled. So now he is carrying out a partial amendment in that the sick, the infirm and the disabled, whose family owns a car, can go to a polling station, park within a hundred yards of a polling station, go in and vote, and then come back and sit in the car. As the hon. Mr Francis Thomas has pointed out, it does not include disabled people whose families do not own cars. They presumably, will stay on the register because they have a good excuse.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, it is so amusing for us on this side of the House to see a good fight between friends who have been three years together - ex-Labour Front Members, now S.P.A. and the P.A.P.! It is very amusing, Sir, but on this point about those who do not own cars and because they are sick and infirm, they can remain in the house, but they would like to vote. If this provision is not included, I think a proviso may be added to the end of this amendment to the amendment - "for those who own a car". This is meant for those who own a car and not others.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I point out to the Member for Telok Ayer that it is not a change of mind or a change of attitude? This is a piece of legislation which will govern a very important election. The Member for Tanjong Pagar agreed at the All-Party meeting on the Local Government elections. It was he who agreed to all those things. It never came into his mind that he should move all these amendments. It is surprising that, after this new Bill has come out, he has thought it necessary to move this amendment to suit the conditions of the coming elections. It is an afterthought, and I think everyone should have afterthoughts. It was as a result of his afterthought that this amendment came about and it is my afterthought that I should make the intention clear.

The Chairman: We are on the amendment of the Chief Minister at the moment. If there is no further comment, I will put the Question on the amendment to the amendment.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: I have just proposed that these words be added.

The Chairman: If the hon. Member has an amendment to the amendment to the amendment, will he put it in writing?

Mr R. Jumabhoy: My suggestion is whether these words can be added - "for those who own a car" - if the Chief Minister will think over it?

The Chairman: If the hon. Member wishes to pursue that, he must put it down in writing.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Sir, I would like to do that if you will permit me some time.

The Chairman: Yes. Perhaps the Clerk will be of some assistance. If the Member for Telok Ayer would like the assistance of the Clerk at the Table, I am sure that the Clerk at the Table will assist him.

Mr R. Jumabhoy: I am advised that the Chief Minister, the Attorney General and the Member for Tanjong Pagar have discussed this point and it is not feasible to include it. So I do not think that I should do anything more about it.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: What a change of attitude!

Mr R. Jumabhoy: Not from one side of the House to the other side, and then over again to the same side!

The Chairman: Order. It is getting to be quite friendly banter!

Amendment to the amendment agreed to.

The Chairman: Now the original amendment, as amended, is before the House.

Mr Francis Thomas: I do not think that the Member for Queenstown proposed any amendment to the amendment, but I would like to say a word about his suggestion that a man, who has a motor car and also has a house with a frontage on a public road within a hundred yards of a polling station, should have the right to park his car even though the public are not allowed to. If I understand him rightly, his view is that if a man owns a house, it entitles him thereby to the use of the road for parking his car. This seems to me to be totally wrong; I believe, in law and certainly in common sense; and I hope that no illusion will be spread that his suggestion is correct.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Sir, I am a bit bewildered now as to the general tenor of the remarks. I would like to point out that there are certain streets in town where people live, and they have traffic signs which say "No parking on even days". If you happen to live on that side of the street and you own a car, you park there on the odd days. On the even days, if you park your car there, you get a ticket, and the fine goes up for every even day that the car is left there. Similarly, if you happen to live within a hundred yards of a polling station, between the hours of 8.00 am, and 8.00 p.m., you betake yourself and your car to some other more convenient place of abode.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am much obliged for the answer given by the Member for Tanjong Pagar. As a legal man, he should have given me that explanation when I asked for it, rather than now after everyone has told him so.

Original Amendment, as amended, agreed to.

Question proposed, "That clause 23, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Mr William Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to comment on clause 23 - the use of motor vehicles at elections.

Hon. Members in this House are aware that over 5,000 people of Tiong Bahru district have shifted to Kallang. They are there now because of the big fire in Kampong Tiong Bahru on 13th February, 1959, and I am quite sure that about 50 per cent of these 5,000 people now living in Kallang are voters in my area. I wonder whether the Government will consider setting up a polling station in order that these people can cast their votes in Kallang, instead of coming down to the Tiong Bahru district - a distance of several miles. The Chief Minister was kind enough to say that motor vehicles used for the conveyance of the sick, infirm or disabled would be allowed to park in front of polling stations, and I am quite sure that among this large number of voters, he will give consideration to the fact there may be quite a number of sick and infirm persons. I would strongly urge that Government either set up a polling station in Kallang itself, where there are thousands of workers, or allow these people to go to the district of Tiong Bahru in vehicles provided by Government.

3.30 p.m.

Mr David: Sir, I am grateful to the hon. Member for Tiong Bahru for drawing Government's attention to the difficulties which will be occasioned to this particular section of the population, and I do give him an undertaking that we will look into the most practical way of trying to assist them within the obligations of the legislation.

Mr William Tan: Thank you.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: May I just read an excerpt from the Petir editorial entitled "Pre-election Exercise". I think it bears on this point. In the editorial's speculation as to the date of the elections, it has this to say:

"That polling day would not be until late May is corroborated by a Government statement on the 17th February that the Tiong Bahru fire victims should be rehoused in new low-cost housing on the burnt-out site in three months' time, i.e. 17th May. We can be sure pleasure - loving and indolent Ministers are rehousing the fire victims in record time for reasons not unconnected with the elections. If the fireworks of the great Trade Fair had not turned out to expectations, why not take advantage of the fireworks at Kampong Tiong Bahru? The Chief Minister turned out, and acted as an amateur fire-fighter, and as was intended, pictures of this heroic feat -".

The Chairman: Order. That article contains several unparliamentary expressions, and I do not think the honourable Member is justified in hiding behind an article of that nature which uses unparliamentary expressions, that is to say, offensive remarks about Members of this Assembly. Therefore, I would suggest that if he is reading extracts from that paper, he should leave out the unparliamentary expressions.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: On another point of order, Sir. May I know whether Petir is a recognized paper of this Assembly or not? If it is not recognized, then how could he quote extracts from that paper?

The Chairman: It is not a point of order on which I can rule. It is, in fact, not a point of order. It is a paper which is in circulation, I take it, in Singapore. The only thing I was going to ask the Member for Tanjong Pagar is for him to give us the date of that paper.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Coming from a man who has the impudence to -

The Chairman: Order. I think I have ruled on that point, and I do not think the hon. Member should add any further comments.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Very well, Mr Speaker, Sir, but nevertheless since the Week-Ender has been quoted in this House by the hon. Member for Queenstown, I should think it extremely unwise for him to challenge the political propriety of a very sedate, and, if I may say so, an extremely worthy political tract like the Petir. If I may continue without the elegances which are contained in this piece it says here:

"...as was intended, pictures of this heroic feat of the Chief Minister carrying a bucket of water to squash out a fire threatening the lives of our people was dutifully displayed on the newspapers the following day. We find it hard to believe that the target date of three months for rehousing the victims will be after polling. Already unprecedented S.P.A. Government generosity has overwhelmed the fire victims. Free S.I.T, housing, until rehoused in three months. Some cynical poor living in other miserable kampongs, many worse than Kampong Tiong Bahru, are saying that it is better to burn out the kampongs and get the S.P.A. to repeat their philanthropic schemes at public expense. But alas! the general election comes but once in five years. And an S.P.A. Government but once in a lifetime."

Sir, I can assure the Member for Tiong Bahru that if the Government had the doers who could equal the people who did the thinking, and who could match the will of the thinkers, then low-cost housing would be ready before polling day. The voters will be brought back there before polling day, and the Member for Tiong Bahru can rest assured that the purpose is not to get them to vote for the present Member for Tiong Bahru.

The Chief Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is indeed very healthy to see these friendly exchanges across the Table during the last sittings of the life of this Assembly. The hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar felt it necessary to quote from his Petir, which I think is "The Lightning", and one does know the destruction of the lightning. And he went to the extent of suggesting that it is because it is nearing election time that we did all those things for propaganda. May I respectfully submit to the hon. Member, Sir, that I was in politics years and years ago, and whatever I did, I did it from my heart, without any desire whatever to seek publicity; unlike certain leaders of the P.A.P.

If I may quote the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar, I need not have to take along with me special photographer to snap pictures and to see that the photographs taken at the scene of the devastation are properly published in the local newspapers. I did not know there was going to be pictures taken, or that I asked for pictures to be taken. I have been working all my life helping people whenever help was needed. In fact, it is true, Sir, that it is very difficult for leaders of the P.A.P. to believe that there are sincere people who help those in distress out of their own heart, instead of seeking political credit for everything that they do.

Now they say the fact that we are going to build houses in three months' time is a political stunt on the part of the S.P.A. If we do not do a thing, they will say that this Government is rotten; it does not look after the interests of the poor. And, "If your houses get burnt, well, you have to look out! You have a very rotten Government which does not have sympathy for your sufferings." I believe, Sir, even on the very day of the fire, while it was still raging, there was a P.A.P. propaganda machine out there saying that the Government was the cause of the fire! The Government was the cause of the fire! Sir, I do not play that kind of politics. Ten years have I served the people, and I will keep on serving clean, without having anything to do with politics. I do not have to try and tell hawkers that we love them, although -

The Chairman: Order. The Chief Minister is wandering very, very far away from parking cars!

The Chief Minister: With due respect, Sir, you have allowed the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar to depart from the subject and bring in the case of the fire victims just to explain the use of cars on polling day. I thought that in reply it was necessary for me too to say that I did not have to go to the extent of telling hawkers that I love them, and that I would not arrest them anymore, although they were arrested in their thousands only a few months ago. I do not have to do that, Sir.

I think we have departed from the real purpose of this debate. It is nice to have these friendly exchanges! I welcome them, and I hope these familiar exchanges can keep on going until 4 p.m. this afternoon!

Mr William Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am really surprised at the remarks made by the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar, that the flats being built or going to be built by the Government on the site of the fire in Kampong Tiong Bahru will be ready in three months; but I am quite sure that within three months the Government will not be able to build these flats, especially when they are multi-storey flats, as said by the Hon. the Chief Minister. So it is my duty, as the people's representative in Tiong Bahru, to see that these people, now living in Kallang, are not being inconvenienced.

We either set up polling stations in Kallang for them or take them down to their original polling districts. Whether they vote for me or for anybody else is none of the business of the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar. My concern is that it is our duty and I so urge the Government not to inconvenience these few thousand voters, some of whom are old men and women and who may be sick or infirm, by imposing compulsory voting and restricting the use of vehicles, and so on and so forth. I feel that it is our duty and I, as the elected representative in Tiong Bahru, feel it is my duty to draw the attention of the Government to the lack of polling stations.

Mr David: Sir, I have already given an undertaking to the hon. Member for Tiong Bahru, which I willingly reiterate since he has felt it necessary to stress the point again, that we will look into what is practicable in order to assist this particular section of the population to record their votes.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause 23, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 24 to 26 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 27-

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

In page 11, line 14, at end, to add- "; or

(f) open or maintain, for the purpose of any activity directed towards promoting or procuring the election of a candidate at any election, any office in any room, building or any place whatsoever, whether open or enclosed, within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station on polling day.".

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is provision in the Ordinance to prevent canvassing on polling day, and one of the loopholes which was left open was the use of election offices. No election office is prohibited, and it may well be that the practice in the past, of using or requiring election offices as near as possible to polling stations, would spread like a rash if the purpose is to try to overcome or circumvent the provision against canvassing on polling day. Therefore, I move this amendment to prevent any election office from being used within 200 yards of a polling station. The present provision without this amendment only prohibits canvassing, which means activity in a public place. This will close the last of the little gaps in the "no canvassing" or "no activity" directed to procure votes on polling day.

Question proposed.

3.45 p.m.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, the afterthoughts of the Member for Tanjong Pagar have prompted me to move this amendment. The wording itself sounds very good, but I am surprised that, with all his legal background and training, and although he has admitted himself that prohibition of canvassing would come in, he has framed the amendment in this way. The original wording of the clause itself reads:

"73A.-(1) No person shall on polling day-

(a) by word, message, writing or in any other manner endeavour to persuade any person to give or dissuade any person from giving his vote at an election;

(b) visit an elector at his home or place of work for any purpose in connection with an election." I will omit the other part. I will come now to 73B.-(1) :

"No person shall-

(a) endeavour to establish the identity of any person entering a polling station; or

(b) check the name of any person entering a polling station on any list at the approach to a polling station; or

(c) anywhere place any desk or table or establish any office or booth for the purpose of recording particulars of voters; or

(d) wait outside any polling station on polling day, except for the purpose of gaining entry to the polling station to cast his vote; or

(e) loiter in any street or public place within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station on polling day."

To say that you cannot open any office within a radius of two hundred yards - I cannot see what purpose that might have. It does not allow anybody to establish any office or even place a desk anywhere at all. What is the purpose, and what is the idea of this amendment then, Sir? The hon. Member has got his legal training in a Colonial country and should have been able to frame these amendment in the way in which he has been taught. Not to allow anybody to place a desk or establish any office near a polling station! He has even gone to the extent of restricting the interpretation of "family" and he does not allow grandchildren, or even -

The Chairman: Order. Let us not wander over matters which are not before the Assembly. We have finished with the amendment on "family". We should now consider this particular amendment which is before the House.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, I was only trying to indicate and then clarify how this amendment comes in. Now, canvassing is not allowed. You cannot even do anything at all. Sir, how could you then allow an office outside 200 yards of a polling station? Would not that be subject to abuse? If you can establish an office outside 200 yards of a polling station, what is there to stop a voter going to that office (or that desk) and obtain particulars of his name on the electoral roll and, at the same time, to be canvassed by the people who sit at that desk to vote for a certain Party? With all my experience in past elections, the P.A.P. has swarmed over all polling stations by establishing offices just in front of the polling stations. An amendment is now moved that an office should not be within 200 yards. It will be outside the 200 yards. What is there to prevent canvassing then? We can not do anything at all. So why cannot we say that we cannot even establish an office outside the 200 yards limit, Sir? May I then officially move,

That the words "in Singapore" be inserted between the word "whatsoever" and ", whether" and to delete the words "within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station".

The Chairman: May I have the amendment?

Amendment handed in.

The Chairman: The hon. Member's amendment appears to be to leave out, in line 4, the words ", whether open or enclosed, within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station on polling day", and there to insert "in Singapore".

Mr Lee Choon Eng: If it pleases you, Sir, I think I am prepared to omit the words "in Singapore". The Bill is the Singapore Legislative Assembly Elections (Amendment) Bill, and whether the words "in Singapore" are there or not, it does not matter much.

The Chairman: I did not indicate that the words "in Singapore" should be omitted. The words "in Singapore" should be inserted.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: To be inserted? I am sorry, Sir, I am much obliged and I am prepared to accept your advice.

The Chairman: Has the hon. Member completed what he has to say on his proposed amendment?

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Yes, Sir.

The Chairman: The original amendment is to add a paragraph (f) reading:

"Open or maintain, for the purpose of any activity directed towards promoting or procuring the election of a candidate at any election, any office in any room, building or any place whatsoever, whether open or enclosed, within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station on polling day."

The amendment to be moved is to leave out, in line 4, the words ", whether open or enclosed, within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station on polling day" and there to insert "in Singapore" so that the paragraph would then read:

"Open or maintain, for the purpose of any activity directed towards promoting or procuring the election of a candidate at any election, any office in any room, building or any place whatsoever in Singapore."

Mr Lee Choon Eng: "in Singapore", and stop at that.

The Chairman: That is my understanding of the amendment.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: What about the words "on polling day", Sir, because I am trying to lay emphasis on polling day rather than on any other day during the period between Nomination day and the election?

The Chairman: To insert " in Singapore on polling day", is that it?

Mr Lee Choon Eng: What about the words "open or enclosed"?

The Chairman: I take it that if a building is not to be erected, then whether it is open or enclosed makes no difference. If the hon. Member is happier to have it, we will put it like this: "in Singapore, whether open or enclosed, on polling day". Can I then indicate what my understanding of the amendment is? The amendment is to leave out the words ", whether open or enclosed, within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station on polling day", and there to insert "in Singapore, whether open or enclosed, on polling day". The original amendment is as it appears in the Supplementary Order Paper. It has been proposed as an amendment to that amendment to leave out ", whether open or enclosed, within a radius of two hundred yards of any polling station on polling day", and there to insert "in Singapore, whether open or enclosed, on polling day"; so that the paragraph will read, "open or maintain, for the purpose of any activity directed towards promoting or procuring the election of a candidate at any election, any office in any room, building or any place whatsoever in Singapore, whether open or enclosed, on polling day."

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Yes.

The Chairman: The question is, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out."

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: The Member for Queenstown has what is popularly called "a nimble mind". Sir, I congratulate him on the perspicacity with which he has been able to discern the other loopholes in my amendment. But I would like to remind him that it is normal during polling day to have what are known as polling agents and counting agents - polling agents representing a candidate, one in each place where the votes are cast. If you do not have any place where your counting agents can foregather, and then disperse to the various polling stations, how then do you organise your work on polling day? I am obliged to him for the simplicity with which he has swept aside all necessity for any activity whatsoever on polling day. But I must remind him that candidates are entitled as of right to have a polling agent at each place of polling, and a counting agent at the place of counting. These people have to be organised in shifts. They go in the morning - some are replaced in the afternoon. If there is no place where they can foregather, then how does one conduct these activities?

Secondly, may I just explain the reason why the amendment was drafted in this way? It was because every other conceivable type of election activity on polling day has been catered for and properly circumscribed, except a candidate's election office. And we know from past experience that if an election office is near a polling station, the chances are that it will be abused. It will be used, not as an election office where the organisational operation - the backroom work - of the election is done, but it will also become a centre from which a certain amount of canvassing can take place, because voters would pass by on their way to the polling station.

I did not originally phrase my amendment to include "within a radius of two hundred yards". I originally phrased my amendment to read "within two hundred yards", because I did not consider the back street of a polling station to be of sufficient importance to warrant its exclusion. I think the Member for Queenstown does not really know how much embarrassment he is causing his Government. This draft which he now sees on the Order Paper is, in fact, the Attorney General's improvement on my draft. Since he wanted it to read "within a radius of two hundred yards", I agreed. Even though we will have only one further sitting when we have to deal with the Government - Members of the Opposition will be well advised to circularise individually all Members on the Government side to get their respective views.

Mr Lee Choon Eng: Mr Chairman, Sir, the Member for Tanjong Pagar says that he is dealing with the Government; but I, as an elected Member of this Assembly, have no right at all to raise any question or to move an amendment to an amendment. I, as an elected representative of the people, have no right at all to voice the views that I have gathered from the people. What nimble mind the Member for Tanjong Pagar has! I again emphasise, Sir, with all his legal training from the Colonial Office which he had condemned, he now comes and admits that he has not framed the amendment in such a way as he originally should have done so. I move this amendment to his amendment because it came into my mind, during the course of my interviewing the electorate and the public, that if his amendment were to be accepted, then it would be subject to abuse by the P.A.P.

4.00 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Moment of interruption.

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

Progress reported.

Mr Speaker: Further consideration, what day?

Mr David: Tomorrow, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Tomorrow it will be.