Fourth Supplementary Estimates, 1959

2.55 p.m.

The Chairman: Fourth Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1959 (Paper Cmd. (New Series) 18 of 1959).

There are amendments. The first is on Head 7, Chief Minister/Prime Minister, in the name of the Member for Farrer Park, in relation to subhead 1, item (33). This amendment, I have indicated to honourable Members, is in respect of an item similar to items under Heads 61 and 62. Therefore, for convenience, discussion on the first amendment may range over the other two amendments, in which event there will be no further debate when the other two amendments are reached. I trust that is clear.

Head 7 -

Mr A. P. Rajah (Farrer Park): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 7 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (33) of subhead 1 therein.

I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for making it possible for me to speak on the other heads of expenditure; it will save the House considerable time if I speak on all the three amendments at the same time.

Mr Speaker, Sir, soon after the present Government was returned to power and soon after the Prime Minister and his ministerial colleagues had taken office, one of the first statements that he made was that it was the desire of the Government to cut down Government expenditure and that it would be right and proper in those circumstances that the Ministers themselves should suffer the first cut. That was very laudable, and the Government proceeded to do it, thereby giving an indication to the public that the cost of ministerial Government certainly was going to be reduced. Let us, therefore, examine that statement in the light of events that have happened subsequently.

We now find that requests are being made for Political Secretaries. Beyond Political Secretaries, Parliamentary Secretaries have also been appointed to Ministries, where previously Assistant Ministers had not existed. I venture to suggest, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the total costs of the Ministers together with their Parliamentary Secretaries and Political Secretaries - such as we know them - perhaps exceed the total cost of what the Ministers and the Assistant Ministers had previously drawn - when I say "previously drawn", Mr Speaker, I mean by Ministers and Assistant Ministers in the previous Government.

This appointment of Political Secretary is something which certainly is not known to the Constitution of Singapore. Therefore, it would be interesting to find out what this appointment is. Firstly, are these posts civil service posts? That is the first question, and I would like it answered. If they are civil service posts, have these appointments already been made? If so, by whom? If they are not civil service posts, and if these appointments have already been made, who are the holders of these posts and whether these holders are members of the P.A.P. and have been given these posts merely because they have been useful to the Party in bringing them to power? And lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to know whether there are only three Political Secretaries attached to the three Ministries set out here, namely

Head 7 Chief Minister/Prime Minister

Subhead 1 item (33) Personal Secretary (Political).

Head 61 Ministry of Culture

Subhead 1 item (3) Personal Secretary (Political), one ($1,400); one ($1,100). For the Minister for Culture, not one, Mr Speaker, Sir, but two Political Secretaries. Under -

Head 62 Ministry of National Development Subhead 1 item (3) Personal Secretary (Political).

I do not know whether there are other Personal Secretaries (Political) attached to the other Ministries, but these are the only posts which the House is aware of in these Estimates.

3.00 p.m.

Another curious feature of the Personal Secretary (Political) is that, as described here, the Prime Minister carries a Personal Secretary (Political), the Minister for National Development also carries a Personal Secretary (Political), whereas the Minister for Culture carries two, one Personal Secretary (Political) at $1,400 a month, and a second Personal Secretary (Political) at $1,100 a month. If they are given the value for the posts, I suppose the gentleman who is holding the post at $1,400 must be holding the more valuable post. Perhaps the House could be told why it is necessary, if at all it is necessary, to have Political Secretaries, that the Minister for Culture should have two Personal Secretaries, and one at a rate which exceeds all the other Personal Secretaries by $300 a month.

The Chairman: The Question is "That the sum to be allocated for Head 7 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (33) of subhead 1 therein." As indicated, the debate may range over Head 61, subhead 1, item (3) , Personal Secretary (Political), $17,500, in respect of which an amendment appears in the Supplement to the Order Paper in the name of the Member for Farrer Park:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 61 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 1.

Similarly with regard to Head 62, subhead 1, item (3).

The Prime Minister (Mr Lee Kuan Yew): Mr Speaker, I must congratulate the Member for Farrer Park for his ingenuity in calculating the costs of the present Ministries as against those of the previous Government, and coming to the brilliant conclusion that we are costing the people more. I have to disillusion him, because he forgot to include in the previous Government the officials, of which there were three, who were colleagues of the present Member for Geylang Serai. If you look under the Heads, "Chief Secretary", "Attorney-General", all under the Ministerial side, and the cost of the linen and the crockery and all the rest of it, you will find that it comes to much more than what we are costing now.

Nevertheless, I welcome the opportunity to clarify the appointment of Personal Secretaries (Political).

Each Minister, to assist him in the discharge of his responsibilities, has a Parliamentary Secretary, a Permanent Secretary and a Personal Secretary (Political). As has already been pointed out, the Minister for Culture, according to Cmd. Paper 18 of 1959 is carrying two Political Secretaries. I congratulate the Member for Farrer Park for his assiduous study of this Paper and for having anticipated an amendment which will be moved by the Minister for Culture to clarify the designation of one of those two posts. In fact, there is only one Personal Secretary (Political). The other, at $1,400, is not a Personal Secretary (Political). I shall not anticipate what my colleague will be saying when he moves the amendment.

May I first delineate briefly the duties of the Parliamentary Secretary and the Personal Secretary (Political)? Everybody knows what the Permanent Secretary is supposed to do. His duties are set out in the Constitution itself.

The Parliamentary Secretary, as the term designates, carries the burden of the Minister's parliamentary duties, and to the extent that the Minister designates or delegates, he carries the burden of the Minister's ministerial duties. The Personal Secretary (Political) has no administrative duties. He has no direct access to the Civil Service. He is a personal appointment of the Minister, and his role is really that of the Minister's closest confidant on the political implications of the moves, plans and policies of the various Ministries.

May I say that there have been three appointments, and that there will be three more in the near future. Ultimately, all the appointments will be filled.

First, my own personal appointment. He is Mr Jek. The second is Mr Woodhull whose appointment is Personal Secretary (Political) to the Minister for Health. The third is Mr Rahim Ishak, who is Personal Secretary (Political) to the Minister for Culture. They are, Mr Speaker, Sir, our political chiefs of staff, so to speak, political backroom boys, the people who have the aptitude, the skill and touch in these matters which are of invaluable assistance, I hope, to all Ministers, to avoid the unnecessary faux pas which would otherwise fall their way if the presentation and implementation of policies were left entirely to the Civil Service.

It follows, therefore, that they are all political appointments. I am unable to enlighten the Member on the actual procedure on these appointments. I shall leave that to my Minister for Finance, who is more acquainted with establishment matters. What it amounts to is this. This is the Minister's Personal Secretary (Political). It says what it means.

May I say to the House that one of the problems which this Government faces - and I have said this on many previous occasions - is not only the carrying out of our plans and policies, but also the manner and method of presentation of these policies to the people of Singapore.

Mr Jek was a former newspaper man on a Chinese newspaper. He also went to gaol for some time in 1957/1958 for alleged subversive activities. He was released, presumably because the Government discovered that the allegation of subversive activities was unfounded. He is not the type of person whom we would want to give a job to for the sake of rewarding him. If the last Government had a fraction of the skill and devotion to duty, the political know-how that these types of persons have, they would not have come such miserable croppers as they did.

These are open political appointments, and I venture to suggest that succeeding governments will find that this is a sound and healthy practice.

Mr Speaker, let me just refer you to one instance of the kind of difficulties those people extricate us from. You will remember, Mr Speaker, that we were making arrangements for the Yang di-Pertuan Negara to deliver the first speech to this Assembly in Malay. The permanent staff was there, the skilled translators in the former P.R.O. and those you had prudently recruited beforehand. It was a difficult first task - 18 pages of translation were almost unintelligible. But Mr Rahim Ishak, who I hope will continue to give the Minister for Culture the political touch, was in the space of 24 hours able to reduce what was an unintelligible verbatim translation into one which I hope Malay Members on the other side will agree was a coherent and smooth passage from the Yang di-Pertuan Negara in the national language. He was able to do that because, amongst other things, he used to be the leader writer in the Utusan Melayu.

The Minister for Culture (Mr S. Rajaratnam): Mr Speaker, Sir, I should like to draw the attention of the House to Head 61, subhead 1, item (3) which now reads "Personal Secretary (Political), one ($1,400); one ($1,100)."

I am sorry if I have slightly confused the Member for Farrer Park, but I think he will have a better understanding of what all this is about if I say that this does not reflect the staffing position quite accurately. It should now read, "Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political) ($1,400), and Personal Secretary (Political) ($1,100)".

The purpose of this new designation is to indicate more precisely the functions of one of the Secretaries. The post of Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political) is also an appointment personal to the Minister, but it involves duties and functions which are in some respects different from those of Personal Secretary (Political). When the Supplementary Estimates were submitted, the post of Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political) was then designated as Personal Secretary (Political), because at that time it was not possible to define precisely the functions of many of the officials in the Ministry. As you know, Sir, the Ministry of Culture is a new Ministry. It has to be put together from scratch, and it is still today in the process of creation. It is therefore not possible to predict in detail what responsibility would fall on what officer and what function they would be required to perform. After all, Mr Speaker, there are many Government departments which have been in existence for nearly a century, and there are officials who are still not quite sure where they fit in, and what their precise tasks are. Therefore, when the Ministry of Culture, which is only about three months old, occasionally gives new designations to one officer, I do not think the Member for Farrer Park should see anything more sinister in it.

3.15 p.m.

Now that the Ministry of Culture is more or less complete, the need for what I have termed a Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political) has become more apparent. His functions are those imposed by the very nature and structure of the Ministry of Culture. As you know, Sir, my Ministry is in charge of a variety of publicity services - radio, information, posters, films, publications and a public address system under which field officers go out every day to broadcast necessary and vital information to the public. This wide variety of publicity services have not only to be fed with suitable materials but it is also necessary that they function as a co-ordinated unit. It will therefore be one of the functions of the Publicity Liaison Secretary to see that there is such co-ordination.

As to why my Ministry requires two appointments which are personal to the Minister, here again they are imposed by the very character, functions and structure of the Ministry of Culture. This Ministry is concerned with shaping people's ideas and mental attitudes. To quote from the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, one of the functions of this Ministry will be to create "a sense of national identity among the various races in Malaya" and "to instil in our people of all races the will to be a nation". This, therefore, involves not only taking into account such things as sentiments, attitudes and reactions of people in general but also the attitudes, sentiments and reactions of the various cultural and racial groups in this country. Therefore, Sir, in the case of my Ministry, the bricks and mortar with which this Ministry works are of finer material than may be the case with some other Ministries. In a multi-racial society like ours, it is necessary for this Ministry to have people who can advise it on the political, social and cultural reactions of the various races and communities in Singapore. Therefore, one of these posts requires someone with a knowledge not only of the Chinese language but also of Chinese trends, thought and reactions and also a knowledge of (on the purely technical side) publicity methods and organisation.

The other post requires someone with a knowledge of the Malay language and Malay thought, reactions and attitudes. In view of this, I feel, Sir, that there is every justification for having two political secretaries because they will guide this Ministry which deals mainly with ideas, attitudes and sentiments, to gauge accurately reactions to Government measures or Government programmes on the part of these communities. I am quite sure that if, as the Prime Minister mentioned earlier, the previous Government had a little bit more foresight in this matter and not felt its own pulse and mistaken it for the pulse of public opinion, it would not be where it is today.

The Prime Minister: I want to make one point in further elucidation which I had taken for granted, when I first stood up to speak on this motion. It is this: that every act of the Government is in fact being interpreted in four different worlds and, very often, with four different results: the Chinese-speaking world, the Malay-speaking world, the Indian-speaking world and the English-speaking world. And we have as yet no Minister who is educated to straddle all these four worlds. Quite a number of my Ministers are ambidextrous, who have been educated in more than one world. The appointment of political secretaries is to make up this deficiency. I am English-educated. Sometimes, an act which to the English-educated temper and reaction may sound reasonable, correct and proper, may require some amendments in order that it can be equally welcomed by the Chinese-educated world. Hence the appointment of my political secretary who is a man well conversant with the Chinese world. In the case of the Minister for Health, he is Malay-educated and his appointment is to compensate for his lack of touch of the English-speaking world with which he has a great deal to do in his Ministry.

My colleague the Minister for Culture has said, a new Malayan culture will be built basically around the Malay language and it was essential that he should have someone who has the right understanding of the reaction and the susceptibilities and the sentiments, the whole political and philosophical outlook of the Malay people. This is a factor which we must all remember. If a government wishes to govern effectively with the support of the people, then that is a government whose every action must be judged as successful not only in one world, but in four worlds. I hope that distributed among the eight Ministries there will be enough political talent to keep us in touch with all possible susceptibilities, moods and tempers of all the worlds that we have to face in our multi-racial, multi-lingual and multi-cultural society.

Mr Rajah: Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all I welcome the Prime Minister's statement that these Personal Secretaries (Political) will have no direct access to the permanent Civil Service. I am much obliged to him for making that statement quite categorically without any qualifications. The statement, as I understand it, Mr Speaker, Sir, means this. That in so far as the Civil Service is concerned, the Political Secretaries will not interfere, and that any interference with the civil servants will be from the Minister through his Permanent Secretary.

Sir, I think it will be a sad day for Singapore if the Political Secretaries take over the departments rather than the Permanent Secretaries, who are directly responsible to the Minister himself. One must always keep in mind that these are political appointments and, as such, they must inevitably be given to persons who are high in the esteem of the Party in power and who possibly helped to put that Party in power. That is what strikes me as being dangerous about these appointments, Mr Speaker, Sir.

I sympathise with the Prime Minister and the difficulties of his Government in a multi-racial society. I appreciate his statement that what may seem right to the English-speaking groups may not seem so right to the Chinese-speaking groups, and so with the Tamil-speaking groups and the Malay-speaking groups. Perhaps if the former Government, as he says, Sir, were as alive to it as his own Government is, they might not have been where they are today. There may be something in that too, Mr Speaker, Sir. But, the point of the statement of the Prime Minister is this. His proud boast to this House and to everyone outside is this. That his Party is deeply rooted in the masses of the people, his Ministers, his Parliamentary Secretaries, his Assemblymen, they are all deeply, inevitably and inextricably rooted in the masses. If that proud boast is true, Mr Speaker, Sir, what is the point in all these appointments? Each Minister, as I understand it, has his own Parliamentary Secretary. May I congratulate the Prime Minister on the way in which he has made these appointments of Parliamentary Secretary? Where he has an English-educated Minister, he has very thoughtfully put a Parliamentary Secretary whose education is derived not through English. A very sensible and, if I may be permitted to say so, a very good idea. He has therefore distributed throughout his Ministries persons who deeply understand the English-speaking groups, the Chinese-speaking groups, the Indian-speaking groups and the Malay-speaking groups. Now, if he has among his own Ministers and his Parliamentary Secretaries, 16 persons to understand the four trends in Singapore, Mr Speaker, Sir, may I again ask the Prime Minister what is the necessity for making these political appointments, unless it is to distribute largesse to people who have put him in power?

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, we are nowhere near the American spoils system yet, but I would suggest to the Member that if it is largesse that we wish to distribute, there are much more convenient and less conspicuous ways of distributing it among the victors.

I would like to suggest to him that when we say our Party-we are, basically, modest men by nature and we do not say each individual is rooted in the masses-we mean that collectively as a Party, we are rooted in every section, every sector, every stream of opinion and thought of this society. All the appointments are, of course, appointments made from those who are very close to the Party. I have not the slightest compunction in persisting in saying that my Party is rooted in the people. Each and everyone of the political secretaries, when they are appointed and those who have already been appointed, is rooted in the people.

Why should we have more talent at our disposal? Why not? We have got the talent and we intend to use it. If the Member for Farrer Park and his old colleagues who have now disappeared from the political scene, had won in the 1955 general elections (I heard a great deal of their plans when they were planning to get into office then) they would have had nothing else other than they themselves. They have no talent and no background to fall back on. We have a broad stratum of skill, ability and talent and we intend to utilise it to the best of our ability and the maximum benefit of the people of Singapore.

3.30 p.m.

Mr Rajah: Mr Speaker, Sir, no doubt the Prime Minister is interested in the people of Singapore just as I am and just as every decent citizen in Singapore must be, but what the Opposition is not satisfied with is this. These appointments are not primarily made for the benefit of the people of Singapore but for the benefit of the People's Action Party, so that during these five years, a line of propaganda will be let out on the people of Singapore which will enable the Party to come back at the end of five years.

An hon. Member: Hooray!

The Chairman: Order.

Mr Rajah: If that equates to the interest of the people of Singapore, certainly the Prime Minister is right, but there are quite a few people in Singapore who say that it does not equate in the way that the Prime Minister would like to equate it to. Therefore, if the main underlying motive in these appointments is to bring the P.A.P. back into power at the next elections, why do the P.A.P. not pay for them themselves? Nobody will then question these back-room boys working hard for the P.A.P. Nobody is saying that they should not have these persons appointed at the behest of the P.A.P. But what is being queried here today, Mr Speaker, Sir, is this. These posts have to be paid for out of public funds and public funds are not yet P.A.P. funds.

Now, the point raised by the Minister for Culture, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that by a dexterous change of name, the P.A.P. Government seeks to make a rose into something else. He said that the first post is not Personal Secretary (Political) but Publicity Liaison Officer (Political). As I understood it from the Prime Minister, the purpose of these appointments was to keep the Government in touch with the people. This does not seem to be very different from Publicity Liaison Officer (Political). It seems to mean the same thing to me. I do not know how the Minister for Culture seeks to draw a distinction between these two appointments. The post of Personal Secretary (Political) is exactly the same as the post which, in his Ministry, is going to carry $1,400 a month.

Another point that the Minister for Culture impliedly made is that one post is to contact the Chinese masses and the other post is to contact the Malay-speaking group. I hope I have not misunderstood him but that was the impression I got when he was speaking. If it is publicity and putting over the policy of the Government to the people of Singapore that is the vital purpose of this appointment, probably the other Ministries also need two Personal Secretaries (Political): one to get at the Chinese masses and the other to get at the Malay-speaking group.

I still feel, Mr Speaker, Sir, that these appointments are not for the benefit of the people of Singapore but are largely intended for the benefit of the Party in power.

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, may I just make this observation? It is the business of every government to see that it governs in such a way that it is returned to power at the end of its mandate, and the fact is that there is nothing improper in this purpose. It is the whole business of a government to govern in such a way that at the end of its term of office, the people say, "Yes, we shall have more of it. We entrust our fate to you for another term of office." And the fact that our Personal Secretaries (Political) are, I hope, going to assist this Government in achieving that aim does not disqualify them from being paid openly out of the funds of the Government, because they are assisting the Government, not the Party.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, when the Member for Farrer Park drew attention to the anomaly existing between the salaries of three Personal Secretaries and that of the fourth, I thought that he was in the running for appointment as the Secretary to any possible trade union or as a Personal Secretary (Political) should it be formed. But I am afraid that the Member for Farrer Park has brought into consideration different standards of judgment in assessing the value of these appointments.

You will recall, Mr Speaker, that in 1955 when the first election under the Rendel Constitution took place there was a Party contesting the election and it was called the Progressive Party of which the Member for Farrer Park was a distinguished member. Now, this Progressive Party, which has transformed itself into different names and under different guises, found it necessary to acquire experts to give them political advice and they duly appointed an English woman who was formerly a member of the Liberal Party or the Conservative Party - I forgot which.

The Prime Minister: The Liberal-National.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: The result was that the Progressive Party came a hideous cropper and, true to form, changed its name.

Mr Speaker, when we consider this whole problem of why our standards are more exacting than the standards to which the Member for Farrer Park has been accustomed, I can assure you that a great deal of what he has said on the subject is not only irrelevant but, if listened to by any government in this country, would lead it rapidly to its ruin.

Mr Rajaratnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, after listening to the Member for Farrer Park, I think that I should let loose our Personal Secretaries (Political) on him, because I am quite sure that after half an hour he will understand why we need Personal Secretaries (Political) to help us in our work.

He also claimed that my Ministry has merely changed the name of one Personal Secretary into Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political) in order to make the whole thing smell a little bit sweeter. In view of the fact that the new designation involved four words, I will expect the Member for Farrer Park to be a bit more scared. Because Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political) takes four words and the original Personal Secretary are only two words, he is a bit more suspicious and sees sinister meaning behind each of the words. But I think I have explained quite clearly that the Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political) is involved in certain technical functions connected with publicity, that is, radio, information, posters, films, and so on. At the same time, it is essential that whatever information is put over at any one time should be properly co-ordinated, unlike the previous Government which used to speak with different voices. We are interested in seeing that at least we speak with one voice and that whatever we put over is properly co-ordinated, instead of one section of the publicity unit conflicting with another section of our publicity unit. Sir, it is a skilled technical function, to be able to co-ordinate radio, information, posters, films, and so on, and that is why one of the Secretaries is called a Publicity Liaison Secretary (Political). The job is more responsible and the officer therefore is entitled to a slightly higher remuneration than the other Secretary whose functions do not involve any technical tasks connected with the co-ordination of publicity services.

Mr Rajah: Sir, I would lice to assure the Minister for Culture that I now understand why this gentleman with more technical qualifications and holding a more complicated designation is drawing $300 more a month than the other officer who is just a trained man.

As for the statement of the Minister for Finance, Mr Speaker, Sir, I think he has entirely supported my point, if I may say so with respect, when he said that when the Progressive Party made an appointment, that was paid out of the Progressive Party funds, not out of Government funds. That is what I am suggesting the Minister for Finance should do: pay for it out of party funds and not out of Government funds.

3.45 p.m.

Question put, "That the sum to be allocated for Head 7 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (33) of subhead 1 therein".

Mr Rajah: Division, Sir.

The House divided: Ayes, 6; Noes, 39; Abstentions, Nil; Absent, 6. Ayes. Noes. Abdul Hamid bin Ahmad bin Ibrahim. Haji Jumat. Bani, S. T. Ahmad Jabri bin Buang bin Omar Junid. Mohammad Akib. Byrne, K. M. Koh, C. H. Chan Chee Seng. Mohd. Ali bin Chan Choy Siong, Alwi. Miss. Rajah, A. P. Chan Sun Wing. Seow Peck Leng, Chor Yeok Eng. Mrs. Fung Yin Ching, Miss. Goh Chew Chua. Goh Keng Swee. Hoe Puay Choo, Madam. Kandasamy. G. Lee Khoon Choy. Lee Kuan Yew. Lee Siew Choh. Lee Teck Him. Leong Keng Seng. Lim Cheng Lock. Lin You Eng. Lingam, S. V. Low Por Tuck. Abstentions. Mammen, John. Nil Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi. M. Ismail Rahim. Ng Teng Kian. Ong Chang Sam. Ong Pang Boon Rajaratnam, S. Sahorah binte Ahmat, Madam. Sheng Nam Chin. Tan Cheng Tong. Tan Kia Gan. Teo Hock Guan. Absent. Toh Chin Chye. Baharuddin bin Wee Toon Boon. Mohamed Ariff. Wong Soon Fong. Lim Yew Hock. Yaacob bin Mohamed. Ong Eng Guan. Yong Nyuk Lin. Ramaswamy, S. Tee Kim Leng. Thio Chan Bee.

Question on the amendment accordingly negatived.

Mr Rajah: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allotted for Head 7 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (36) of subhead 1 therein.

Mr Chairman, Sir, this concerns the Information Officer for Singapore in the United Kingdom. Recently there appeared a report in the Press to the effect that this Information Officer had been recalled from the United Kingdom. In view of that, Mr Chairman, Sir, I would like some explanation as to why it is necessary that this vote should be provided for in the Estimates.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Chairman, Sir, the answer is quite simple. When you recall an officer from a certain post, or if you are to transfer him from one post to another, you do not delete that post purely for that reason. There may be occasions in the future where a more suitable person may appear and be appointed to that post.

Mr Rajah: Sir, do I understand that the vote is kept alive with a view to a future appointment?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Yes.

Mr Rajah: Mr Chairman, Sir, I am satisfied and may I have the amendment withdrawn?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Rajah: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allotted for Head 7 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 14 therein.

Mr Chairman, Sir, this concerns the sum of $12,000 provided for in the Estimates for Language Training Facilities for Assemblymen. It has been kept a very quiet, and deep secret. Although I am an Assemblyman, I know nothing about it. Perhaps the Minister might like to explain what I am supposed to do, and for what.

The Prime Minister: There is no enigma about this. It means what it says - Language Training Facilities for Assemblymen. All of us know that there are four languages used in this Assembly, and that nobody in this Assembly speaks all four languages. It has, therefore, been considered proper that facilities should be provided for every Assemblyman, if he so desires, to equip himself with knowledge, to read, write and speak any one of the four languages in this Assembly.

I have explained just now the difficulties of presenting Government policies and Government programmes to a multi-racial, multi-lingual society. Apart from the hope to overcome the difficulties by building up a composite leadership which contains all the skills and all the talents from each of the different educational worlds, there is the other hope that every one of the Members will try to straddle more than one world. Some of the Members on the Government side of the House who have been co-opted into the various Select Committees are unable to follow the proceedings as expeditiously as they otherwise would, if they understood a certain amount of English, and if they were able to read a certain amount of the Minutes without having to get it translated for them.

At the same time I suggest that perhaps Members on the Opposition side will join some of the Members on the Government side, who are English-speaking, in trying to master the national language. On the Government side, Sir, we hope that before three years you will be able to join us in a debate in the Malay language. And if the Members from the S.P.A. - these three who obviously do not seem to be in need of any moral rearmament, appearing to be sufficiently sturdy to withstand the misfortunes that have befallen their colleagues - could make the effort, perhaps even they might survive, as the appendix survives in the human being.

Rules and regulations are being framed. The only reason why the Member for Farrer Park has not heard about them is because of the difficulty of trying to formulate rules. I have the rules and regulations for the civil service to use as a model. To make sure that the facilities are being properly used and not wasted - e.g. when the teacher comes he finds the pupils absent, and the State loses funds - there will be periodic tests to see that progress is being made. In the examinations next year, I even hope to follow the civil service procedure and give a bonus where a bonus is due. The difficulty is to find a uniform examination, because the standards of the 51 Members of this Assembly vary. One never knows whether it is fair to ask an aging, balding man to do as much work as a vigorous, young, stalwart-looking trade unionist. But I assure Members on the Opposition side that this is intended for the benefit of the people of Singapore, because if they have leaders who understand not just one sector but two or three, or may be even four sectors of the population, then so much the better for the people.

The Chairman: One slight correction. There are 52 Members in the Assembly.

The Prime Minister: I beg your pardon,

Mr Chairman, Sir, I hope that the 52nd Member will also take advantage of this facility that I am asking for.

The Chairman: That is why the Speaker has spoken!

Mr Rajah: Mr Chairman, Sir, with the permission of the House, I would like to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $123,028 for Head 7 ordered to stand part of the Fourth Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1959.

Head 61 -

The Chairman: There is an amendment standing in the name of the Member for Farrer Park:

That the sum to be allotted for Head 61 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 1.

Does the Member wish to move simpliciter?

Mr Rajah: Mr Chairman, Sir, I do not wish to move, as Head 61 has been dealt with in the discussion on item (33) of subhead 1 of Head 7.

The Chairman: Very well.

The sum of $52,300 for Head 61 ordered to stand part of the Fourth Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1959.

Head 62 -

The Chairman: Does the Member for Farrer Park wish to move the amendment standing in his name on the Order Paper Supplement:

That the sum to be allotted for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 1.

Mr Rajah: Similarly, Mr Chairman, Sir, I do not wish to move.

The Chairman: Very well.

The sum of $44,450 for Head 62 ordered to stand part of the Fourth Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1959.

The Chairman: Now for the heads of expenditure undisposed of. They appear in Schedule B at page 6 of the Paper, other than Heads 7, 61 and 62. I propose to take those heads of expenditure* en bloc.

*Following are the heads of expenditure:- Head Title $ 12 Film Censorship 31,906 20 Legal/State Advocate-General's Chambers 36,494 22 Treasury/Ministry of Finances 697,455 24 Pensions, Retired Allowances, Gratuities, etc 299,520 53 Social Welfare 1,370,000 D46 Education 259,510 D61 Public Works, Non-Recurrent (General) 110,000 D62 Colonial Development and Welfare Schemes 217,621

Question, "That the sums stated for the heads stated in the summary of totals contained in Schedule B of Paper Cmd. (New Series) 18 of 1959, other than for Heads 7, 61 and 62 already disposed of, stand part of the Fourth Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1959", put, and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $3,242,284 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Fourth Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1959 contained in Paper Cmd. (New Series) 18 of 1959", put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

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

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions.

Resolutions read.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the Assembly doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolutions accordingly agreed to.