LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS (SPECIAL PROVISIONS - ANSON ELECTION) BILL

3.28 p.m.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Mr Speaker, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to make special provisions for the Anson Election for 1961."

Bill read the First time.

Second Reading

Mr Speaker: Second Reading, what day?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Now, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, I lay upon the Table a Certificate of Urgency signed by the Yang di-Pertuan Negara in respect of the Bill.

Certificate of Urgency handed in.

Mr Speaker: The Certificate is in order. Are typed copies of the Bill available for the use of Members?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Yes.

Typed copies of the Bill handed in to the Clerk and distributed to hon. Members.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

As the House is aware, the Government is revising the electoral registers this year. The present position with regard to this revision is that the existing registers and Lists A and B have been open to public inspection since 8th May, 1961, and closed on 22nd May, 1961. Next will follow what we know as the Claims and Objections period when lists of claimants will be published, objections to claims received, and adjudication of claims and objections made. According to the timetable drawn up for completion of the revised registers, it is expected that the revised registers will be certified and published in August 1961.

Whilst the revision of the electoral registers is going on, we have before us the Anson Division by-election caused by the death of the late Member for Anson, Inche Baharuddin Bin Mohamed Ariff. Because of complaints that some persons who intended to be candidates in the Hong Lim by-election could not do so, and because their names had been omitted in the present registers, it is considered desirable that this by-election should be held on the basis of the certified revised registers, and not on the present registers which are over two years old.

The use of these revised registers of electors will mean that persons standing as candidates in this by-election will not be confined only to persons whose names appear in the 1959 registers. Normally, these revised registers would not be certified and published until September at least of the year in which revision takes place. The Government has decided, however, that proceedings for the holding of the by-election for the Anson Division should be commenced early next month and that Nomination Day should be 10th June. Therefore, this Bill has been introduced to make special provisions to enable any person whose name appears in List B for any electoral division or who has made a valid claim for the insertion or retention of his name in a register of electors to stand as a candidate for election for the electoral division of Anson if he so desires, although his name is not yet included in a register of electors. This special legislation in effect will allow nomination of candidates to proceed, while the new registers are being completed for certification and publication. We were unable to provide similar special provisions in respect of the Hong Lim by-election as the time-table for the preparatory work on the revised registers for 1961 did not make it possible.

In so far as voting on Polling Day in the Anson by-election is concerned, administrative arrangements have been made to ensure that the revised register for Anson will be given priority attention and be ready for certification and publication by July this year. This certification and publication will be made sometime before Polling Day in order to enable all voters in the certified revised register for Anson to vote at the by-election. They alone will be eligible to vote, as this register would be the register of electors in operation on Polling Day in accordance with the provisions of the Singapore Legislative Assembly elections.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.37 p.m.

Tun Lim Yew Hock (Cairnhill): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am a bit disturbed by the speech of the Minister in the Second Reading of this Bill. He says that Polling Day for Anson will have to wait until the revised register is ready, and he says that ii will not be ready until sometime in July. This means, Sir, that after Nomination Day a candidate will have difficulty in knowing who his voters are. He will have to work a bit in the dark as he will have only the 1959 register to guide him. It will mean greater difficulty to all the candidates, especially as they will have to wait until the new revised register for Anson is out before they can send their manifestos and circulars to those people whose names appear on the revised electoral roll which, as the Minister has said, will not be ready until July.

Sir, this is a bit difficult if the Government Printing Office were to experience some breakdown in the machinery. What will happen then to the by-election? I think it is only a maximum of eight weeks or two months between Nomination Day and Polling Day, and if the revised electoral roll is not ready by then, there might be no by-election!

Sir, the Minister also says that this amendment is to enable those whose names appear in List B or those who have made claims for their names to be registered in the electoral roll to stand as candidates. He says that he has received representation. I do not say that I do not believe him, because there was an instance in Hong Lim where a prospective candidate was not allowed to stand because her name did not appear in the electoral roll and there was a scene where some public mourning took place. In a way this did give some indication to the public that it was mourning day for the P.A.P. in Hong Lim.

3.42 p.m.

Mr A. P. Rajah (Farrer Park): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister sought to give the impression to the House that while the registers are being revised, it might not be possible to hold a by-election in Anson. I got that impression from the Minister when he opened his speech this afternoon.

Sir, that impression is confirmed by what I read in the Straits Times of Wednesday, 24th May, on page one. It reads, Mr Speaker, Sir:

`The Official announcement also stated that the Government would ask the Legislative Assembly at its sitting tomorrow to approve a special Bill, which would allow the by-election to proceed while the new Anson electoral register is being finalised and certified.'

If my understanding of that official statement, as printed in the Straits Times, is correct, it seeks to give to the public of Singapore this impression - that because the electoral roll is now being revised and as the revision will take two or three months and while this revision is taking place no by-election can be held, and as the Government is anxious that Anson should not remain unrepresented in the Assembly for too long, the Government has therefore introduced this special Bill which will enable the electorate of Anson to have a representative in this House.

Sir, my understanding of the Elections Ordinance is that no revision need deter the Government from holding a by-election in Anson. In fact, the whole basis of the Legislative Assembly Elections Ordinance is that election will be held at the time when a vacancy arises on the register then obtaining at that time. Mr Speaker, Sir, if my understanding of the law is correct, then the Government has been guilty of issuing a statement which, on the face of it, is not in keeping with the law as it stands. The Government seeks to place itself in the favoured position of telling the public that it is not delaying the election and that what it is trying to do is to hold the election earlier than is possible by law. Therefore, it is bringing in this special Bill to enable an election at Anson to take place. Mr Speaker, Sir, the P.A.P. Government is no chicken. I am fully convinced in my own mind that the Government, with all the assistance that it has, is fully aware that an election in Anson can take place while the electoral roll is being revised. Therefore, one asks the question. Why was it necessary for the Ministry of Culture - I think it must have been the Ministry of Culture, because it was an official statement - to put out a statement which, on the face of it, is not in keeping with the law?

It has been suggested, Mr Speaker, and suggested seriously, that the Government has some particular candidate in mind to put up in Anson, but unfortunately for them, he is not on the 1959 electoral register. Therefore, it has become necessary, shall I say, to amend the law in order to suit this particular individual, so that he might be given the privilege and the right to contest the election in Anson when the existing law denies him that right or privilege. Mr Speaker. Sir, it is for the Government in its reply to explain the situation adequately. I do not accept the statement by the Minister that because one person has complained that he or she had not been allowed to stand in Hong Lim, therefore, the Government has been conscience stricken about the whole thing, and it has become necessary to use the whole legislative machinery to enable this one person to contest the Anson by-election. I am sufficiently a cynic, Mr Speaker, Sir, not to accept that reason. There must be something more to it. And it is for the Government to explain it.

Reading the Bill, Mr Speaker, Sir, it would appear that those persons who would be allowed to stand as candidates might not get their names on the registers in time to vote, unless the Government extends the time to a date when it will become possible for the registers to be finalised. If the Minister is seriously suggesting that the election will only take place when the 1961 registers have been finally revised and certified by the Returning Officer, then the time for claims and objections and appeals against those claims and objections would have to be taken into account; then the election might be delayed till August or September. Is it the intention of Government then not to hold the election until the revised registers have been finally certified by the Returning Officer? As I read the Bill, Sir, it merely enables the Government to hold the election on the existing registers as they now stand, with the addition of List B, with the addition of any person who now claims or will claim that his name has been left out. As far as I can see, Mr Speaker, Sir, it makes no provision to enable persons whose names are on List B to vote in the election. The only way in which persons whose names appear on List B can vote would be if the registers have been certified before the election takes place. If, unfortunately, those registers are not certified, then persons on List B cannot vote. So we have the anomalous situation of a candidate who has not got a vote in that particular area or any area being able to stand as a candidate for Anson.

The Prime Minister: I cannot help people being cynical or pessimists, or otherwise abnormal in their attitude to life, but we would like to help them to understand what this legislation is trying to do. For quite some time now the Census Office, together with the Elections Office, had fixed May for the revision of the registers. These registers were last revised in 1958. The date for the next revision was postponed from 1959 and 1960 to take place in 1961, because we felt that it would be a waste of effort to have a yearly revision whilst other more important things were being looked into. Therefore, this operation had already been triggered off for quite some time before May 1961.

We are asking some odd thousand people - new voters - to go and check their names in the electoral roll - List B; those whose names have been struck off from the old register for various reasons, those who have now reached 21 since 1958. At the moment, you can only hold an election in Anson without this Bill cm the old 1958 registers and you are going to have confusion not only in Anson but in the whole town. Everybody has just gone to check his name on the register. Then he is told he cannot vote. Election must, therefore, willy nilly take place on the new register. That is the position. The operation has been launched for a revision of the register and we have to go through with it. In normal circumstances, what would happen is that the register would be finalised in September and could be used for nomination in October. We are putting in overtime to finish the register in Anson by July so that voting can take place in July. The other constituencies can be held up, and they will probably be finished in August. But in July when voting in Anson takes place, all those who have gone to check their names will find that they are entitled to vote. At the same time, there have been complaints that the names of some people have been left out from the register. They want to be candidates - whether sincerely or just as a guile is another matter. We say, by all means be candidates. By all means, let us vote on the new register. The 10th of June is fixed for Nomination Day for Anson. Anybody whose name is on List B or on the old register is entitled to be a candidate. The period for inspection has already closed. It closed last Saturday. Two weeks were allowed for inspection. The inspection has closed. That is why we are taking this Bill today. All those who have inspected the register and have found their names there can be candidates. If they are in Anson, they can be voters. That is the position. All we are doing is to prevent a delay in the by-election or the by-election being carried out on an old register which is out of date and which, in view of the fact that this operation to revise the register has already been launched, will cause confusion. People have gone to Post Offices and have seen their names. If they are now told they cannot vote because this is being held on the old register, there will be a great deal of confusion.

The position is simple. If the Member for Farrer Park and the Member for Cairnhill want to be cynical, or for other medical or psychological reasons are unhappy about it, I can do nothing about it. All I can do is to try and explain to them simply what this operation is all about. It is to enable an election in Anson to take place using this register which has already been inspected by the public, and ensuring a suitable overtime arrangement that the register is certificated before Polling Day. Sir, the Member for Farrer Park is not the only person who, on reading the Bill, asks why there has been no provision that those on List B will be able to vote in Anson. I am sorry to say that, for a person who is conversant with the law and professionally holding himself out as a person who is prepared to advise other persons on the law, he had not bothered to look up the provisions which the State Advocate-General would tell him. It is unnecessary to have any special provision in this Bill to say that certification will take place before polling. Certification must take place before polling before the register can be used; otherwise a fraud on the public will have been perpetrated. Surely the Member is not suggesting for one moment that we are going to go through the whole elaborate process of legislation to speed up the election and then on Polling Day say, "Ladies and gentlemen, please vote on the old register." Some 2,000 persons in Anson whose names are on List B would thereby be turned away, causing a great deal of unhappiness, misunderstanding and cynicism on a much bigger scale than it has already worked in this House on two Members of the Opposition.

Mr Rajah: You have no statutory guarantee of that, though!

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not in the least bit averse to it, and I am quite sure my colleague, the Minister for Home Affairs, would be quite happy if the Member for Farrer Park would like a brief adjournment to move an amendment to ensure that there is certification. We will accept that. We have been advised by the State Advocate-General - and we have to be advised by the proper legal officer - that it is unnecessary. If the Member chooses to move a clause which is ex abundanti cautela, we are quite prepared to accept it. There is no trouble about it at all.

Mr Thio Chan Bee (Tanglin): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not usual for the rules of a game to be changed just before its commencement, and although subsequent events may bear out that what the Prime Minister has said is true, yet, coming as it does, this new Bill does create a very unfortunate impression. The impression, Sir, is that for the sake of some particular person or persons this Bill is being specially introduced to enable them to stand as candidates. That may not be true, Sir, but that is the unfortunate impression being created.

The Prime Minister: And you are helping to create more of such an impression!

Mr Thio Chan Bee: Anyway, Sir, the principle introduced is wrong - that just before an election this kind of legislation should be introduced. If the rules were not satisfactory they should be allowed to stand until after the particular match has been finished and not just before the commencement of the match. Otherwise any party in power - maybe not this one - can legislate just before a very important election in such a way that it is to the advantage of that particular party or the particular candidate contesting for that party. I am not saying that the Government is going to do it, Sir, but the timing of the Bill is very unfortunate.

The Prime Minister: Could I, on a point of elucidation, ask the -

Mr Speaker: Order. I am afraid the Prime Minister is too late. Mr Ong Pang Boon, in reply?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker. Sir, the doubts raised by the Opposition Members have been adequately answered by the Prime Minister. However, I just wish to assure the Opposition Members that the revised electoral register will be ready sometime before Polling Day. I can assure the House that all candidates will have sufficient time to work on the new register. I do not think any candidate will have difficulty in knowing who the voters are, because immediately after Nomination Day the old register together with List B will be given to the candidates.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly. Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Mr Ong Pang Boon]..

Bill considered in Committee.

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

4.02 p.m.

Clause 1 -

The Prime Minister: May I take this advantage, Mr Speaker, Sir, to make a few observations?

The Chairman: Is it on an amendment?

The Prime Minister: Not on an amendment, but on a question which maybe you would think could somehow or the other be appropriate at this stage.

The Chairman: Is it in connection with clause 1? Clause 1 is just the title.

The Prime Minister: Clause 2 perhaps.

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 -

The Chairman: No amendment! Any Member wishing to move an amendment can do so at this stage. If there is no amendment, then I will propose the Question.

Question proposed, "That clause 2 stand part of the Bill."

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sorry that the debate has taken this turn. I would like to make the position of the Government quite clear. All we are doing is to ensure that there is an election held quickly, fairly, and with no confusion. I have explained that the operation to revise the register had been planned some one year before hand. It was triggered off for May and had been triggered off. Thousands of people have gone to see this register and it is impossible just to ignore this operation and say, "Right, we go back to the old register." I give this House an alternative. So far as we are concerned, it is a matter of irrelevance to us whether the election is held on the old register or on the new register. But as far as the people are concerned, it is important that there should be no confusion. Those whose names are already put in List B, and who have already inspected them, will expect to go and vote. If the Opposition feel that they want the register to be certificated, then when the time for division comes let them vote against this amendment, and the Government will allow this Bill to be defeated on the voice of the Opposition. If they say no to this Bill, then this Bill can go out. The register will be certificated in July and the election can take place. We are quite happy to have this Bill and launch the by-election in June. If the Opposition feel, as the Member for Tanglin has suggested, that this is changing the rules in the midst of the game, then we say, "Right. We can postpone the game at the will of the Opposition." Let them say no to this Bill. The Bill is scrapped and nomination can take place in July after certification. If they say yes to this Bill, then nomination can take place on the 10th of June and polling will take place - I give a solemn assurance - on the new register in July. That is the simple-

The Chairman: Order. I did not stop the Prime Minister because he was so anxious to put his point across to the Assembly. But those remarks would be in order at the Third Reading, on the details of the Bill. At the Third Reading, the Opposition can consider the points raised by the Prime Minister. At the moment we are on clause 2, which is "interpretation."

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 3 -

The Chairman: Members are permitted now to move any amendment if they should think fit.

Mr Rajah: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I, on clarification

The Chairman: Move an amendment?

Mr Rajah: I am not quite certain at this stage. But I want to speak with a view to finding out certain things before I move an amendment.

The Chairman: The hon. Member for Farrer Park must first move the amendment, and if he is satisfied he can beg leave to withdraw it.

Mr Rajah: May I then move this amendment, Sir? I move,

In line 2, to leave out "valid".

The Chairman: The Member should make his speech now.

Mr Rajah: Yes, Mr Speaker, Sir. Section 17 of the principal Ordinance, which is the Singapore Legislative Assembly Elections Ordinance, reads as follows:

`17. -(1) Every person who is entitled in accordance with this Ordinance to have his name entered in any register of electors at a revision of that register and whose name has been omitted from that register and from List B or whose name has been included in List A, and who claims to have his name inserted or retained as the case may be in the register may apply to the Registration Officer to have his name inserted or retained therein.'

So that, Mr Speaker, Sir, under section 17 (1) it is merely a claim that we know. Section 17 (1) does not speak about a "valid" claim. Now, clause 3 here says:

`Any person whose name appears in List B or who has made a valid claim under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the principal Ordinance...'.

May I, therefore, ask the Minister to explain what exactly he means by a "valid claim"; whether he distinguishes a "valid claim" from a "claim" under section 17 (1) as set out in the Singapore Legislative Assembly Elections Ordinance?

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not anticipate the legal aspects of this debate, but I should imagine the answer lies in the fact that a claim has to be first substantiated. All kinds of claims can be made to a Returning Officer or to the man in charge of the register. But the man in charge of the register either allows or disallows a claim according to whether it is in accordance with the facts and according to the Law. The expression "valid claim" means one which has been allowed, found to be in accordance with the facts and the law by the officer in charge. Further I would like to add that as far as these List B voters are concerned, the period for inspection has already closed; the claims and objections are being considered and will be over, I believe, in about a fortnight. Thereafter, before the 10th of June, the claims have either been accepted or they have been rejected.

Mr Rajah: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Prime Minister has appreciated the point I raised. If I may pursue the matter further from there, the point then, Mr Speaker, Sir, is in clause 3 - a "valid claim". So that a "valid claim" cannot arise under clause 3 unless and until the claims and objections have been disposed of. Now, if a person's name has been left out of List B, then that person has certain remedies. He proceeds then under section 11. The chronological sequence of revising a register, Mr Speaker, Sir, is this. As the Hon. the Minister for Home Affairs has indicated, the registers were published two weeks before last Monday. They were given two weeks, which came to an end last Monday, which was the 22nd of May. Then any person whose name does not appear on List B can send in a claim. If a person's name appears in List B, Mr Speaker, Sir, that is not the end of the problem. The problem is just about to start. Then the Returning Officer has to publish that list and within 10 days of the publication of List B, any person who objects to any name on List B can then send in an objection. If the objection is sent in, then the Registration Officer must hold a public inquiry. That takes some time. Before the public inquiry can take place, both the objector and the person to whom objection is taken must be called to this public inquiry. Evidence is then heard and the Registration Officer adjudicates upon the claim or the objection as the case may be.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my point is this. It is at that point of time that it becomes a valid claim and not before; so that a claim, to become a "valid claim", might take two to three months.

Take the other case, Mr Speaker, where no objection is made to a person whose name appears on List B. Merely because his name appears on List B is not the end of the matter. The proviso to section 11(9) reads:

`Provided that the Registration Officer may, without any public inquiry as aforesaid, allow any claim in respect of which no objection has been made if he is otherwise satisfied that such claim should be allowed and shall insert the claimants's name in the register.'

So that in the case of a person to whose name no objection has been taken, his claim becomes valid only when the Registration Officer has satisfied himself that his name should be allowed to go on the register. So we get two points of time when a claim can become valid - in the case of a person who has not been objected to when the Registrar satisfies himself that he is all right, and in the case of a person who has been objected to after an inquiry has taken place and the Registrar has then satisfied himself.

4.15 p.m.

Now this is going to take some time - from two to three months. So I ask the Minister what then is the meaning of the phrase, "or who has made a valid claim under subsection (1) of section 17 of the principal Ordinance"? Does it mean that the election will be held up until such time as the Registrar has satisfied himself that in either case cited by me that person has a valid claim?

The Prime Minister: Sir, the Member for Farrer Park delights in legal quibbles. We are not concerned with legal quibbles as such. A problem had to be met, namely, that the operation to revise the register had been launched in May. We are now trying to prevent undue delay, because of this revision, from holding an election.

The number of persons likely to be affected by an objection being made against them or by a claim being refused is probably not one in a hundred thousand, according to previous experience in these matters - and probably not one in Anson. Assuming that 50 people are involved in Anson, is it suggested that there can be no certification of the register for a poll to be taken till all these inquiries are held? What we are saying is, "Here is List B a sum total in Anson of about 2,000 people, out of a sum total in the whole of Singapore of over 100,000 people who now expect themselves to be voters. Let it proceed." We are confident that with overtime work put in, the Anson register will be certificated in July. That is all we are saying. I think this is a more convenient time for me to say this, because in the Third Reading I will have an opportunity to speak only once. Some Members of the Opposition are either deliberately dense, or perhaps they are naturally incapable of following an argument put only once. The proposition is quite simple. We intend to change no rules. It can make no difference to the outcome whether you change or you do not change the rules. All we are saying is this. A by-election has to be held in Anson. It is our intention to hold it as quickly as is convenient and in keeping with decency when a Member has died. We feel that the most convenient time will be immediately after the National Day celebrations when we go back to work.

If the Opposition feel that this is changing the rules, all they have to do when they vote is to say no and the Bill will die. We will let the register in Anson be certificated in July and polling can take place. But let it never be said that we were not prepared to introduce a bit of legislation to enable it to take place in June. It is as simple as that. We can argue round the mulberry bush and inquiries can go on for months, but how many people are involved? In the last revision of the register, the Returning Officer - the man in charge - will tell you that there were not more than 20 to 30 objections for the whole of Singapore. Is it suggested that all this should be held up?

Let us assume that one objection is made in Anson - the one person being either on the register or claiming to be on the register. He does not vote while his claim is being adjudicated, hut all the other 2,000 odd voters plus the 8,000 voters on the old register can vote. That is all. It is as simple as that. I say sometimes perhaps the Opposition will have to take the responsibility for legislation. In a case like this, we have taken the responsibility of bringing forward this legislation in order that things can move. If the Opposition feel that this is not in their interest and they do not think that this is according to the rules, let them vote against it. The by-election can be held up.

Mr Rajah: It is a strange thing, Sir, that the Prime Minister should take this line when his Government, having taken the full responsibility for this Bill, should now talk as he is doing. If he felt it was a national Bill, there was one course open to him. He could have consulted the Opposition leaders before he brought in this Bill, but he never took the trouble to do that. But now when he is faced with problems, he is trying to put the onus on the Opposition.

However, Mr Speaker, Sir, the point is that this is a Bill which does not talk of enabling people to vote. It merely enables people to stand for election and not to vote. If the law of the country is that only a person who resides in a particular ward can vote or stand in that ward, then the problem which the Prime Minister is speaking of might not be so serious. But here, Mr Speaker, Sir, in Singapore, irrespective of where you live and where your name appears on the register, you can go and stand for election in any division. Now, this is a Bill which enables people whose names appear on List B throughout the 51 electoral divisions to stand in Anson, and the Prime Minister keeps on talking about the Anson register. Really, Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not understand the Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to call for the file just to read out my minute to the Minister asking him to clear with the State Advocate-General with certainty that there is no necessity for a provision in the Bill to ensure that those on List B will be allowed to vote, and the answer that came back from the S.A.G. was that it is not necessary because it is expected to certify the register before polling takes place. That is all. That is the key operation.

As I have said, it is not our business. Once it is suggested that this is a partisan Bill, then I say we pass the ball back to the Opposition. It is the business of the Government to govern. If this were not a partisan Bill, then I say we take it though in the national interest regardless of what the Opposition say. But this is a Bill to ensure a by-election in Anson, in which Members of the Opposition or individuals in the Opposition will become interested parties, either via their parties or via individuals whom they may support. Therefore, if it is suggested for one moment, on a Bill which is meant to introduce a political contest, that it is ensuring laws which are unfavourable to the Opposition, then I say scrap it. And I leave it to them either to take the Bill or scrap it. That is a matter entirely open to them.

May I read here a note from the S.A.G. to the Permanent Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs? This arose out of my query to the Minister as to the need for having a provision, and the S.A.G. wrote:

`I refer to your minute of the 17th May.

I confirm that if the new register is revised and certified before Polling Day, voters on the new register will be eligible to vote and there is no need for a separate provision.' The query that was sent up from the Minister is:

`The draft Ordinance is all right insofar as it overcomes the provisions regarding candidates.

Will you please check whether the new register which is now being prepared and which will be completed whilst the by-election is on can be used on Polling Day? That matter has to be settled beyond any doubt, namely, that on Polling Day it is the new register with List B included that is to be used as the register for electors.'

This is from the Permanent Secretary to the S.A.G.:

`Please confirm that voters on new registers certified and published before polling day will be eligible to vote on Polling Day.'

It is as simple as that. Let me say this. Whatever the faults of this Government, we are prepared to govern in the national interest, but this is not governing in the national interest. This is a piece of legislation meant for a political contest will take place in Anson either on 10th June - if this Bill goes through - or if it does not go through, it can take place in July. It makes no difference to us whatsoever. We get no benefit, political or otherwise, by enforcing this Bill. I say if the Opposition feel in the least unhappy that an unfair advantage is being taken, then let them say no to the Bill. We propose to abstain and the Bill will die. In a case where they have an interest, the Opposition must either be satisfied, or if they are not satisfied (whether they are right or wrong), we are quite happy to let them have their way.

Mr Rajah: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know what has transpired between the State Advocate-General and the Ministers of the State, but all I know is what I see in the Bill, and underneath it is an Explanatory Statement which reads as follows:

`This Bill will enable any person, whose name will be included in the revised registers of electors for 1961 [mark the words "revised registers of electors for 1961"], to stand as a candidate for election for the electoral division of Anson, although his name is not yet included in a register of electors.'

It nowhere mentions the poor voter.

4.30 p.m.

Question put, "That the word proposed to be left out, be left out."

The Prime Minister: Division, Sir.

The House divided: Ayes, 6; No, 1; Abstentions, 39; Absent, 4. Ayes Abstentions Abdul Hamid bin Ahmad bin Ibrahim. Haji Jumat. Bani, S. T. Ahmad Jabri bin Buang bin Omar Mohammad Akib. Junid. Lim Yew Hock. Byrne, K. M. Mohd. Ali bin Alwi. Chan Chee Seng. Rajah, A. P. Chan Choy Siong, Thio Chan Bee. Miss. Chor Yeok Eng. Fung Yin Ching, Miss No Goh Chew Chua. Koh, C. H. Goh Keng Swee. Hoe Puay Choo, Absent Madam. Kandasamy, G. Chan Sun Wing. Lee Khoon Choy. Sahorah binte Lee Kuan Yew. Ahmat, Madam. Lee Siew Choh. Seow Peck Leng, Lee Teck Him. Mrs. Leong Keng Seng. Yong Nyuk Lin. Lim Cheng Lock. Lin You Eng. Lingam, S. V. Low Por Tuck. Mammen, John. Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi. M. Ismail Rahim. Ng Teng Kian. Ong Chang Sam. Ong Eng Guan. Ong Pang Boon. Rajaratnam, S. Ramaswamy, S. Sheng Nam Chin. Tan Cheng Tong. Tan Kia Gan. Tee Kim Leng. Teo Hock Guan. Toh Chin Chye. Wee Toon Boon. Wong Soon Fong. Yaacob bin Mohamed.

Amendment accordingly agreed to.

Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported, with an amendment.

Third Reading

Mr Speaker: Third Reading, what day?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Now, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time."

Question proposed.

The Deputy Prime Minister (Dr Toh Chin Chye): Mr Speaker, for purposes of the record, I would like to clarify the stand that the Government has adopted in abstaining from voting on this Bill.

If it had been a Bill in the national interests and if it was the responsibility of the Government to see that this Bill should be put through in the national interests, then we would have seen to it that the Bill was passed. However, it has been said by the Member for Tanglin that the purpose of this Bill is to change the rules just before the game commences. It is to dispel completely any insinuation that we, on our side, wish to remain in power by fixing the rules of the game that we have adopted the stand of abstaining from voting on the Bill. The onus therefore now lies upon the Opposition whether they want an early election after Nomination Day, 10th June, or Nomination Day sometime after July when the new electoral register has been certificated. Let it not be said outside that the Government is now afraid of an early by-election in Anson. Let it not be said that we are worried about holding an early by-election in Anson. If there is any delay in the Anson by-election, the Opposition must bear the responsibility for it.

I think this must be carefully clarified so that members of the public will be able to understand that if Nomination Day does not take place on June 10th, it will be because the Opposition Parties have insisted that this Bill should lapse.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, let us get this thing in the right perspective. Nobody forced the Government to state yesterday that Nomination Day is to be the 10th of June. The Government is fully aware of its own intentions to carry this Bill (which is now receiving its Third Reading) through all stages today. The Minister, in moving the Bill, said that Nomination Day would be the 10th of June, but that Polling Day would take place after the revised register had been completed or printed; and that would be sometime in July. He was not able to give a specific date. I pointed out to him, Sir, that under the law there is a certain time limit between Nomination Day and Polling Day. If, just by a twist of circumstance - an unfortunate circumstance at that - the Government Printing Office were to suffer a breakdown and the electoral rolls could not be ready, how are we going to carry on with the by-election? Knowing that it was their intention to table this Bill today and carry it through all stages, surely the Government, if they had thought of not wanting to put the Anson voters in an embarrassing position, could have declared that Polling Day could be some day later than 10th June. There was no need for them to show that they were anxious for an early Nomination Day and leave Polling Day to fate, as to when and how fast the new electoral registers could be completed. Now, the-

Mr Speaker: Order. I have allowed the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition to speak up to now, but of course they have been quite irrelevant under our Standing Orders, which say that on the Third Reading of a Bill, the debate shall be confined to the contents of the Bill.

There are two ways open to the Opposition if they do not wish this Bill to become law, and those ways are indicated in the Standing Orders. Standing Order No. 78, paragraph (1) reads:

`On the third reading of a Bill amendments may be proposed to the question "That the Bill be now read a third time" similar to those which may be proposed on second reading;'.

That takes us to Standing Order No. 67, paragraph (3), which reads:

`On the second reading of a Bill, an amendment may be proposed to the question, "That the Bill be now read a second time", to leave out the word "now" and add, at the end of the question, "on this day six months", or an amendment may be moved to leave out all the words after the word "That" in order to add words stating the object and motive on which the opposition to the Bill is based, but such words must be strictly relevant to the principle of the Bill and not deal with its details.' Those are the alternatives, if the Opposition are contemplating defeating the Bill, those are the ways to do it.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank you for your indulgence. This is, of course, due to the fact that the debate on this Bill has taken an unprecedented turn.

The Bill itself is only concerned with allowing those whose names appear in List B or those who have made claims under section 11 of the Ordinance to stand as candidates for the by-election in Anson. It has nothing to do with the right to vote of those whose names appear in List B. We are not saying that the Government should hold this by-election on the old register. If they want it on the new register or on any register, the Opposition are prepared to meet them.

4.45 p.m.

The Prime Minister: Just to clarify the position, Sir. This is an unusual bit of legislation in that the general public are not interested in it. This is legislation meant for political parties. It inaugurates a political contest, and only political parties and politicians are interested in the Bill. It is absolutely important and fundamental that no doubts be cast on the proposition that the contest should be fair and equal. We have put forward this Bill because we believe that this is a fair and just way of doing it. If the Opposition feel, as they have indicated on the Second Reading, that this is unfair and unequal, all they have to do is to say no to the Bill, and it lapses. It is as simple as that. But they cannot have it both ways. On the one hand, they cannot expect the Government to carry this Bill through in the teeth of their opposition, and then, on the other hand, for them to go out and say, "Ah, what a wicked Government; fixing the rules of the game against the Opposition!" We are doing no such thing. All we are doing is to ensure that a regular and proper election be held in the best circumstances possible. If the Opposition think that that is not their wish - this is as much for them as it is for us; they are interested parties and so are we; so are the other political parties and individuals who want to contest this by-election - if they say no, so be it.

Mr Speaker: I had better clarify the position now. Procedurally, as has been indicated by me, if there is no amendment to be moved to the Question, "That the Bill be now read a Third Time", then I will have to put that Question. That, perhaps, is an appropriate time also for the Government to indicate their intentions in so far as this Bill is concerned by abstaining.

The Prime Minister: Yes.

Mr Speaker: So that, procedurally, that is the position. The Opposition now must make up their minds whether or not they wish the Bill to be defeated. If they wish it to be defeated, then the proper way is to move the amendment I have suggested.

The Question is, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." As many as are of that opinion say Aye.

Mr C. H. Koh (Joo Chiat): Division.

Mr Speaker: Can I take the voices? The Question is, "That the Bill be now read a Third Time." As many as are of that opinion, say Aye.

Hon. Members remained silent.

Mr Speaker: To the contrary, say No.

Some hon. Members: Division, Sir.

Mr Speaker: There seems to be a hiatus! The Opposition, I think, must make up their minds.

Mr Koh: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Is it time for tea now?

Mr Speaker: I propose to take the vote on this Bill. I think, in fairness to the Assembly and to the Chair, the Opposition must make up their minds.

Question put, "That the Bill be now read a Third Time."

The Prime Minister: Division, Sir.

The House divided: Ayes Abstentions Abdul Hamid bin Ahmad bin Ibrahim. Haji Jumat. Bani S. T. Ahmad Jabri bin Buang bin Omar Mohammad Akib. Junid. Lim Yew Hock. Byrne, K. M. Mohd. Ali bin Alwi. Chan Chee Seng. Rajah, A. P. Chan Choy Siong, Thio Chan Bee. Miss. Chan Sun Wing. No Chor Yeok Eng. Koh, C. H. Fung Yin Ching, Miss Goh Chew Chua. Absent Goh Keng Swee. Sahorah binte Ahmat, Hoe Puay Choo, Madam Madam. Kandasamy, G. Seow Peck Leng, Mrs. Lee Khoon Choy. Yong Nyuk Lin. Lee Kuan Yew. Lee Siew Choh. Lee Teck Him. Leong Keng Seng. Lim Cheng Lock. Lin You Eng. Lingam, S. V. Low Por Tuck. Mammen, John. Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi. M. Ismail Rahim. Ng Teng Kian. Ong Chang Sam. Ong Eng Guan. Ong Pang Boon. Rajaratnam, S. Ramaswamy, S. Sheng Nam Chin. Tan Cheng Tong. Tan Kia Gan. Tee Kim Leng. Teo Hock Guan. Toh Chin Chye. Wee Toon Boon. Wong Soon Fong. Yaacob bin Mohamed.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: On a point of order.

Mr Speaker: Can I just take the result first?

Tun Lim Yew Hock resumed his seat.

Mr Speaker: The Member for Cairnhill wishes to raise a point of order. Is it in connection with the Division?

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Yes, Sir.

Mr Speaker: In connection with this particular Division?

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Yes, Sir.

Mr Speaker: The point of order being?

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Can the mover of a motion abstain from voting on his own motion?

Mr Speaker: The answer is simply that he can. He may even vote against. The result of the voting is Ayes, 6; No, 1; Abstentions, 40; Absent, 3.

Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed.

4.55 p.m.