CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND ORDINANCE (Amending legislation)

Mr David Marshall asked the Minister for Labour whether he will consider introducing legislation to amend the Central Provident Fund Ordinance to enable a contributor to withdraw the amount standing to his credit in the Fund, or part thereof, if he has been unemployed for a period of 12 months or more.

The Minister for Labour (Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim): Mr Speaker, Sir, the sole object of the Central Provident Fund Ordinance was to set up a fund to make provision for employees in their old age. The fund was not meant to assist employees who have become unemployed. The contingency of unemployment therefore cannot be covered by a savings scheme as that envisaged by the Central Provident Fund, and if it is used to ameliorate the condition of members who have become unemployed, then it will result in the entire purpose of the fund being defeated.

Mr David Marshall: Mr Speaker, Sir, could we not assist these people? Because if we do not, they will not reach old age to reap it. They will die of starvation. Let a little humanity be introduced. These are their complete savings. I am sure, Sir, and I am personally conscious that the Board has been sympathetic. But it has to work within these very hard limits. In the light of the economic situation and the employment market, I do ask the Minister to consider that it is appropriate today to give the Board the discretion. Would he consider that?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think anybody is going to die of starvation, as claimed by the Member for Anson. In my opinion, the proper way to help the unemployed is not to fiddle about with the Central Provident Fund, but to set up a scheme of unemployment insurance. In order to do that, however, the support of the trade union movement is necessary.

Mr Bani: You will have it.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Since the Member for Thomson is very keen on this thing, let me inform him and other Members of the Assembly that my colleague, the Minister for Finance, has told me this. At a number of meetings held in December 1960, the matter was brought up before certain trade union leaders, which included the Member for Thomson, if I may say so, and other big leaders of the trade union movement, such as Mr Lim Ching Siong, Mr Woodhull and Mr Dominic Puthucheary. He proposed to them that an unemployment insurance scheme be introduced forthwith on a tripartite basis, with contributions from employers and employees, and with the Government meeting all costs and liabilities of the fund for the first year of operation. The administration of the Central Provident Fund would prepare the administrative and financial details of the operation. These trade union leaders, however, rejected the proposal. Under the proposed scheme, Mr Speaker, Sir, the unemployed would be entitled to benefits of about 40 per cent of their working pay. The Finance Minister brought up this proposal so that workers may feel less anxiety over losing jobs through redundancy or retrenchment. One of the major causes of industrial disputes has been the retrenchment of workers, and an unemployment insurance scheme would help to improve relations between labour and management by removing one of the major irritants.

Tun Lim Yew Hock (Cairnhill): Sir, does the Minister consider that the trade union leaders referred to by him truly represent the trade union movement of Singapore?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: I think, Mr Speaker, the trade union leaders referred to by the Member for Cairnhill will themselves have to answer this. It is not for me to tell him.

Mr David Marshall: I am grateful to the Minister for the information he has given, Sir. I am very happy indeed that there is such a scheme in mind. Having put it to the trade union movement, would the Minister and the Government be good enough to put it to this House?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: Sir, the Government, as the Prime Minister has said, is trying to do everything possible and when the appropriate time comes, we will do it.

Mr Bani: The Minister has quite conveniently disclosed only the part that is useful to him for the purposes of whatever he has been doing. But I wonder if the Minister would be fair enough to clarify in detail why these trade union leaders rejected the plan?

Mr Speaker: Order. Perhaps the question could be worded in such a way as to ask the Minister whether he will table a White Paper. I do not think this House can be detained as long as that for clarification. Perhaps the Member for Thomson would like to ask for a White Paper.

Mr Bani: All that I want to say is that if the Government wants it, we are prepared to disclose the facts to the public.

Mr Chan Sun Wing (Upper Serangoon): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, according to what the Minister for Labour has said, he is trying to put the blame on the trade union leaders for the non-establishment of the unemployment insurance scheme. I want to ask him whether, when this policy was brought up, it was discussed with the Parliamentary Secretaries of the People's Action Party Government?

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: (In Malay): The Member for Upper Serangoon asks whether the blame could be squarely put at the feet of the trade union leaders. He wants to know whether the allegations are true or otherwise. What I said earlier, Mr Speaker, that the negotiation conducted between the trade union leaders -

Mr Speaker: Order. I think probably it is the fault of the translation, or perhaps it is not. The translator probably is not quick enough. But I think the question was whether or not the Parliamentary Secretaries were consulted. Is that right?

Mr Chan Sun Wing: And Assemblymen.

Mr Speaker: Whether the Parliamentary Secretaries and Government Assemblymen were consulted. That is the only question.

Mr Chan Sun Wing and Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim rose -

Mr Speaker: Order. I have clarified it. Inche Ahmad.

Dr Sheng Nam Chin: On a point of order, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are not very fluent in Malay as yet over here - we hope we shall be in a year's time - but it so happens that one of our ear-pieces has gone out of order. Can we get it repaired before the Minister pursues the matter?

The Prime Minister: The Leader of the House may adjourn.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: (In Malay): In reply to the query of the Member for Upper Serangoon, I wish to inform him that he is not yet versed in the Malay language.

Mr Speaker: Order. The question really is: were the Parliamentary Secretaries and Government Assemblymen consulted in this matter? That is all.

Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim: (In Malay): The scheme originated from the trade union movement. It concerned trade unions and it was discussed with trade union leaders who were in the Party and who were Political Secretaries. So my answer is obvious and clear.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: There appears to be some confusion over the answers. Earlier the Minister said that it was the Minister for Finance who initiated the talks with the trade union leaders. Now it would appear that the trade union leaders in the P.A.P. started them. Who started them?

Mr Speaker: The Prime Minister is taking off his coat. I hope it is because he is feeling hot.

The Prime Minister: May I explain, Sir?

Mr Speaker: Order. This is Question Time and if a Minister feels that an explanation is due, then I think the proper time is when the Minister has an opportunity of making a Ministerial statement. At the end of Question Time, I will allow the Minister for Finance or the Prime Minister to make a statement on the matter. This is Question Time and I think we must stop this question at this stage.

The Prime Minister: On a point of order, Sir. I want to explain that I have given instructions to the Water Engineer to allow water to run to the Assembly in order that the air-conditioning plant can run properly. That was the reason for my taking off my coat and not out of any disrespect to the Chair.

Mr Speaker: I do not think the Chair finds that disrespectful. The Chair was wondering whether the Table was wide enough to separate the Prime Minister from the Opposition.