ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES FOR 1962

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [5th Allotted Day].

Resumption of debate on Question (12th December, 1961),

"That the sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1."-(Dr Lee Siew Choh).

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

2.33 p.m.

MAIN ESTIMATES, 1962 (Cont.)

Head 50 -

Question again proposed.

Mr Ong Chang Sam (Choa Chu Kang: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Home Affairs yesterday stated in this House that the Government had lifted the ban of 8,000 books. All the books banned by the previous Government were unimportant and the Government hooks on which the ban had been lifted were of no significance. I said yesterday that the does not allow books of a political nature, such as books on socialism, to be imported into Singapore. The present Government professes to be a non-Communist, Socialist Party. The Prime Minister has also recommended that the people should read all kinds of books in order that they may learn how our society can be reformed. But the Government has so far not allowed books of this nature to be imported into Singapore. If the Government is sincere in reforming our society through knowledge gained from certain books on socialism and political theories, then it should allow the importation of such books into Singapore, as they will be very useful to the people of Singapore. If it wants to prove that a bad society can be reformed, then it should allow the people to read these books in order that they can decide for themselves whether the arguments put forward by the Government are good or bad. The present policy of the Government is contrary to its declared policy of promoting Malayan culture. The Minister for Culture and his Parliamentary Secretary have said that they want to encourage local writers to write books with a local background, as books of the nature of Alice in Wonderland are not useful and necessary in Singapore. The censorship on useful books imposed by the Ministry of Home Affairs had not been in keeping with the Government's professed policy. There is a book called Reminiscences of Fire which has not been properly censored. The present Government's policy is not in keeping with its professed aim of promoting Malayan culture. The Government should not adopt the same rule, the same standard or the same criterion in respect of the censorship of all kinds of books.

Another point I want to raise is in connection with the issue of identity cards. At present, the Registration Centre sends out teams to register students in schools so that they do not have to come to the Centre for their identity cards. This is a good method, but, in actual fact, no proper facilities are extended to students, especially those in the rural areas. If the students who are promoted to secondary schools in the rural areas do not possess identity cards, the schools will not admit them. The Registration Centre has not sent out officers to the rural schools to register students who qualify for registration. When students went to the Centre, they were told by the officer in charge that they should remain in their schools and wait for the officers to come and register them. But no officer has ever been sent to the rural schools. The students in the rural schools have been inconvenienced because many of them will be going to secondary schools.

So I hope the Minister for Home Affairs will take steps to facilitate the registration of students in order to enable them to proceed to the secondary schools in the urban areas. I hope he will provide them with all kinds of facilities to save their time and money.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Ong Pang Boon): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not clear what books the Member for Choa Chu Kang was referring to. We have not banned books of a political nature. We have also not banned books on socialism. Many book-shops in Singapore are selling books on socialism. Perhaps he has not visited the book-shops, and that is why he is not aware of this fact. Perhaps he has visited those book-shops which do not sell this kind of books as they are not in great demand. The hon. Member could not point out any specific example, and that is why I cannot give a specific answer.

Our policy on the censorship of books sold in the book-shops has always been liberal. We have been quite open-minded about it. I would like to quote a passage from the Report of the P.A.P.'s Special Committee reviewing the work of the Government and the Party. The Report clearly shows the attitude of the Government in regard to the censorship of books and literature.

'It is contended that we have tended to be too strict in our censorship of books, films, records, music and other cultural material from abroad. Censorship is always a tricky problem as it very often involves a certain measure of subjective judgment on the part of individuals who exercise censorship. What may be immoral or undesirable to one group of people may not be so to others. Such differences of opinion are likely to arise in an even more acute form in a multi-cultural society where sense of values differ.

In addition, censorship must pay regard to the prevailing political atmosphere and tensions in society. We must ensure that there is no expansion of cultural forces inimical to cur broad objectives of creating a Malayan nation and a democratic, non-communist socialist society.

However, as long as these broad objectives are not jeopardised, there should be freer play of cultural influences.

There are cultural materials from abroad which are not merely propagandistic but calculated to bring about active hostility against democratic forms of government.

We should restrict such type of cultural material as we restrict material which glorifies colonialism. The test is what impact certain types of hostile cultural materials is likely to have on our people at a given moment. For example, it may be all right to show a film dealing with religious and racial conflicts or about juvenile delinquency or gangsterism at times when there are no acute racial religious or juvenile delinquency problems.

Works of literary and social, value, including those by Communists, should not be excluded as a matter of course. Only such works should be excluded which are likely to incite our people to do unconstitutional things or hamper us from our goal of building a Malayan society.'

2.45 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. It seems to be a very long extract.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, there is only a short paragraph more to go.

'Subject to this overriding consideration, we should allow freer flow of books, scientific literature, plays, films and songs from Communist countries. We recommend that all nonpolitical books should be allowed entry from Communist countries as a general rule.'

Therefore, from what I have already quoted, we can see clearly that the Government's policy on censorship is very lax and broad-minded. Because of this, many books which were banned formerly are allowed on sale at present.

As to the allegation that we do not encourage local creative works in literature, unfortunately the Member for Choa Chu Kang has not been able to give us any concrete examples in this respect. We have banned many undesirable publications imported from other countries. There is a positive aspect of this ban. If we have very few undesirable publications, then the healthy publications in our own country will have a good chance of better circulation. There will be more and more people trying to take part in literary works with a Malayan background. Therefore, in this respect, our policy is in compliance with that of the Ministry of Culture.

As for the book mentioned by the Member for Choa Chu Kang, Reminiscences of Fire, this was banned only at the time when the students were staging a boycott. This book contained seven articles, the first six of which are quite innocuous. But the last article, the title of which is Reminiscences of Fire, is the main reason for banning this book. It is because the writer of this article wrote about students camping in the Chinese High School in 1960. This article states clearly the organisation and activities of the students camping there, how they were trying to go against the Government at that time, and how propaganda work was carried out against the Government then. In this article terms such as "superior" and "Directives" which in Communist organisations were commonly used. Only those who were found connected with the underground activities of the Communists will have knowledge and use of such terminology. The event took place at the time of anti-colonialism, and the government then was pro-colonialist. But the present Government is a popularly elected government. The anti-government by violence phase has gone.

Another reason for banning this book is that at the time when the book was banned there was a minority of Secondary IV students who made use of the same method of organising agitation among students in their boycott against Government Secondary IV examinations. They even resorted to violence to stop students Who wanted to sit for the examinations. So in that atmosphere of tension, if we allowed this book to circulate in the market, it would only lead to increasing difficulties for the Government. Therefore, I would like to ask the Member for Choa Chu Kang whether he is sincerely concerned with local writers with a Malayan outlook writing literary works in this perspective or whether he is trying to defend Communist activities. Unfortunately, he has not made it clear to me. I can tell him that fortunately it is we who are in power, otherwise the writer of this book will not be able to move about freely in this country. He might be confronted with more difficulties and troubles.

As regards the Registry of Persons, the Member for Choa Chu Kang mentions that the Registration Office has not sent out mobile teams to rural schools to register the students who want to apply for identity cards. If there is such an occurrence, and if he can bring up concrete examples, such as the place or the name of the school or the students, then I will take proper measures to deal with such a problem. As far as possible, we are trying to reduce the need for 12-year old students from the rural areas to go to the Registration Office to get their identity cards. Many members of the public go to the N.R.I.C. Centre to get their identity cards. So if we encourage more and more students to go to the Registration Centre in the city, then there will be a great pressure of work. That is why we have decided that where there are students who are of age and who are studying in rural schools, we will send out mobile teams to register them so that we can save them a lot of trouble and transport money. Of course, we are understaffed and because of the question of expenditure, it is impossible for us to send out mobile teams to every school in the rural areas. I believe that given more favourable conditions, both administrative and financial, we will try to send out mobile teams to every school in the rural areas so that every student who wants to apply for an identity card can be attended to.

Tun Lim Yew Hock (Cairnhill): Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Minister were to have said yesterday what he said just now, I would have nothing to pick with him. In fact, I would have supported him. When he was attacked by the leader of the Barisan Sosialis in regard to censorship of publications and the denial of citizenship rights to be a number of what the Barisan Sosialis termed "anti-colonial fighters", the Minister felt it to be a very convenient way of answering such attacks by saying, "We are not so bad. It was the Lim Yew Hock Government that imposed the ban. Since we came into power, we have already approved about a few thousand books." Sir, in regard to that ban, may I explain here that it was a blanket ban on all publishing companies in Communist China? Then there was a continuing process of screening the books, and if the books were harmless they would be released for sale in Singapore. The P.A.P. took office in 1959 and the continuing process still continues. As a result of that continuing process, the ban was lifted from a large number of books.

Coming to citizenship, the Minister said, "We are not so bad. The Lim Yew Hock Government was very strict. We have given citizenship to a lot of people." What the leader of the Barisan Sosialis said about the denial of citizenship rights was, I think, in regard to those who they claimed were anti-colonial fighters, and the Minister knows who they are. We refused to grant them citizenship. The fact that the P.A.P. has been in power for 2½ years, and coupled with the fact that those so-called anti-colonial fighters were comrades of the P.A.P. and they still refused them their citizenship rights shows that what the Lim Yew Hock Government did was quite right.

3.00 p.m.

Sir, it has been the habit in this House since 1959 to label all sins or omissions on the Lim Yew Hock Government. Even the Barisan Sosialis, when they were sitting opposite, were attacking the Lim Yew Hock Government, as if it was a free-for-all. But now that they have come over here they are beginning to have the feeling, as the people of Singapore are now beginning to realise, that the Lim Yew Hock Government was not so bad as compared with the P.A.P. Government. At least, it is much better.

The Chairman: Does the Member for Queenstown want a vote?

Dr Lee Siew Choh (Queenstown): Can I speak a few words?

The Chairman: Just a few words, and then we will take a vote.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: The Member for Cairnhill mentioned a little while ago about citizenship being denied only to certain people. But I can assure him that a number of students who took part in the 1955/56 demonstration have been denied their citizenship. Also quite a lot of people who were active members of the P.A.P., and not only those who were detained, like the Organising Secretaries and Branch Committee members, have been denied their citizenship. We do not know why.

An hon. Member: All are Communists!

Dr Lee Siew Choh: As regards the books, Sir, may I ask the Minister how is it - this is in defence of the Member for Cairnhill in a certain way - that books which were available during the Lim Yew Hock period are no more available today?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: What are the books?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Sir, a number of companies have been writing to the Minister for the last twelve months.

The Minister for Culture (Mr S. Rajaratnam): Name the books.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: The names of the two companies concerned are the Singapore Trading Company and the Education Book Store. They have been writing to the Minister asking for certain hooks to be released. But they have not been released. In fact, during my stay in the Ministry, I found that if there is but one line in the whole book which says what is happening in China is good, or if there is just one line that praises Mao Tse-tung, then the whole hook is banned. So much so, Sir, that several people who had been working in the Ministry have resigned in protest. I feel that the Minister has borrowed spectacles heavily tinted from somewhere. Otherwise he could not have seen socialist books as Communist books.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: I did not know, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the Member for Queenstown has now allied himself with the Member for Cairnhill. My point is that in Singapore, unlike in the Federation, it is not a blanket ban as such. Books are released after examination. This Government has been more liberal. That is why within a period of two and a half years, we have released more than 8,000 books. In the Member for Cairnhill's time, probably none of those books would have been released. The Member for Queenstown has asked how it is that books which were available during the previous Government are no longer available now. Mr Speaker, Sir, there are many reasons why books which were available during the previous Government are no longer available now. It is not that we are even stricter than the previous Government. I would like to give some of the reasons why it happened. In June this year, I instructed my officials to find out about this, because certain allegations were made that nowadays book-shops have less books for sale than before. After interviewing five of the largest bookshops in the city, we found out that these are the reasons why there is a scarcity of books nowadays. First, once the books produced in China, are sold out in Singapore, they are no longer available in China. It is not possible to order again the same type of books because, in a planned economy, as in China, the production is related to the demand. Once the books are sold out, that is the end of it. Secondly, there is a shortage of printing material in China, and, therefore, it is not possible for the Chinese Government to produce as many books as before [Interruption] -

The Chairman: Order.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: - for export overseas. The third reason, according to the bookshop proprietors, is that in recent years creative work in China has been very scarce. The reason is that many of these writers have been sent to the villages and the communes to take part in physical labour, and, therefore, they have no time to write any literary works. Hence, there are less new books available in Singapore. Mind you, Sir, this information was given by people who have been dealing with this business for years. Fourthly, the market for the progressive type of books is very small. Those who read them are the youth and the intellectuals. Mr Speaker, Sir, what all proprietors of bookshops are after is profit. If this type of books do not bring them as much profit as the others, they will not import them. Fifthly, although the Singapore Government has released many types of books, the Federation still imposes a ban on this type of books. Therefore, the market continues to be very small, and it is not profitable to import this type of books for sale in Singapore only. It is not because the Government's standard of censorship is more severe than that of the previous Government's. These are objective facts.

The Chairman: Dr Lee, take a vote?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: One sentence only, Sir. I can summarise the real reasons in two words. They are the "Special Branch".

Mr David Marshall: Hear, hear!

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

The Chairman: Amendment (1) on the Order Paper Supplement for today. Inche Ahmad Jabri.

Inche Ahmad Jabri Bin Mohammad Akib (Southern Islands): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3.

Mr Speaker, I am surprised to see that the vote for the cost of students attending the Muslim College at Kiang has been reduced as compared to the 1961 vote. What should have been done by the Government is to increase the vote and not to reduce it. This is on the basis of the policy to encourage more capable students to further their religious studies. It is, therefore, necessary that this vote should be increased. We have just heard how the Prime Minister replied to my question concerning translators in the High Court, He said there were not enough defendants, and so there was no need for more translators. I think those who receive religious study at the Muslim College, Kiang, will be more useful to the State of Singapore. Therefore, Mr Speaker, I think it is appropriate for the Ministry of Home Affairs to increase this particular vote, and not have the vote as it is this year. When I read today's newspapers, there are very few students studying at the Muslim College at Klang.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, when the Muslim College, Klang, was founded in March 1955, the Singapore Government made a capital grant of $10,000 and undertook to offer ten scholarships in' two batches of five scholars at the rate of $1,560 per year. The first batch of five students who joined the college in 1955 completed their studies in 1959. No scholarships were offered in 1960 because consideration was then given to reviewing the extent to which the Government had need of personnel academically qualified in the Muslim religion and the extent to which they could make use of the College. Unfortunately, this assessment of the demand for graduates of the College was not completed before the opening of the 1960 academic year of the College in April of that year. However, the matter was resolved and it was decided to send one scholar a year for the five years commencing from the 1961 academic year, instead of five scholars in one batch. The provision of $4,000 in the 1962 Estimates is less than previously because of the decision to send one scholar a year instead of five at the time. The provision of $4,000 in 1962 is to meet the cost of the student who studied in the College in the academic year 196l and will continue to do so in 1962, and the cost of the student who will be selected for the academic year 1962, and a little bit of other expenses that may arise in connection with their studies.

The provision of $7,800 in the 1961 Estimates was only a repetition of previous estimates. At the time when the provision was entered in the 1961 Estimates, no decision had yet been arrived at whether to send one scholar per year or five scholars in one batch. That is the reason why there is this difference in the provisions for 1961 and 1962.

Inche Mohd. Ali Bin Alwi (Kampong Kembangan): Sir, I feel at a loss when the -

3.15 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Time has expired. Does the Member for the Southern Islands require a vote?

Inche Ahmad Jabri indicated assent.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

The time allotted for Head 50 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with:

Dr Lee Siew Choh:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 17.

Inche Ahmad Jabri Bin Mohammad Akib:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 19.

Mr Chan Sun Wing:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 23.

Dr Lee Siew Choh:

Dr Sheng Nam Chin:

Mr Chan Sun Wing:

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $100.

The sum of $1,694,090 for Head 50 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 51 -

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 51 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 6.

Sir, this is an item for the maintenance of vessels, and I find it difficult to understand why it is that the estimate for 1962 is double that of 1961. Is it because there are more vessels to be maintained or is it because the maintenance carried out from year to year has not been enough, and it has to be made up with a double vote?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the provision is for the maintenance of the following vessels:-

H.M.S. Laburnum, which is the Head-quarters ship of the M.R.N.V.R.; H.M.S. Panglima, H.M.S. Cana, Panji, two harbour launches, one fast motor-boat, three bailers and five dinghies.

Until 1962, the proper maintenance of vessels has not been possible owing to the lack of funds and so maintenance on a breakdown basis only has been carried out. The slipping or docking has always been kept to a minimum because of high dock charges. Dock Staff therefore, have not been able to carry out drill tests or the examination of hulls and of associated fittings. This lack of proper maintenance in the past means that in most cases major overhauls will be required in 1962.

In working out the amount required for maintenance of such vessels in 1962, estimates from the Harbour Board have been obtained and, as a result of these estimates, a figure of $138,976 has been arrived at. This maintenance comprises such items as scraping, painting, refitting of underwater fittings, replacing of waterline plates, cleaning, slipping, dock charges, etc.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: I withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $9,912,930 for Head 51 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 52 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr David Marshall -

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 52 be reduced by $100.

The Chairman: Mr Marshall? He is not here.

The sum of $418,720 for Head 52 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 53 -

The following amendments stood in the name of Inche Ahmad Jabri bin Mohammad Akib -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (2) of subhead 1.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 4.

The Chairman: Inche Ahmad Jabri?

Inche Ahmad Jabri: I am not moving both my amendments.

Dr Thio Chan Bee (Tanglin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $100.

Sir, at the time of the Bukit Ho Swee Fire many people were asking themselves this question: Why should Government have to wait for a big fire before building houses to rehouse these attap-house dwellers? The Fire Brigade cannot control a fire that breaks out in an attap-house area if the wind is blowing strongly. Therefore, it would be a pity if the Fire Brigade is unable to prevent an occurrence like this once in three years, because if the money that has to be spent to relieve these fire victims could be spent before the fire, it would save the fire victims, the public and the Fire Brigade too, a large expenditure of money and effort.

Another suggestion made is this, If the Fire Brigade could suggest preventive measures to reduce the fire risks in these areas, that would be another way to prevent a tragedy like this from happening regularly. I have been told, Sir, that in these attap-house areas if they changed the roofings of attap to zinc or aluminum roofings, then the Finance Ministry would come along and say that the property tax must be increased.

The Chairman: We are now on the Fire Brigade and not on housing. Let us not talk about attap houses as against zinc houses. I should imagine that if the Member wishes to speak about the Fire Brigade on this vote, he should indicate how the Fire Brigade has failed, whether expansion is necessary and 50 on and so forth-not on housing.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Speaker. Sir, the vote for the Fire Brigade comes to nearly $2½ million. If by preventive measures fire risks could be reduced, then we could reduce the expenditure. All this tragedy would not have happened. Simple measures like the Fire Brigade people going round to advise the people on changing their roofing would be of greater help. But there is one obstacle, Sir. The property tax people say this thing cannot be done without increasing the property tax. This is where perhaps one Ministry could help another.

The Chairman: The Question is, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $100." I do not know whether the Minister has anything to answer there.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, actually it is more a question of housing than the Fire Brigade. However, I wish to inform the Member for Tanglin that it is precisely because of these fire hazards that the Government is spending millions of dollars each year to build new flats, which will be more tire-proof, and we hope with the successful conclusion of the Four-Year Development Plan on housing, such large fires as the Bukit Ho Swee fire will not occur again.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Fire Brigade may be in a position to suggest ways and means of preventing fire, such as the use of inflammable materials for houses and so forth. But all this, Mr Speaker, Sir, is -

The Chairman: Non-inflammable.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: - non-inflammable materials for houses and so forth. But, Mr Speaker, all this is to a large extent tied up with the economic conditions of the people. I mean, all the non-inflammable materials invariably are more expensive than attap and planks. Therefore, many of the suggestions of the Fire Brigade are just not within the means of these attap-house dwellers to carry out. That is where the Housing Board has come in to build low-cost houses for these attap-house dwellers.

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I wonder whether the Minister could give some consideration to this suggestion. During the life of the previous Government some kampongs has fire extinguishers provided together with one or two firemen going round and forming a squad of about 20 kampong people depending on the size of the kampong, to teach them how to use these fire extinguishers and to be on call should there be a fire to prevent the fire spreading. I find that these fire extinguishers have now gone dry; the 20 people have gone off the list, and nobody knows who they are because the list has not been renewed. If the Assemblyman concerned for that area were to approach the Minister and give him the details, could we get help along those lines?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Member for Mountbatten were to make a request to the Fire Brigade for the setting up of a fire-fighting squad in whichever kampong she thinks necessary, I am sure the Fire Brigade would only be too glad to do so. In fact, there are at the moment 72 kampong fire-fighting squads in 28 kampongs. These squads have all received training and equipment from the Fire Brigade. They were recruited in order to fight fires in the incipient stage within their own kampongs before the arrival of the Singapore Fire Brigade. I can assure the Member for Mountbatten that if she were to put up a request, it would be favourably considered.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I shall discuss this in the Development Estimates. I withdraw this amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $2,449,510 for Head 53 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 54 -

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 54 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 7.

Sir, this is a vote for the purchase of of passports amounting to $24,000. I wonder whether it is wise to spend so much money on passports which will be out of fashion when the next constitutional advance takes place in, I think, 1963. How many passports can be purchased with $24,000, and how long will these last?

3.30 p.m.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker. Sir, I think the provision is very necessary to meet the anticipated demand in 1962. For the information of the Member for Cairnhill, the number of passports issued from June to December 1959 was 6,341. In 1960, the number of passports issued was 17,432. In 1961, as at November, the number of passports issued has reached 20,607. The amount provided for in the 1962 Estimates can only purchase about 19,000 passports. Fortunately, we are anticipating a balance of about 8,000 passports this year. So together with 18,000 for next year, we are just in a position to meet the demand in 1962.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: In view of the explanation, may I beg leave to withdraw?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Mr Speaker, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 54 be reduced by $100.

Sir, I have no wish to embarrass the Minister, for as we all know, the Immigration Department has improved considerably as a result of recommendations from the Barisan Sosialis Assemblymen and branches. But I wish to raise a few points.

In spite of the improvement, there is still restriction imposed on Singapore citizens who want to travel. For example, Singapore citizens and children of Singapore citizens who have been awarded scholarships in iron curtain countries have been prevented from going on these scholarships just because the Special Branch - the Special Branch always comes in - says that these people should not be allowed to go on scholarships to non-pro-Western countries. I wonder if the Minister will reconsider the policy on this question.

Again. Sir, you will remember that at the inauguration of the Barisan Sosialis, we extended an invitation to -

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mao Tse-tung!

Dr Lee Siew Choh: - the Sarawak United People's Party to attend our inaugural meeting. The Chairman of the Party himself was entertained lavishly when he passed through Singapore. He has said that his organisation is a legal organisation and that there is no Communist in his organisation. Yet when his representative was asked to come along, our Minister here saw fit to stop him from attending the inaugural meeting. Again I wonder whether the Minister will consider changing the policy on this question.

There is still one more point. This concerns the local-born who are now in China. There are a number of people born in Singapore who went to China for various reasons, and now when they want to come back, they are prevented from doing so. People over the age of twelve have not been issued with certificates of status. We think it is the inalienable right of anybody born in Singapore that he be allowed a chance to come back. We know, Sir, there are people who have been away to America, Indonesia and Australia for 20 to 30 years, and because they could produce documents to prove that they were born in Singapore, they were allowed to come back. Why is discrimination shown against those people who went to China? We know a number of such cases, and even the brother of one of the Assembly women opposite is similarly discriminated against.

Mr Ng Teng Kian (Punggol): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is the opportune time now for us to touch on the immigration laws. Our Minister for Home Affairs is no longer a bachelor. He knows the warmth and responsibilities of a family.

There are two rules in this country restricting local citizens from applying for permission for their wives to enter Singapore. There is another restriction which is applicable to their children. According to the present law, a local-born citizen will not be allowed to apply for permission for his wife to come into this country if between the period 1948 and 1952 he has not been living together with her. The rule applicable to their children is this. If they were born elsewhere and they are older than six years, they are not allowed to come into Singapore. These restrictions have greatly affected the Chinese. In the past, generally speaking, the Chinese came to Singapore to earn a living but their wives stayed in China. They did not know that after the P.A.P. came into power they would be faced with such restrictions, The P.A.P. claims to be a socialist Party. Hard-working people from China earn no more than $200 a month. So it is impossible for them to go back to China in the course of two or three years. These people never realised that the P.A.P. Government would impose such restrictions on them. They have not been able to live with their wives for the last five years as their wives are not allowed to come into Singapore. Therefore, I say that these restrictions are worthy of reconsideration on human grounds. I hope the Minister concerned will improve this situation.

Regarding the restriction on the entry of children, it is impossible for a child who is six years old to live alone away from its parents. Who is to look after the child? Therefore, I hope the Minister for Home Affairs, who is a father now, will understand parental love and the love between husband and wife. He must realise it is not good to curb such love.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Queenstown mentioned the Government's refusal to allow two representatives of the Sarawak U.P.P. to attend the inaugural meeting of the Barisan Sosialis. I think the reasons have been made public in the newspapers and, in fact, even the Prime Minister has disclosed the background of the lives of these two persons. Therefore, I do not think it is necessary for me to repeat here again what is a public fact. It may be that the President of the Sarawak U.P.P is not a Communist Party and that the Party is a legal Party - as he said - but that does not mean that a legal Party does not contain Communist or pro-Communist elements. As you know, Sir, no Communist will claim himself to be a Communist. Because the Communist Party is an illegal organisation in Sarawak, therefore they must find a legal Party for their activities.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in the middle of this year, the P.A.P. set up a Committee to review its work in the Government and in the Party. The Member for Queens-town was a Secretary of this Committee. During the discussions on the problems of immigration, if I remember correctly, he did not raise the question of Singapore-born persons who had gone to China in the early fifties to take part in the Sosialist reconstruction of the mother country. He did not say anything about them. In fact, I am surprised today that he should champion their cause. Is it because he has gone over to the other side of the House? Or is it because the support of this small number of people is so vital for the survival of his Party?

The Member for Punggol has raised the question of the entry of the wives and children of Singapore citizens. The question of immigration must be viewed m relation to the economic conditions of the country. If the Government wants to be popular, the easiest thing for it to do is to open the gate and allow everybody to come in. But then what will happen to the country? The unemployment situation will get from bad to worse and whatever new industries the State may develop, the opportunities of employment will be quickly taken up by these alien elements.

3.45 p.m.

Therefore, Mr Speaker, Sir, the free flow of immigrants from outside has to be controlled. Immigration is a Pan-Malayan matter. Because there is no restriction at the Causeway, it is just not possible for Singapore to adopt an immigration policy which is diametrically opposite to that of the Federation.

In these two specific instances of entry of wives and children, the Review Committee again has made a recommendation that we should relax the restriction of these two categories of people, i.e., wives and children of Singapore citizens. The recommendation is that, so long as the relationship is proved, all wives of Singapore citizens should be allowed entry. This recommendation has been accepted by the Government and we are now awaiting the views of the Federation Government on this matter. As soon as we get the Federation Government's agreement on this, we will implement it.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I am surprised at the Minister saying that I never raised this point before in the Committee of Review. I have the minutes of the 10th meeting of the Committee of Review with me. I was the Secretary.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: That is P.A.P. property and should be returned!

Dr Lee Siew Choh: It is not P.A.P. private property! It is -

The Chairman: Order!

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I raised this important matter, saying that - I will read just one sentence to you, Sir:

'Dr Lee says that it is the basic human right that a person he able to return to the place of his birth.'

But, unfortunately, I was overruled. I raised this point on many occasions, and even the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education agreed with me on this. Now the Minister for Home Affairs turns round and says he knows nothing about this. I want to ask him again, Sir what about those people who have -

The Minister for Education (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): Point of clarification, Sir.

The Chairman: Will the Member give way?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: No time, Sir. I also want to ask the Minister: what about those people, now in China, whose parents in Singapore are about to die? On compassionate grounds, Sir - I know of one particular case. This person appealed to the Minister to allow the son to come back to Singapore just to see his dying mother. Confirmation that the mother was dying came from a medical certificate saying that the mother was suffering from this and that. But in spite of such circumstances, the Minister saw fit to refuse permission even for the son to come back to have a last look at the mother. Mind you, Sir, the father of the son in China had given an undertaking that if the son was not allowed to remain permanently in Singapore, he would be willing, however, to let the son come back for only a stretch of three months. In spite of that, the Minister refused. The last time I heard of this case was about two months ago. I do not know of any further developments. I hope the Minister will on compassionate grounds alone, consider cases like this.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not aware of the case he mentioned. If that is so, I shall look it up to see whether it is a genuine case. But as I said, Mr Speaker, it is very difficult to make a precedent in this kind of cases because, once a precedent is made, it is very difficult to refuse other cases, whether genuine or not. One important point the Member for Queenstown has overlooked is that the Chinese Government refuses to issue any travel documents to its nationals who want to go abroad. As you know, Mr Speaker, Sir, when someone lands in Singapore without any travel documents, it is not an easy job to get rid of him because no shipping company will take him.

The Member for Queenstown surely must be aware, Mr Speaker, Sir, that in 1960 the Singapore Citizenship Ordinance was amended. He agreed to the amendment. The amendment says quite definitely that if any citizen, who has at any time after the 6th day of April, 1960, voluntarily claimed and exercised any rights available to him under the law of any foreign country, being rights accorded exclusively to the citizens or nationals of that foreign country, shall cease to be a citizen of Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, all these persons might have been born in Singapore, but they had already exercised the rights exclusively accorded to nationals of that foreign country. As such, according to the amendment in the Citizenship Ordinance, they have ceased to be Singapore citizens.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think I heard the Member for Queenstown state that he consulted the Minister for Education on this.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: No.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: The Parliamentary Secretary. I thought it was the Minister for Education. That was why I wanted clarification.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I think the Minister for Education was too duty conscious.

The Chairman: Order.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I just want to clarify a point which the Minister for Home Affairs raised, Sir. There is hardly any time left. He said he did not know about the particular case I referred to. I can assure him, Sir, that the father of that person in question, who had seen me earlier, not only went to the Ministry to see the Parliamentary Secretary but also saw the Minister in his Meet-the-People sessions. And yet he has the audacity to come here and say that -

The Chairman: Order! The Member for Queenstown is using .language which not only slithers on the borderline but goes over the borderline. In this particular context, I ask him to withdraw the word "audacity".

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I withdraw that word, Sir. He also raised the point about the amendment in June 1960. Sir, I must tell you that quite a number of Assembly back-benchers in the P.A.P. never knew what was happening. There is no shame in this kind of thing because we were never informed. All these are legal matters the implications of which were never explained to us. It was only later on that we found that that amendment was meant to stop people from coming back by using technicalities, like saying that these people now already exercise some foreign rights. I mean, if these things had been explained to us, I am sure we would have objected to them. They hoped to catch us unawares on technical and legal points.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Chan Chee Seng): Mr Speaker, just now the Member for Queenstown mentioned that such a case came up to me. I have never come across this sort of case. I think the Member for Queenstown uses all sorts of twisting stories in the Assembly. If he ever had such a case, put it up and substantiate it, but do not just say that there was a case like that. Put it up [Interruption] and let us hear it.

The Chairman: Order.

Mr Chan Chee Seng: He said I had come across this case. I have never come across it.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: But you were approached.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to say that the amendment to the Singapore Citizenship Ordinance was discussed among Parliamentary Secretaries and taken down to Assemblymen. If the Member for Queenstown did not understand all this, he should have asked any of the Cabinet Ministers at that time. If he chose to ignore all these things, it is not for me to help him.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

The sum of $1,115,080 for Head 54 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 55 -

Mr Tee Kim Leng (Pasir Panjang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 1.

This concerns the post of Commissioner of Police, which is still being held by an expatriate officer. I do not know when will a local officer be able to hold this post. This is a very important post as far as the implications of the law are concerned. Recently we came to know that when the law was being implemented, there was prejudice and discrimination. We know the law should treat all people equally, regardless of creed, race or religion. But, in point of fact, we can see that taxi-drivers are being oppressed. The taxi-drivers in Singapore number some 10,000 and they are leading a very difficult life. Very often when they pick up a fare, they are prosecuted. On the other hand, we see that foreign capital concerns such as the S.T.C., whose drivers have committed the offence of overloading, have not been prosecuted. So it seems that this law is discriminating between local and foreign capital concerns.

Another point is this: I am not clear about the recent strike by the students. According to newspaper reports, there were unidentified people who assaulted the students and there were also unidentified people who drove a vehicle and knocked down a student. I have not seen any police action being taken in this matter.

At one time when there was a strike in a laundry factory, I do not know why the police went there and they were asked to push vehicles out of the factory. There is something very strange about the implementation of the law which -

The Deputy Prime Minister (Dr Toh Chin Chye): On a point of order. I believe the Member for Pasir Panjang is moving an amendment to item (1) of subhead 1 of Head 55. That deals with the Police Commissioner. I do not think that has anything to do with the buses.

The Chairman: I think the Member for Pasir Panjang has alleged that there has been discrimination in the application of the law by the police. Therefore, the person who would be responsible for any discrimination in the application of the law would be the Commissioner of Police as Commissioner of Police. The Member has brought in the buses to indicate, I think, that taxi-drivers are prosecuted while S.T.C. conductors or drivers are not prosecuted. Therefore, in principle, he is correct in raising these points under item (1) of subhead 1. It is the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police to see that there should be no discrimination in the application of the law.

4.00 p.m.

Dato Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat (Geylang Serai): Mr Speaker, Sir, on this particular Head we are not supposed to speak on any item except the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police?

The Chairman: No, not necessarily at all. There are other items which come under "Personal Emoluments". I beg your pardon. Under item (1) of subhead I, yes - the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police. But there is an amendment by the Member for Queens-town on the whole of the subhead. He can then, when it is moved, touch on any other aspects which are dealt with by the personnel of the police. Have I made that clear?

Dato Abdul Hamid: The reason why I ask is this. We have here on this Head ten amendments. At the rate the debate is going on during these last few days, it looks as though those Members whose notices of amendments under any particular Head come right below will not have the chance to speak. A hat I am trying to say is this. I have an amendment. I thought I could speak on a particular subhead 1, but I have had no chance to speak on quite a number of occasions.

The Chairman: That is exactly what I have tried to warn Members about. Supply time is Opposition time. When I informed the House that I had allocated time, I did suggest to Opposition Members that they should get together and try and share the time. Apparently they have not done so. The fact that the hon. Member for Geylang Serai has not filed a motion on this particular item which is giving rise to a debate on the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police does not prevent him from speaking on the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police, because the amendment has already been moved. If it has not been moved, then, of course, he is precluded from speaking. Any other point, Dato Abdul Hamid?

Dato Abdul Hamid: I would like to speak on the question of policy in regard to the Police Force on this particular Head.

The Chairman: That will come under the main Head 55 - general policy. What the Member for Pasir Panjang is doing now is to pin-point the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police, and he is entitled to do that. He alleges that there has been discrimination in the application of the law, and that, of course, is the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police. Mr Tee Kim Leng.

Mr Tee Kim Leng: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, what I have said is that the Commissioner of Police must go according to the Jaw, without any discrimination.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, allegations of bias in the execution of the law have been made and certain instances mentioned. The first of these is that of taxis. The Member for Pasir Panjang alleges that taxi-drivers have been discriminated against and that the foreign-owned S.T.C. has been left off quite easily. I remember I made a reply to this same question at the last sitting of the Assembly; that in the case of the taxi-driver, he is in full control of his vehicle, and if he chooses to flout the law and tout for extra passengers, then he is in for trouble. In the case of buses, according to the drivers and the conductors of the buses, they cannot control the number of passengers boarding the bus. Therefore, it sounds a bit unjust for the police to go after the bus driver. The allegation that we are favouring a foreign-owned bus company is nonsense, because the .drivers and conductors of Chinese bus companies have not been summoned or prosecuted in court. Therefore, where is this discrimination in favour of the foreign-owned S.T.C. as against the Chinese bus companies owned by local capitalists?

The hon. Member also mentions unknown persons assaulting students during the boycott. I think every Member is aware that parents were taking their children who wished to sit for the examination to the examination centre and that they were forcibly prevented from entering the examination centre, and in many instances, there were scuffles to block the students. These unknown persons - being unknown I do not know who they were - could well be the boycotted students themselves or could well be the parents who wished to take their children to the examination centre. If they were pervented physically from doing so, or violently from doing so, I say what else could the parent do other than force his way in? If in the process, something were to happen, no one could stop it.

As for the laundry strike, that the police were biased and interfered in the laundry strike, I am afraid I am not well aware of this strike in the laundry. But I can assure the Member for Pasir Panjang that in cases of trade dispute, and when the police are required on the spot, they are always there at the request of the Labour Department.

Mr S. T. Bani (Thomson): Sir, in spite of the fact that he is an expatriate officer, the Commissioner of Police, is undoubtedly a wise old man. I have no doubt he is an efficient Commissioner of Police. But I would like the Minister to take into serious consideration what I have to say, because I think, from what I have personally witnessed, the behaviour of police personnel at strike spots in front of pickets has been gradually deteriorating. To say the least, Sir, their behaviour is one of indecency and provocative. I ask the Government Front-benchers not to laugh at this, because if they want witnesses, I am quite prepared to line up thousands of workers to testify to what I say. The Government Members are laughing because they do not realise the seriousness of the situation. Sir, last week a few police officers, accompanied by an inspector, stood in front of the Chartered Bank building where about 150 workers of Guthrie and Company were on strike. I was told that the police personnel who were present there made indecent signs to the workers and provoked the temper of the workers. I think what happened after that the Minister is fully aware of. This is just one of the instances I have personally witnessed - plainclothes policemen in front of the premises of the Singapore Business Houses Employees Union making obscene signs at union officials and calling them out for a fight. Unfortunately, I respect the decorum of this Assembly, and it is not possible for me to show what sort of signs were made. But if the Minister is interested to know, Sir, I can demonstrate to him anywhere he chooses. But, Sir, I think this is a serious matter. I do not blame the Minister because I have no doubt he is not aware of the conduct of every single policeman in the force. But I hope he will give serious consideration to what I have said, and at least undertake to investigate the truth of this statement.

One of the things I would like to say here, Sir, concerns the economy of the State. The Minister for Finance always says that he does not have enough money for development projects. But I see, Sir, the Police Force is throwing a lot of good money away on unnecessary projects.

The Chairman: Order. We are now on item (1) of subhead 1 - Commissioner of Police. I have indicated how the debate should go. Members should say how the Police Force as a police force has failed in its behaviour and so on and so forth.

Mr Bani: Sir, what I am about to say comes within the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police. Therefore, it will be relevant.

The Chairman: Will the Member please continue for a bit, so that I can decide?

Mr Bani: I have seen and I am told that plainclothes policemen have been sent in five or six cars to follow Mr Lim Ching Siong all the way round the city.

An hon. Member: It is an honour!

Mr Bani: Not that Mr Lim minds it. But I just want to point out the irrelevance of sending five car-loads of policemen and wasting public money by following Mr Lim Ching Siong around - cars, their maintenance, petrol, etc, etc. Mr Lim tells me that if the Minister wants to save public money, he is quite prepared to give him a schedule of his activities; what time he starts, where he goes, whom he meets round the clock.

4.15 p.m.

The Government can save money and tell the Commissioner of Police not to send five or six cars with odd-looking cronies inside following Mr Lirn around. Personally, Sir, I would like to ask my good friend, the Minister for Home Affairs, -

An hon. Member: Good friend?

Mr Bani: - to do me a favour. I have no car, Sir, and I get a few chaps, following me in cars. I only hope the Minister can instruct them to give me a lift, so that I can save my taxi fare.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Thomson mentions his Secretary-General being followed by five car-loads of plainclothes men. I think his Secretary-General is not that important or such a big fry to merit five car-loads of plainclothes men following him.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the behaviour of the police at places of strike has been complained of, and in one instance the Member for Thomson mentions that a plainclothes man made indecent signs to him. Mr Speaker, Sir, for one thing, if the man was in plainclothes, I wonder how he could know for certain that he was a police plainclothes man and not any criminal element. If he believed that that man was a police in plainclothes, then I think he should have brought it to the attention of the Commissioner of Police and asked him to take action, and if no action was taken in spite of the fact that the allegation was substantiated, then I think in that event the Commissioner of Police was biased. But Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know whether the Member for Thomson did or did not make a complaint and it is not possible for me therefore to investigate into the matter. But I would like to inform him that, in carrying out their duties, the police are facing more and more difficulties in maintaining their neutral position, because over the past few months the picketing - this is told to me not just by the police but also by Labour officials - has become more and more unruly and violent. The police have complained that often they have to face all kinds of abuses, and that in front of members of the public. They have to tolerate all that because they have been told again and again by me and others that they should try to cool down and keep their temper in executing their duties. One thing I would like the Member for Thomson to do is to co-operate with the police and advise his union members that they should observe the rules of peaceful picketing as provided for in the Trade Disputes Ordinance. If he could persuade his union members to observe that, I am sure there will in fact, be no need for the police to be present at places of strike where picketing is going on. The police have always been called to the scene of a strike because the picketing there has not been peaceful. In fact, it has been unruly.

The Chairman: Will the Member for Pasir Panjang require a vote? He has heard the Member for Geylang Serai. Time is getting short. Does he wish to add anything further?

Mr Tee Kim Leng: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I wish to say a few more words. The Minister has not seen the workers. To my knowledge, the S.T.C. conductors do not like to have more passengers in their buses. Why do they want to have more passengers? Because their employers ask them to do so, as they know that the Government will not prosecute them. When the buses have more passengers, the workers will have more work to do. Moreover, pockets are liable to be picked.

The Chairman: Order. I think the Minister gave a very long answer to the same question posed to him some time ago. I do not think the whole matter should be reopened in this manner - not in this Committee of Supply. If the hon. Member was not satisfied with the reply given by the Minister then, he ought to have filed notice of a motion in the matter. Any other point the Member wishes to make?

Mr Tee Kim Leng: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to put it to the vote.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

The following amendments stood in the name of Mrs Seow Peck Leng -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (5) of subhead 1.*

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (6) of subhead 1.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (8) of subhead 1.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 is respect of item (9) of subhead 1.

The Chairman: Mrs Seow, amendment (2)*.

Mrs Seow Peck Leng (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, Sir, to give more time to the main Head, could I -

The Chairman: The Member is not moving amendment (2)?

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: I am not moving my amendments on items (5), (6), (8) and (9).

The following amendments stood in the name of Inche Mohamed Ali bin Alwi -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (83) of subhead 1.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (84) of subhead 1.

The Chairman: Inche Mohd. Ali? He is not here. Dr Lee Siew Choh.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will not speak very much about it, Sir. The only thing is that I feel -

The Chairman: Will the hon. Member move first?

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1.

I will not take up much time, Sir,I just want to emphasise one or two points. At the present moment, the whole Ministry is ruled by the Special Branch. In fact, our Minister, although he sits in this Assembly, merely takes orders from the Director of the Special Branch. Whatever the Special Branch says, goes. As we know, Sir, the Special Branch has been initiated, trained, and orientated towards preserving colonial interests. Today, the P.A.P. is just doing exactly that. Every. thing which, to the colonial master in the days of old looked Communist or red, similarly today is considered red. I only wish our Minister would put on spectacles which are not tinted red. Let him use spectacles which are normal coloured so that he can really see things more in their natural colours. If they are really yellow, let them be yellow. If they are really red, let them be red. But do not look at things which are not red and not yellow with yellow glasses and red glasses.

An hon. Member: Green glasses.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: It is a great waste of public money. Consequent on such doings, Sir, I may add that they ire abusing the powers of the police in indirectly intimidating people. I give you one example, Sir. As you know, our Barisan paper has come out and a new advertisers have put advertisements in our paper. The moment an advertisement is put in, the Special Branch will send people straightaway to look the advertiser up and call him in for interrogation for hours on end. This, as E say, is heavily tinted with intimidation and should never be done. I hope the Minister will look into matters like this.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Queenstown surely must have read the Constitution Order in Council that other than matters concerning defence, foreign relations and internal security, the elected government as the absolute power to do what it wishes. In matters of internal security, there is the Internal Security Council where three parties are involved. Other than matters of internal security, defence and foreign relations, the Singapore Government has absolute power to do what it wants. Therefore, to say that the Special Branch is running the Singapore Government or giving orders to the Minister is all utter nonsense. If the Member for Queenstown can look at things in their proper perspective, instead of looking through yellow glasses, I am sure all this phobia about the Special Branch will not have arisen.

The allegation that the Special Branch has been abusing its powers and chasing after advertisers in the Barisan Sosialis paper has, in fact, been raised by, I remember, the Member for Upper Serangoon sometime last week in the C.P.A. Room. I told him that if he would make a formal complaint and if after proper investigation it was found correct, then I assured him that something would be done. But till today I have not got his complaint in writing and, therefore, to make all these wild allegations without any evidence, I think, is wasting the time of this House and not befitting the Chairman of a political Party.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will only give a very short reply to what the Minister for Home Affairs has said. The other day the Member for Upper Serangoon told the Minister about a certain police officer visiting an advertiser in our Party organ. The Minister did not give any reply when he was asked to give an assurance in this matter.

Mr Chan Chee Seng: I want to say few words -

The Chairman: Order. I think the Minister is capable of looking after himself.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, surely the Member for Choa Chu Kang cannot expect a blanket answer from me to guarantee all kinds of things which I do not know. The complaint has not been made and I do not know exactly what sort of guarantee he wants.

An hon. Member: He has complained to you.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will not say more things. There are so many people who want to say so many things.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

4.30 p.m.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 54.

Sir, this is a vote of $42,000 a year for 14 temporary constables who are, in fact, security officers for Ministers. It has been reported to me that the people who are now working as temporary officers were members of the P.A.P. and that they were taken on to do this job just to give protection to the Ministers from the masses whom they claim love them so much, so much so that they have to be protected from the love of the masses!

Sir, I have discovered for myself that these so-called temporary constables who are security officers for Ministers are even made to become chauffeurs for Ministers. If this is the way to get public funds to pay for one's personal amenities, I think it is definitely wrong. Do all Ministers require bodyguards? If their claim that they are the beloved of the masses is accepted, then the masses will know how to protect them. Then the Ministers do not have to be protected from the masses whom they claim love them.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir,I think the same subject has been raised in connection with the 1960 Estimates. If I remember correctly, the Prime Minister did give quite a detailed explanation why we need these temporary constables for the Ministers. I think they are all members of the P.A.P. with the exception of one, and we selected them because of this fact. In the course of our duties and activities, we have to attend all kinds of meetings - apart from public meetings, there are Party meetings - and naturally we would like somebody on whom we can rely. In fact, it would be embarrassing when attending Party meetings for the regular police officers to be present - both for us and for the Police Force - because they have to maintain their neutrality; and II they are found attending Party meetings with the Ministers, all kinds of allegations may be made. This is very much a personal matter because the security officer following the Minister must have his confidence. There is no point in having one who is completely unknown to the Minister.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: I would like to put it to a vote, Sir.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

Dato Abdul Hamid: Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $100*.

*The same amendment also stood in the names of Inche Mohamed Ali bin Alwi and Inche Ahmad Jabri bin Mohammad Akib.

Sir, I would like to say how satisfied I am with the general efficiency and devotion to duty of the Police Force. Although the Barisan Sosialis do not like them, I say they are good and really first-class.

I am also glad to note that more and more of our Chinese youth are serving the force. There was a time when serving in the Police Force was something derogatory. This change of mind is all to the good and it will be of great benefit to the people as a whole. However, the point I am trying to make is that the backbone of the Police Force are still the Malays. The N.C.O.s and the the Other Ranks are mostly Malays. Yet the proportion of Malay officers is relatively small. This has been the case for some time now. But with more and more Malays coming out of secondary schools, I think it will be possible for Government to recruit more of them for the officer class of the Police Force.

The other point I would like to touch upon is the services of our Gurkha Police. I am not saying they are not a useful unit. They are first-class policemen in that they can settle any problem which requires the element of force. But, Mr Speaker, I think they have passed their usefulness in the set-up we have today. Is it necessary for us to use foreign mercenaries to police our population? The time has now come for us to think again. Singapore is a self-governing State and I think we should do away with whatever vestiges of colonialism that may remain. I am positive that given the chance our policemen can undertake any of the tasks that are now assigned to the Gurkhas. As a matter of fact, we are now spending nearly $1 million on the Unit, employing no less than 331 persons. This money could well spent in employing local men.

The other point I would like to raise concerns the licensing of firearms and, in particular, pistols and revolvers. I really do not understand what Government's policy is on this subject. I understand from Government sources that licenses are issued to those whose lives, in the opinion of the police, are in danger. I have a personal interest in this, Sir,I happen to have one of those revolvers, hut last year I got a letter from the police asking me whether it was still necessary for me to retain my revolver - mind you, Mr Speaker, only one. I carry an automatic not because I fear that at any time my life is in danger but because the work I do and the responsibilities I have to carry out require me to meet any possible eventuality at any given time. Anyway, the long and short of it was that the revolver was confiscated. Later on, I heard rumours from a very reliable source that the police withdrew my revolver because they were afraid I might run amok in this Assembly. May I assure the Minister that I have no such intention? Anyway, Sir, what I am trying to say is that the Government is very discriminating in the issue of licences to people, though sometimes I do meet people in the course of my work who carry revolvers and who, I think are not really in danger of their lives. There was a particular case where the revolver of a managing director of a firm was withdrawn, and it was given to the manager of the firm, and yet the manager was nothing but an ordinary employee. But, Sir, it is mood to learn that although my revolver was withdrawn the revolver of the leader of the Alliance has not been withdrawn. I do not know whether his life is in more danger than mine is. At the same time, I understand the revolvers of all the Ministers have not been withdrawn either. Probably their lives are in danger.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Member for Geylang Serai thinks his life is in danger after a peaceful period of more than a year, and if he submits an application, we will consider it.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a number of points have been raised about the police. I am glad it is noticed that the efficiency of the police has increased in general, and 1 am sure the rank and file of the Police Force will appreciate that remark as well as I do.

It is true there are few Malay officers in the Police Force. I remember I also touched on this point last time. I said it had been like that for many years. We are doing out best to increase the number of Malay officers. For the information of the Member concerned, since we assumed office in 1959 to date, 15 Malay rank and file have been promoted to the Inspectorate, 2 Malays have been promoted to the rank of A.S.P. -

The Chairman: Order. Time has expired. It does not prevent the Minister, if he thinks fit, from making a ministerial statement tomorrow at 2.30 p.m. That being so. Dato Abdul Hamid?

Dato Abdul Hamid: I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $26,208,320 for Head 55 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

The following amendment stood in the name of Tun Lim Yew Hock -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 56 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (116) of subhead 1.*

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Sir, I am not moving the first amendment*, but I am moving the second amendment. I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 56 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 56.

Sir, this is a vote of $164,800 for Rations and for 1962 there is a reduction of $20,000 from last year's estimate of $184,800. I would like to ask the Minister why this reduction is considered necessary. Is it because he anticipates that there would be less offenders - it is a good sign if there are going to be less offenders - or is it because the type of rations is changed thereby resulting in a reduction in the cost of feeding the offenders?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the average daily population of Changi Prison had dropped from approximately 900 in 1960 to approximately 700 in 1961. Although the prison population fluctuates in response to the numbers of convictions and detentions, the Changi Prison population is expected to drop in 1962 because of the expanding facilities at Pulau Senang to accommodate criminal law detainees formerly held in Changi Prison. I hope that answers the question of the Member for Cairnhill.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $4,792,380 for Head 56 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 57 -

Mr Bani: I am not moving amendment (1)*.

*Amendment (1) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 1.

The Chairman: Amendment (2), Mr Bani?

Mr Bani: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (2) of subhead 1.

Sir, I am told the Ministry of Education is the most inefficient Ministry of the whole lot of Ministries, and I do not know -

The Chairman: Order. We are now on the Parliamentary Secretary. Is the hon. Member blaming the Parliamentary Secretary for the inefficiency?

Mr Bani: I have no doubt that the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, as two of the key figures in the Ministry, must be responsible. The Parliamentary Secretary, as second-in-command, should share at least 50 per cent of the responsibility.

4.45 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. The responsibility lies with the Minister. Therefore, if there is any allegation of inefficiency in the Ministry, the Minister should have been attacked, but the amendment has not been moved.

Is there any further comment on item (2)?

Mr Bani: Nothing further. I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 1.+

+The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr S. T. Bani and Dr Thio Chan Bee.

Sir, the Minister for Education has lost his Political Secretary for more than a year. I do not know whether he has taken steps to fill the vacancy. Perhaps he is now of the view that it is no longer necessary for a Political Secretary in his particular Ministry. If he can assure us that that post will no longer be required next year, I will only be too happy to withdraw.

Mr Bani: I am not speaking.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I am not speaking.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is true that the Ministry of Education has been without a Political Secretary since the first incumbent resigned on personal grounds. The Ministry is certainly in great need of a Political Secretary, and every attempt is being made to find a suitable person to fill this post. But should it prove that by the end of 1962 the Government is unable to find a suitable man, then we will follow the precedent set by the Deputy Prime Minister - we will reconsider the position again by 1963.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: May I withdraw?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Dr Thio Chan Bee -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (5) of subhead 1.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I am not moving my amendment on item (5).

The following amendments stood in the name of Tun Lim Yew Hock -

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (8) of subhead 1.

(6) That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (9) of subhead 1.

(7) That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (10) of subhead 1.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: I am not moving amendments (5), (6) and (7), Sir.

The Chairman: Amendment (8)* then.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (11) of subhead 1.*

Sir, item (11) is the creation of two Administrative Assistants to take over the two Assistant Secretaries who are already in the Establishment. But then, Sir, the amount provided for in the 1962 Budget is $8,160 which is just sufficient to provide for one Administrative Assistant, and not two. $8,160 works out at $680 a month, which is the initial salary of the scale. Can the Minister please explain whether he wants two Administrative Assistants or whether he considers that only one Administrative Assistant is required?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, this actually is part of the exercise as previously explained by the Minister for Finance. Arising out of Malayanisation, there was too large a gap between the top officers and those underneath. Therefore, the exercise in the Ministry of Education is really in respect of full provisions - those of Principal Staff Officer, Principal Assistant Secretary, Assistant Secretary (A), (B) and (C). Although there is one post in which there has been no change in the provision of Grade G officer, there has been regrading and downgrading of the other four posts. The Grade G post has been reduced to a timescale for the Principal Assistant Secretary, the Assistant Secretary (Class 3 post) has been reduced to a timescale Assistant Secretary post, the Assistant Secretary post to an Administrative Assistant post. Two posts o Assistant Secretary were reduced to two posts of Administrative Assistant. In all, there has been a saving of $11,880 per annum.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Sir, the Minister has not replied to my simple question. What he has endeavoured to do is to reply to questions which I have not asked - in the other amendments which I did not think it was necessary to move, because there had been an explanation.

I quite understand the two Assistant Secretaries have now been regraded as two Administrative Assistants. But what the vote provides for is only for one. I ask the Minister whether he wants two or one. That is all.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I do not know whether the Member for Cairnhill is eating his own tail or whether I am doing it on his behalf. What I say is this: that there are five officers involved in this exercise. The same five officers are holding posts after regrading. So the two Administrative Assistants have become two Assistant Secretaries.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: Two Assistant Secretaries have become two Administrative Assistants. If the Minister only knows what he is talking about! What the vote asks for is only for the salary of one Administrative Assistant. Does he want one or does he want two?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: It would appeal that there may have been a typing error. But whatever it is, I have indicated that there has been a saving of $11,880. Assuming there has been a typing error, it will still mean a saving of $3,000. And two Administrative Assistants are needed to replace the two Assistant Secretaries at the moment.

Tun Lim Yew Hock: In order not to make it more difficult for the Minister to understand. If he says that a typing error can cause a saving, then I hope there will be many, many typing errors so that there could be many, many savings. May I withdraw?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Bani: Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (16) of subhead 1.

Sir, Inspectors of Schools are not like Police Inspectors. Their Functions are much more constructive than those of Police Inspectors. Sir, B have heard a lot of complaints amongst teachers of the sort of attitude Inspectors of Schools have come to adopt in the course of their duties. It appears to me that Inspectors of Schools are inclined to go to schools like secret police purely for the purpose of snooping around and finding out whether the teachers are doing their work properly, whether they are sleeping, whether they have white clean shirts on, or whether they have socks on their feet, what colour their socks are, etc, etc. Sir, I am sure the Minister will not quarrel with me on the functions the Inspectors of Schools are expected to perform. I am not suggesting for one moment that we must abolish the posts of Inspectors of Schools. We all agree they are important personnel in our education system. We ought to have inspectors and they ought to be doing a very important job. But if they develop the mental attitude that they are the secret police, then I think they defeat the purpose for which we ought to have Inspectors of Schools. Sir, teachers in schools face numerous problems in the solution of which their own principals are not able to assist. When an Inspector comes around, naturally the teacher expects some assistance to help them to carry out their teaching in a much more efficient and satisfactory way. It is only natural that the teachers get disgusted, depressed, or disappointed if the Inspectors who go round the schools, instead of trying to assist the teachers, behave, as I have said, like secret police.

I would like to ask the Minister for Education whether it is the policy of the Government to have Inspectors who go round and help the teachers in their application of teaching methods, or whether it is the purpose of the Government to have Inspectors of Schools purely for the purpose of snooping around schools to see whether the teachers have white shirts or black shirts or red socks or blue socks, or whatever it is.

The Chairman: The Question is,

"That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (16) of subhead 1."

It might be convenient to suspend.

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend this sitting. I will take the Chair again at 5.30 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.59 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m.

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Resumption of debate on Question,

"That be sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (16) of subhead 1.

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, one gathers from the Member for Thomson that he considers Inspectors of Schools would now appear to be like police inspectors - worse still, as members of the secret police! We have for some days now been listening to Members of Barisan Sosialis speaking vehemently on the Special Branch, their fear of the Internal Security Council, and so on and so forth. This is definitely a psychological complex of Members of the Barisan Sosialis. They are so afraid even of their own shadows that they think someone is shadowing them. I am sure when the Inspectors of Schools in my Ministry read this report in the newspapers tomorrow, they will be laughing because the poor Member for Thomson regards them as no better than secret police, and making the lives of both principals and teachers of schools miserable. Such a situation could not possibly arise under the present Government. But perhaps there should be a M15 and a N.K.V.D. should the Barisan Sosialis form the next Government, if they think they could form one.

May I, Sir, refer very briefly to the Report of the Sreenivasan Commission of Inquiry into Government Recurrent Expenditure. It has not been officially published, but I have been supplied with the second interim Report which covers the Ministry of Education. I had occasion to refer to this in another instance at a radio forum. This Commission of Inquiry had investigated, rather in detail, the duties of the various departments or division , of my Ministry. They did indicate under paragraph 154 that Inspectors of Schools carry out routine inspection of every teacher's work twice a year, and also inspect the administration of schools. That is their function. They should be going there to assist the principals and, if necessary, the teachers, if they are in difficulty. It is possible that the human factor might creep in where a little officious Inspector of School might overdo things a little. But that is to be expected now and again and not to be taken where the exception becomes the rule. I can assure the Member for Thomson that, as far as I know, Inspectors of Schools have been carrying out their duties to the best of their ability. But should there be occasions where individuals may have exceeded these powers. I think the teacher or the principal is at liberty to lodge a complaint. This could then be investigated and the matter put right. But I do not think it could be said that our schools are now working in an atmosphere of fear. Here again, unless the teachers themselves or principals are too active in politics, they have nothing to fear at all.

Mr Bani: Mr Speaker, I wish to assure the Minister that I am not suffering from, as the Minister calls it, police phobia. The point I did make was that the teachers regard these inspectors as inspectors of the secret police. I am not teaching, and, therefore, I assure the Minister again. Sir, that I have no fear of inspectors, be they school inspectors or police inspectors.

The Chairman: Does the Member wish for a vote?

Mr Bani: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (41) of subhead 1.*

Sir, it would be convenient if I could deal with amendments (10),* (11)+ and (12)++ together.

• Amendment (11) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (42) of subhead 1.

++ Amendment (12) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (43) of subhead 1.

The Chairman: If it is convenient, yes.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Sir, I raised this matter last year to the effect that since the Government has adopted a policy of equality of treatment for all schools, naturally the Chinese school heads are wondering why they do not have super-scale posts in their stream. After a lot of discussions, the Minister said he would think about it when the right time arose. The right time would be when the number of Government Chinese schools would be something like 80 per cent of the total. I suggest, Sir, that in view of the fact that there is now a common secondary and a common higher secondary examination, perhaps it is about time that the suggestion be considered to remove any feeling that there has been discrimination.

The Chairman: Amendments (11) and (12) are being taken together. Mr Yong.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I wish to say, Sir, that one must differentiate between Government service of schools under the Government and schools which are Government-aided. Unfortunately, the so-called Singapore Education Service was somewhat restricted in its provisions which apply to the English Government schools, and these three superscale posts form part of the service. As stated by the Member for Tanglin, I did say last year the matter would be considered. I wish to state now that the Ministry is currently reviewing the Singapore Education Service so as to make it applicable to the four language streams. I think it will take some time to sort out the difficulties and I hope to be able to make an announcement at an early date.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendments stood in the name of Dr Thio Chan Bee -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (42) of subhead 1.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (43) of subhead 1.

The Chairman: Amendments (11) and (12) are not being moved. Amendment (13)++, Dr Thin Chan Bee.

++Amendment (13) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (48) of subhead 1.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I am not moving it, Sir.

The Chairman: The Member is not moving. Mr Bani.

Mr Bani: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (49) of subhead 1.*

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Dr Thio Chan Bee.

I just want to ask the Minister if he could state the basis for the selection and appointment of principals of primary schools. This is asked purely because I hear there is widespread discontent among teachers on the appointment of primary school principals.

The Chairman: Dr Thio Chan Bee.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I am not speaking, Sir.

The Chairman: Mr Yong Nyuk Lin.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: The appointment of principals of primary schools being a promotion appointment, would, of course, be referred to the Public Service Commission. I do not feel I could add anything further which would enlighten the Member for Thomson, except to say that all teachers are entitled to apply for vacant principalship of schools. I think generally the vacancies are circularised. The teachers send in their applications which would then be forwarded to the Public Service Commission. The P.S.C. would then call them up for interview and make the necessary appointments, and these go into the Government Gazette.

Mr Bani: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (50) of subhead 1.

Sir, the item refers to Graduates of recognised Universities and Special Teachers Training Institutions, and 284 new posts are being provided. Last year I brought up the question of the recognition of American University degrees if the holders were found to be capable of teaching in our schools. We were told then that the matter was actively under consideration, and a decision would be made. I believe so far no decision has been made. Many of these holders of American University degrees who have been teaching for many years naturally are feeling unhappy about it. Another thing is that although their graduate status has not been recognised as regards pay, they are down on the staff list as recognised graduates. So if they are recognised as graduates on the same staffing formula, they would naturally assume that they would be recognised as such when it comes to the consideration of pay.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is quite true that last year the Member for Tanglin brought up the subject of recognition of American degrees and also, I think, Indian degrees or graduates, and commented on this matter. The Foreign Qualifications Regulations, 1960 were published on 30th December, 1960. The Foreign Qualifications Committee of the Public Service Commission was established in May 1961. All graduates with hitherto unrecognized degrees were advised to apply for an assessment of their qualifications.

5.45 p.m.

A total of 94 have applied and the Foreign Qualifications Committee of the P.S.C. have. I am glad to say, completed assessment of 34 graduates in the Ministry of Education. The salaries of all those selected for emplacement on appropriate salary scales will be met from the present vote. It might interest the Member for Tanglin if I give him a breakdown of the 94 graduates who have applied: Indian graduates 72 Chinese graduates 9 American graduates 8 Other graduates 5 ---- Total 94 ----

Mr Ong Chang Sam: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, we can see in the Budget that there will be 284 new posts for graduates of foreign universities. I would like the Minister to answer me on the question of graduates of Nanyang University. I want to know whether the second batch of Nanyang University graduates have been admitted to the Government education service. As far as I know, the first batch of Nanyang University graduates have been accepted in quite a great number. This year, the second batch of Nanyang University graduates have been teaching in Government or aided schools. The Public Service Commission interviewed them on the 15th of August this year. But even when the schools were about to close for the year, they had not received any appointments from the Government. So they are not sure whether they will be allowed to continue teaching next year. The Ministry of Education has not made this clear to them even before the schools closed. The Ministry of Education must give the graduates of Nanyang University ample time. If it does not allow them to continue teaching next year, then ample notice must be given to them, so that they will have enough time to look for other employment, instead of having to worry about news from the Ministry of Education whether they will be allowed to continue teaching next year. So I would like the Minister concerned to let the House know how many of the second batch of graduates of Nanyang University have been engaged by the Minister and how many of them are in the 200-odd jobs enumerated in this Budget. I want to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that the third batch of graduates of Nanyang University will be coming out very soon. I want to find out from him whether this third batch will be taken into Government or Government-aided schools next year, and if so, how many.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has requested graduates of Nanyang University teaching in Government and aided schools to undergo training in the T.T.C. for one year. There are many Nanyang University graduates who have approached me personally saying that what they have learnt at Nanyang University is more in quantity and better in quality than what they can learn in the T.T.C. Many of these graduates are required to undergo training in the T.T.C. for the sake of physical education, such as playing basketball and other games. So I appeal to the Government to consider the position of the Nanyang University graduates and recognise the fact that they have learnt enough in the Univer sity to meet classroom requirements. If the Government, from the point of view of education, says that Nanyang University graduates must be given more time to learn teaching methods so that the standard of education will be raised gradually, I will say that the Ministry of Education's requirement that Nanyang University graduates should undergo training in the T.T.C. will help to enhance the standard of education. Therefore, I ask the Minister concerned to consider that the time of these graduates should be spent on the improvement of teaching methods and that better measures should be adopted to rectify the unnecessary so-called training in the T.T.C., which is merely a waste of time.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Choa Chu Kang could have spared himself a long speech when he asked about the destiny of the second batch of Nanyang University graduates who are waiting for confirmation of their appointments. It is true it took some time for the Public Service Commission to interview almost 100 graduates of Nanyang University from the second batch before coming to a decision, which was passed on to the Ministry of Education, and all those who have been considered suitable after security clearance have been advised of their appointments within the last week.

As for the third batch of Nanyang University graduates who are expected to graduate round about Christmas, I think there will be an advertisement within a week calling for applications to be considered by the Public Service Commission whether they wish to be employed as teachers in Government schools or Government-aided schools.

The third point mentioned by the Member for Choa Chu Kang is one in which he claims to speak on behalf of those graduates from Nanyang University who are now under-going a special one-year inservice course of training at the Teachers' Training College. This course has not been instituted purely for Nanyang University graduates, but also for the University of Malaya graduates. It is an emergency scheme purely to put graduates into our secondary schools, because we have greatly expanded the enrolment in our secondary schools. The graduate, be he or she coming from the University of Malaya or Nanyang University, is not compelled to take up this one-year in-service course of training at all. That being so, the salary scale applicable to what we could call an untrained graduate will be $355 to a maximum of $655. But if the graduate decides to take this one-year inservice course to give him or her professional training in the art of teaching and enable him or her to carry the message to the children, the salary scale after completion of this one-year course will be $385 to $930. So it is up to the graduate himself to decide whether he or she would prefer to be an untrained graduate teaching in our schools or be a trained graduate to qualify for a more attractive and higher salary.

I think another question asked by the Member for Choa Chu Kang is to indicate the probable number of Nanyang University graduates who may be employed for next year in the 1962 Estimates. We have provided for the appointment of 50 graduates from Nanyang University for our Government Chinese secondary schools.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: (In Mandarin): Can the Minister tell this House how many of the second batch of Nanyang University graduates have been taken by the Government into the teaching service?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Those are matters of detail, and I will require notice of the question because I cannot be like a dictionary, where you turn to page 3, and give him the figures he wishes.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendments stood in the name of Inche Ahmad Jabri Bin Mohammad Akib -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (54) of subhead 1.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (58) of subhead 1.

Inche Ahmad Jabri: I am not moving my amendments on items (54) and (58).

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr S. T. Bani -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (59) of subhead 1.+

• See column 2099.

The Chairman: Amendment (18)+, Mr Bani?

• See column 2098.

Mr Bani: I am not moving, Sir.

Inche Mohd. Ali: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (61) of subhead 1.*

*The same amendment also stood in the name of Inche Ahmad Jabri bin Mohammad Akib.

Mr Speaker, I merely wish to get an explanation from the Minister for Education concerning religious teachers in Malay schools. I think we discussed this matter last year. There is not much change. The salary scale is just the same. There is no change in their scale as compared with the untrained teachers' salary scale which we have discussed today.

In addition, Mr Speaker, how many of the new posts will be allocated to women and how many will be allocated to men? As to the methods of recruiting for these posts, are they limited to those who have graduated from the Muslim College at Klang?

Another question I wish to ask the Minister for Education is whether an opportunity to perform Friday prayers is given to students who are attending schools - whether Malay schools or English schools, particularly English schools.

6.00 p.m.

Inche Ahmad Jabri: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am told that the teachers at present are insufficient in number, particularly with regard to the Southern Islands where there is no opportunity for the children to receive religious education. If there are ample opportunities to receive religious education on the Singapore mainland, I feel that one teacher of religion should be attached to each school in the Southern Islands. The position today is that one teacher visits all the schools in the Southern Islands. This is very inadequate indeed.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I will first answer the Member for the Southern Islands regarding the inadequacy of teachers of religion in schools.

I have previously indicated that Singapore being a secular State, we try to discourage the teaching of religion in schools, but taking note of the special position of the Malays in our Constitution and in view of the fact that in the past one period a week has been set aside for the teaching of the Muslim religion in Malay schools, we have been maintaining that. Therefore, to have just one period a week in Malay Schools for the teaching of religion, we are making adequate provision for teachers of religion in the schools now existing in Singapore. For those who wish to have more religious teaching in Islam, we feel the existence of the religious schools known as Sekolah Rakyat could be made use of. If the students are attending the morning session, they can attend Sekolah Rakyat in the afternoon, and vice versa. That is why in providing teachers of religion for regular Malay schools, it will be necessary for them to move around to teach in various schools. It will not be possible to have one teacher of religion per school.

Coming to the comments made by the Member for Kampong Kembangan that the salary scale of these teachers of religion is on the low side, I am afraid that is due to the fact that, on the whole those appointed have had rather low educational qualifications. The minimum qualification for a teacher of religion was Standard VII of the Aljunied Arabic School, and many other applicants have rather low qualifications from either the Malay or English schools. That is why the salary scale is only $110-205. I do not think there is any discrimination as regards the appointment of teachers of religion according to sex. Of the 18 now in service, 3 are women and the rest are men.

As regards the recruitment policy, of those already in employment, one holds the Lower Certificate of the Muslim College. It is the intention of the Ministry to appoint a graduate from the Muslim College with a Higher Certificate to look after all these teachers of religion and to try to integrate and improve the standard of teaching. That recruitment will follow next year.

Lastly, I have already stated that we have at least one period for the teaching of the Muslim religion in Malay schools, and children are allowed time off for their prayers in schools.

An hon. Member: In English schools?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: That I think is a matter which can be arranged without too much difficulty.

Inche Mohd. Ali: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, during my school days, when the colonial regime was in power, time off was given to Malay students to perform their Friday prayers. We should be equally proud of this. So I wish to receive an assurance from the Minister in this Assembly.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I thought I had given an assurance to the Member for Kampong Kembangan that this matter will be considered.

Inche Mohd. Ali: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Dr Thio Chan Bee -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (63) of subhead 1.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I am not moving my amendment on item (63).

Inche Ahmad Jabri: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (64) of subhead 1. Sir, I have to touch on items (65)*, (66)+, and (67)++ of which notices of amendments have been given in my name.

*Amendment (22) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (65) of subhead 1.

• Amendment (23), also standing in the names of Mr S. T. Bani and Dr Thio Chan Bee, reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (66) of subhead 1.

++ Amendment (24) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (67) of subhead 1.

In every school, duties have to be performed by watchmen, school servants, messengers, etc. In some of the schools the posts of caretakers, watchmen, school servants and messengers have not been filled. If, say, there is only one messenger in a school, he has to perform the duties of the caretaker and watchman although all these duties cannot be properly undertaken by one man. The job of a messenger is to despatch letters, and a caretaker looks after the school and keeps it clean. It is not fair that one man should do all these jobs and get no extra material benefit other than his own salary. So I would like to draw the attention of the Ministry to the lower paid staff of schools who have been asked to shoulder many responsibilities. I am told that in certain schools children are forced to open the doors in order to help their parents. I say that the responsibilities entrusted to them are many.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the Member for the Southern Islands, the trouble is that the schools are expanding so fast that sometimes we cannot catch up with the appointment of the employees who go with the schools.

There is actually a formula for the staffing of schools - for what we call the non-teaching staff. It is rather detailed and I do not think I would like to read it, but I will give a reply. It is roughly like this. I will just quote one or two parts of it. If it is a 48-classroom primary school, there should be one watchman, eight servants and one office boy, and so on, until if there are only seven classrooms there will be one watchman, one servant and one office boy. So it is very likely that the man who probably complained to the Member for the Southern Islands must belong to the category in which the office boy has to do more work than the normal office boy of a school with a full comple ment of servants. We have endeavoured to get as much staff as we can. In fact, I will be able to answer more fully when we come to item (66) on the subject of school servants. I think the Member for Southern Islands practically ranged over these items.

The Chairman: Yes, he did indeed.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: So if I may carry on on items (64) to (66). We are providing as many as 158 school servants for nine new secondary and 23 new primary schools. We are endeavouring to get a full complement of staff to go with each school, but sometimes there are delays in recruitment. This matter was discussed previously. The recruitment for Division IV jobs is from the Works Brigade and from the Employment Exchange in the ratio of 50:50. So at times there is a bit of a time-lag between appointing staff and posting them to man the respective schools.

The Chairman: The debate is ranging over items (64) to (67).

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Speaker, Sir, in some of the larger schools, the servants have to be on duty for the morning, afternoon and night sessions. I wonder whether the Minister will con sider providing some incentive by giving the head servant a Grade I position, his assistant a Grade II position, and so on, because where a large staff of school servants are employed, I think the senior ones deserve to have an incentive for their additional responsibilities.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I think it would be necessary to refer to the Minister for Finance, who is not here, on Establishment procedure. I am all in favour of it. But I want to say that those who do overtime are paid overtime wages. So there is compensation and they are not just asked to work from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. They are paid the regular rate for regular work and anything in excess is either paid by the Ministry of Education or by the Adult Education Board if a particular school is being used as a centre for night classes.

Inche Ahmad Jabri: I withdraw my amendment in respect of item (64).

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment (22) in respect of item (65), amendment (23) in respect of item (66) and amendment (24) in respect of item (67) are not being moved.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr S. T. Bani -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (88) of subhead 1.

The Chairman: Mr Bani is not here.

6.15 p.m.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Chan Sun Wing -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (110) of subhead 1.

Mr Chan Sun Wing (Upper Serangoon): I am not moving my amendment on item (110) . (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 7.

I would just like to ask the Minister for Education how it is that teachers in aided schools in the rural areas are not able to claim transport and travelling allowances. At present all Government school teachers can get transport allowances.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: There appears to be injustice if presented in the way the Member for Upper Serangoon has done. But, on analysis, I think it appears reasonable that Government school teachers, irrespective of whether they are in English schools or Chinese Government schools - I think it should be made clear that it is not something meant only for English school teachers but also for those in Government schools who are posted to the rural areas - are eligible to some form of compensation for tran sport. Why this does not apply to aided school teachers can, I think, be arrived as follows: a Government school teacher is liable to be transferred and posted to .any school and is expected to assume duty in that school, whether it is 10 miles from the city or whether it is right in front of his house. In other words, the teacher has no choice in the matter. But in the case of an aided school teacher, all he has to do is to go up to a principal of an aided school and, if the Committee of Management wishes to employ him, he can be employed subject to approval by the Ministry of Education. In other words, the choice of the school is left to the particular teacher. In the other case of a Government school teacher, there is no choice in the matter. If he is appointed and is asked to go to Pulau Brani, he goes to Pulau Brani. Or if he is posted to Sembawang or Seletar, he goes there unless he can give good reasons why he could be missed and somebody else transferred. That, I think, is the reason why the Treasury has allocated a small provision to assist certain teachers who are posted to rural schools in Government service.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): In view of the explanation given, may I withdraw the amendment?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Dr Lee Siew Choh -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 8.

The Chairman: Dr Lee is not here.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 22.

As far as I know, this item of expenditure regarding bursaries to school children in the Islands will only be given to students in English and Malay schools to enable them to come to Singa pore to study. I would like to ask the Minister to explain how it is that this aid is not given to students who come to Singapore to study Chinese.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, this provision is to meet the educational expenses of children living in the Islands where there are no secondary or primary schools in the medium of the parents' choice. There has been a provision for 14 bursaries valued at $600 per annum. They have been awarded to children from the Islands, seven of whom are in the Malay stream, seven in the English stream. Of this, eight are Malays, five Chinese and one Indian.

I think in 1962 we can bear in mind the possibility of making similar awards for those who wish to go to Chinese secondary or primary schools.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): I am satisfied with the assurance given. May I withdraw my amendment?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 27.*

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Dr Thio Chan Bee.

I have moved this amendment with this aim in view, i.e., in reading the Budget for next year, I have not come across any item on Nanyang University. A few weeks ago I heard the Minister for Education, say that he hoped to solve the Nanyang University problem early next year or this year. On the one hand, the Government says it wants to solve the Nanyang University question, but, on the other hand, there is no provision made for Nanyang University in respect of its expenditure. So I want the Minister concerned to explain.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Speaker, Sir, we all know this question of aid to Nanyang University is a sore point with many people, especially the Barisan Sosialis. I am sure those of us interested in education do not like this to become a political issue. The sooner the Government can settle it with the proper authorities, the happier the people of Singapore will be.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: It is rather odd, Mr Speaker, that we are talking of subhead 27 "Contribution to University of Singapore" when the subject turns round to Nanyang University.

Sir, it is true this is a very touchy subject and, therefore, it is best to approach it in an objective manner. In the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech, we have indicated that the Government is always prepared to get down to negotiations to settle the Nanyang University question. We have hopes it will be settled in the coming year.

Now, the question of drawing up the Estimates, say, for 1962. All the bookwork really has to be done during the months of January, February, and March, 1961. If it is possible to settle it to the satisfaction of all concerned, all that is needed really is to ask for an A.S.V. (Application for Supplementary Vote). When that comes, I hope Members of the Opposition will support the Government in its application.

Mr Low Por Tuck (Havelock): Mr Speaker, Sir, after hearing the explanation given by the Minister for Education, it seems to me that, if there is complexity in framing the Budget, the simplest thing is to have a $10 token vote for the item "Contribution to Nanyang University".

The Minister for Finance (Dr Goh Keng Swee): Mr Speaker, Sir, indeed that could have been done, but let us imagine the effect of an item of $10 against Nanyang University. There would be an uproar from Chinese educational circles, and the Barisan Sosialis would then proclaim that that is the value of the P.A.P. Government's faith in Nanyang University.

Mr A. P. Rajah (Farrer Park): Mr Speaker, Sir, from the way the notation is made under Head 57, "Contribution to University of Singapore", the Government is already fore-stalling the Bill to be passed by the Assembly in the near future, because there is no such institution, University of Singapore, today. May I say something on the University of Singapore? The University of Malaya now functions as two divisions, the Singapore Division and the Division in Kuala Lumpur. I myself personally regret that it has become necessary to split the University in this way.

The Chairman: Order. I think the University of Singapore Bill will be debated shortly.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: On Saturday.

The Chairman: Therefore, I do not think the Member is entitled to anticipate that Bill.

Mr Rajah: The other question I want to ask the Minister is this. I do not want to embarrass the Government, but I know it is anxious to settle the problem of Nanyang University. I do not know where the points of difference are between Nanyang University and the Government. I was hoping that possibly the Member who had raised this question would point out to the House where the differences were and where the guilt if any lay with the Government. I personally would like to know from the Minister, if the Minister thinks it is politic, to say why it has not been possible to come to some agreement with Nanyang University.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I think I can answer the Member for Farrer Park about this question of the University of Singapore. It is on the Order Paper since the 29th November, and because of merger and this Budget, it has been postponed.

As regards discussions with the Nanyang University authorities, we have had this Liaison Committee comprising representatives from the Government and the Nanyang University authorities. It held some meetings in 1960, but unfortunately they did not come to fruition. I do not think any guilt really is to be attached to either party.

6.30 p.m.

If the matter could gradually be resolved with less hot air and more discussions in a quiet atmosphere, we are confident this matter can be resolved.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

Dato Abdul Hamid: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 28.*

*The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Chan Sun Wing and Dr Thio Chan Bee.

Sir, there are two points on which I would speak on this item. I understand that a class for adult education starts with about 30 or 40 people. It then ends up with two, or three, but with the same number of teachers and the same amount of expenses incurred. I wonder whether the Minister could tell us why this is so, and if it is so, whether it would not be better just to eliminate such classes and thereby the Government and the public would not be called upon to waste so much money.

The second question I want to ask the Minister is this. Could he tell me how many adult education classes there are held in the Malay language?

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the amount under this item for last year is $500,000. It has been increased to about $1 million for this year. However, the results of adult education this year are not too good. The situation in the classes is similar to that in the Lim Yew Hock Government. The number of students has been misrepresented. We have not heard the Adult Education Council declare how many students there are in these classes. I would like to know why this vote has been increased from $500,000 to the present amount.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Speaker, Sir, when the Adult Education Council was abolished and the Government took it over, it was assumed that there would be a great deal of improvement. But judging from the results of what happened in 1960, the enrolment in the classes has dropped. The enrolment for 1959 was 15,942. In November 1960 the figure was 12,584. In 1959 the amount of fees collected for the first ten months came to $136,000; whereas in 1960, the Government collected only $86,773. We wonder why there should now be a request to double the amount of contribution from half a million dollars to over a million dollars. I would suggest, Sir, that if the Chairman of the Board were a non-political figure, then perhaps there would be no danger of the Adult Education Council becoming a sort of battle-ground for the P.A.P. and the Barisan Sosialis, as in the case of the People's Association and community centres. The suggestion, Sir, is that if we want to prevent this important field of educational activity from developing into another battle field, the Members of the Board and the Chairman should be non-political.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I would like, first of all, Sir, to answer the Member for Geylang Serai, when he indicated that classes are being conducted with two or three pupils. I would appreciate it if he could give me the names of the centres concerned, because it would certainly be wasteful for such a centre to carry on. I do know that in certain centres we might carry on with anything from 12 to 15 pupils. But those are special cases. As a whole, we would like to have classes of up to 25 pupils. I regret I am not in a position to tell the Member for Geylang Serai the number of classes in which Malay is being taught. But I will certainly supply him with this information.

To answer the Member for Upper Serangoon, the Member for Tanglin and also the Member for Geylang Serai, when they expressed concern over the increase in the vote for the Adult Education Board by a hundred per cent. May I say that the Adult Education Board is not just purely to provide classes in order to eradicate illiteracy, which is its chief aim? It has gone further by providing what are known as further education classes. The third aim, which is something very unusual, is the provision of secondary education for adults to complete either the Cambridge School Certificate Examina tion or the Chinese Government Secondary IV and Senior Middle III Examinations. I think this is not to be found anywhere in South-East Asia.

The Member for Tanglin brought up certain figures about revenue. He mentioned the small sums for 1959 and 1960. The 1962 Budget submitted by the Adult Education Board is as follows: Revenue from fees for basic education is estimated at $108,000. Tuition fees, registration fees and others would come to $810,000. But the expenditure for the classes is expected to amount to $1.8 million. This is because it is no longer possible to get teachers to give voluntary service for night classes. At one stage in 1959/60, we were able to reduce the cost, but since then we have had to pay teachers at a higher rate in order to teach classes for secondary education, and, therefore, the cost of providing teachers has been brought up to a rather high level. That is why it is necessary to ask for an increased vote from half a million dollars for this year to a little over $1 million for next year.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Speaker, Sir, could the Minister please say whether the following gentlemen are still members of the Board? Mr Lim Ching Siong represented the Trade Union Congress on the Board in 1960. Mr Jek Yuen Thong was Deputy Chairman and Mr Devan Nair was Chairman. In view of the rivalry going on now between the P.A.P. and the Barisan Sosialis, could the Minister assure the House that there would not be trouble with that kind of composition?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: When the Trade Union Congress was dissolved, the membership of Mr Lim Ching Siong and Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi, who were supposed to represent the T.U.C., automatically lapsed. So these two gentlemen

• one of whom is my colleague and he will not give us trouble - are therefore no longer members of the Adult Education Board.

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: Mr Speaker, Sir, did I hear rightly that the T.U.C. was dissolved, when we were given the assurance a few days ago that the T.U.C. was never dissolved?

The Minister for Health and Law (Mr K. M. Byrne): It is in a state of suspended animation!

Dato Abdul Hamid: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment (32)+. Dr Lee Siew Choh is not here. Mr Chan Sun Wing.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 35.+

Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister for Education about the grants-in-aid. According to my knowledge, there are some Chinese schools which did not receive any aid after the P.A.P. came into office. I would like the Minister for Education to explain why these schools did not receive any aid, as a result of which they have stopped functioning.

6.45 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I find it a bit difficult to answer the Member for Upper Serangoon when he says there are certain schools which do not get aid, unless he is in a position to name the schools. But may I just answer rather broadly? Under subhead 35 there are four separate headings - Primary, Full, Secondary, and Technical and Commercial. The total sum is $31.7 million. Of this, $22.6 million, or 71 per cent, will go to the Chinese schools.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): The schools which have stopped functioning as a result of not receiving aid are the Ta Chung School in Pek San Teng and Chung Nan Public School and Tung Lin.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I will require notice of that question and I shall give him a full reply.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: I withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Dr Thio Chan Bee -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 45.*

• See column 2113.

The Chairman: Amendment (33)*, Dr Thio?

• See column 2112.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: I am not moving, Sir.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 50.

That is about the training of technical teachers. I would like to ask this of the Minister for Education. There are many Chinese Secondary IV graduates this year. Can they undergo such training after they have graduated? When will the Ministry open such classes, so that they can receive this training?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: There are at present 42 technical teachers in training - 30 from the English stream and 12 from the Chinese stream. For the 1962 Estimates, the provision is to provide equally for the English and Chinese media.

It is not possible to go too quickly into the question of the training of technical teachers, be it in Chinese or in English. As you will recall, Sir, the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Vocational and Technical Education has been tabled in this Assembly but the Government has not yet tabled its White Paper. When that White Paper is available we will then be in a position to discuss the question of vocational and technical education in Singapore in greater detail.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 56.

I want the Minister concerned to explain why the provision for scholarships has been reduced for 1962?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: The correct person to answer the Member for Upper Serangoon would be my colleague, the Minister for Finance, who is not in the House. This is an item actually inserted by the Treasury into my vote. All I can say is that this comes under Economic Development Division, which is under the Ministry of Finance. Proposals for awards are put up to the Treasury. There is a small Committee appointed by the Minister for Finance which goes through the proposals. I do not know for what reason they have reduced the original figure of $183,900 to $109,700. I will get in touch with the Minister for Finance and suggest that he give an adequate reply to the Member for Upper Serangoon.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has said he is not very clear about the scholarships. He wishes the Minister for Finance to reply to it. But what we want to argue about is something very interesting. The Minister for Education and the Prime Minister have stressed that in Singapore there is a shortage of technical personnel and senior educationalists to implement our education policy. That is why we need more local teachers to be trained abroad. At the same time, they tell us that we should learn the national language. But we have not seen the Minister for Education provide more scholarships or fellowships for local people to go to Indonesia to receive training in the national language. The Government is asking us to study the national language, but without more fellowships and scholarships to enable more people to go to Indonesia to receive specialised training, how can we promote the national language in Singapore and make Malay the national language of Malaya? Therefore, in this respect, I hope the Government will send more local youths to Indonesia to receive training in the national language so that in future, when the national language is fully adopted and used in Singapore and Malaya, these people can shoulder all the responsibilities in education and spread the use of the national language. Therefore, my view is that the Minister for Education should let more youths of Singapore, especially those who are more versed in the national language, go to Indonesia to receive special training.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: There is, I think, a separate vote for scholarships under the control of the Ministry of Finance, and I am asking my colleague to be good enough to turn to the relative page. But I would like to answer the Member for Choa Chu Kang about scholarships to Indonesia. We are going to recruit 20 lecturers for the Teachers' Training College. They will teach not only our Malay teachers to teach subjects in the secondary schools, but perhaps to help in training more teachers to improve on Malay education generally. There are so many methods of improving personnel and local-born staff, etc., and I think it is a question of giving us time and the opportunity to do so. In fact, at least two graduates have obtained scholarships to go to Indonesia. You cannot just start off with sending hundreds of people away all at one time. There are many scholarships available and most times, Sir, we find that there are fewer applicants than there are scholarships, not necessarily just to study in Indonesia.

Mr Chan Sun Wing: I withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 57 be reduced by $100.*

*The same amendment also stood in the names of Inche Mohamed Ali bin Alwi, Dr Lee Siew Choh, Dr Sheng Nam Chin, Mr Chan Sun Wing, Dr Thio Chan Bee and Mrs Scow Peck Leng.

Sir, I think this is the first time in this debate that a main Head has had a chance to be debated! Sir, in this respect, I would like to congratulate the Minister for Education. If it had not been for his co-operation, I think we would still have been struggling with various subjects before we really got to the main Head. I think the reason is that the answers from the Minister has been such as to cut short all sorts of unnecessary discussion from this side. But provoking statements from Ministers draw even more provoking statements from the Opposition benches.

6.57 p.m.

[Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr John Mammen) in the Chair]

Mr Rajah: Sir, a number of people want to speak on this main Head, so I will only touch on two points as briefly as possible. The first point is the six-day week; the second point is equality of treatment for all streams of education - English, Chinese, Tamil and Malay.

On the six-day week, Mr Mammen, I have on a number of occasions raised this matter and said that in so far as the secondary schools are concerned, I am not competent to express my views on it and that it is a matter on which educa tional experts should formulate a particular policy. But I have ventured to suggest to the Minister that, so, far as the primary schools are concerned, it is an utter waste of time. After two years of a six-day week for primary schools, I still consider it is an utter waste of time. It has not contributed one bit to the education of the children in the primary schools, but it has denied them a field of education which it is not possible to give them in the schools. They have been denied one day with the parents in the family circle, and the activities that they could have had with the family for the sixth day have been denied. I venture to suggest to the Minister that for children to receive a proper education which would fit them not only for life in school while they are there, but for life outside the school when they have left school, it is important that the parents, the family and the school should take a hand in moulding the character and the education of the children. That is the first point.

The second point is the equality in the English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil streams, more particularly in the English and Chinese streams. Sir, the position in the English stream is that we have a junior school training for six years, and a secondary school training for six years. In the English stream it is divided into four years up to the senior and, after these four years, the Higher School Certificate at the end of the second year. In the Chinese stream, the junior schools is for six years and a subsequent six years in the middle schools. Now there is argument whether it should be 3:3 or 4:2 -

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: No argument.

Mr Rajah: No argument? I am very glad it has been resolved. Sir, to the Chinese school students, or those who encourage them into thinking that after four years in middle school they should be allowed to go into the fifth and sixth years without passing an examination, I would suggest that that is not asking for equality of treatment.

7.00 p.m.

They are asking for something more than what the English stream enjoys. As for the English stream, Mr Mammen, you have to pass your Senior Cambridge before you can go for the Higher School Certificate. Not only must you pass it but you must also pass it with a Grade I Certificate. I am told you must achieve a certain minimum standard of pass in your Cambridge School Certificate, otherwise you have not the ghost of a chance to go for the Higher School Certificate. For purposes of entry into the Higher School Certificate class, the Senior Cambridge Examination has become not only a pass examination but a highly competitive examination. If the Chinese stream is asking for equal treatment - and I can understand its wanting equal treatment - I beg of it not to ask for treatment which is more favourable to it than to the English stream. What it is asking for is this, irrespective of whether I pass the examination after four years or not, never mind, let me go in for me to sit the final examination at the end of six years which the Director of Education - quite rightly, in my view - will not allow the English stream to enjoy.

The point of my statement is this, Sir,If Chinese education is financing itself out of private funds, there is absolutely nothing against it. But where Chinese education is being financed out of public funds, then the request of Chinese students, and those backing them, to the Minister to allow them to go beyond the four years without passing an examination into the fifth and sixth years and then sit for the examination, I suggest, is not a fair request. I am sure the Chinese stream, which can more than hold its own with the English stream, should not ask for special treatment. It should ask for equal treatment with the English stream and equal treatment, to my mind, is to pass the examination at the end of the four years before entry into the higher form.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Mr Mammen, last year I raised a number of questions and I am glad that since then the Minister has settled some of them. However, Sir, there are two main issues that have been allowed to drag on throughout the previous year and the longer they remain unsettled, the greater the ill effects will be on the school children.

The first issue is the question of the unsatisfactory staffing formula for primary schools. I do not wish to repeat in detail what I said last year, but I would like to remind the House briefly that the staffing formula lays down that for every ten classes there should be 11 teachers in the primary schools. It does not specify whether these teachers should be qualified or unqualified. Even unqualified teachers fresh from school after taking their Senior Cambridge examination are regarded as qualified teachers. Usually the relief teacher is a teacher of a second language, and if any class teacher is absent, he is expected to be a class teacher and to carry on in a medium in which he cannot teach.

Sir, this formula has been found unworkable. It assumes that every teacher employed in a primary school is trained and experienced. He should be able to handle a class from the time the bell rings till the school closes. Sir, the result of this is that a student teacher, without any knowledge of teaching, is put in charge of a class, and since the formula is tight, there is no time for him to go to the head to be instructed in what he should do in class. Instances have arisen where these new teachers had blundered, and when asked for the reason, the head replied that he had no time even to instruct them, because he himself had to take the class of an absent teacher. This has been going on for the last two years, and I think it is time that the formula is altered. I would like to make one suggestion, and that is, if a student teacher in the first or second year in a training school is regarded as half a point and if not less than half the staff in a primary school are qualified teachers, then we can be sure that the primary schools in Singapore will be efficiently run. At the moment, although we have many new schools and many more pupils admitted, we run a great risk that because the foundation laid is so poor, we will be heading for trouble in six years' time. Already the results of the Primary Six Government Examination are not very satisfactory because the average is only roughly about 40 per cent. We have to improve on that percentage, and I am sure the Minister himself wants to raise the standard. He wants not only quantity but quality. Unless the staffing formula is revised, I am afraid we will never be able to achieve efficiency and a high standard of teaching in the primary schools.

Sir, the second issue has already been referred to by the Member for Farrer Park, and that is the controversial issue of the compulsory full six-day week. Sir, I can see how difficult it is for the Government perhaps to change its stand, but I would suggest that the Minister should approach this question in the way he did over the controversial 3:3 and 4:2 middle school issue. How did he do that, Sir? He mentioned to us that he had the support of the educational bodies in this country, that the principals and teachers were in agreement with him.

An hon. Member: The parents.

Dr Thio Chan Bee: Then he went further and said that most of the parents were also in agreement with him. Lastly, judging from the results of those who went to take the examinations, he said the majority were in favour. Now if we were to approach this question on that same basis, I am sure the answer would be found. But, of course, if you want to get advice, you must get it from independent educational experts and bodies. You cannot ask those who are in favour of your political Party to be the advisers. They will naturally say yes. But if independent people are asked and they give independent views, I am sure they will stress that when it comes to a thing like this, it is better to encourage students, teachers and heads to produce maximum results in the minimum time than to encourage them to produce the minimum results in the maximum time. When contractors tender for buildings, I am sure the Government does not select the contractor who specifies that he is going to complete the building in the longest possible time.

Now, if we approach it on the basis of the opinions of experts, the wishes of parents and the results obtained, we can see that the compulsory six-day week is having a demoralising effect on many schools. The justification given was that it was done in the Chinese schools, and therefore the English schools should not protest.

Sir, I have also discussed this matter with Chinese school teachers and they have given me facts and figures to show that the load today is equivalent to a seven-day working week. This is what they have said, Sir. A primary school teacher in a Chinese primary school, before the introduction of this new programme, taught from 36 to 38 periods of 30 minutes each, making a total of a maximum of 1,140 minutes per week. Now they have to teach from 47 to 48 periods of 30 minutes each, bringing the maximum to 1,440 minutes per week - an increase of 300 minutes, per week, or five hours per week, which means that they are working an extra day. In the case of those teaching in high school, the teachers previously taught an average of 20 to 23 periods of 45 minutes each; now they have to teach 32 to 36 periods of 40 minutes each, so that by comparison they were teaching 1,035 minutes per week before and now they have to teach 1,440 minutes per week - an increase of about 400 minutes per week. So they say that this so-called compulsory six-day week is really putting on to them the load of a seven-day week compared to what they were doing before.

I would suggest, Sir, that when the Minister has consulted the experts and the wishes of parents, he will make the ruling more flexible. It could be a compulsory minimum of a five-day week with 5½ or 6 days on a voluntary basis, so that those classes of pupils who, can do a week's work in five days need not come to school on the sixth day. In the case of those who are rather slow - those who are not of the sprinter type but of the long distance runner type - they could be made to come to school for an extra half-day or even for the sixth day. If parents in certain areas feel that their children must be kept in school just to keep them out of mischief, then a roster could be arranged so that teachers could be there for recreational or supervisory purposes to help these children. Educationalists say that up to a point children can absorb knowledge, but to force them to study beyond that point will simply make them dislike study.

Sir, I therefore suggest that, instead of letting the issue drag on and on, the Minister approach it in the same way as he did on the 3:3 and 4:2 middle school issue, with an open mind, and be ready to consult various opinions. I am sure he will be able to arrive at a fair and workable solution.

7.15 p.m.

Sir, there is another issue, and that is this policy towards Government schools and aided schools. I am sorry, Sir, that the Minister is following the line of the Director of Education in colonial days. Maybe he was wrongly advised by those under him. But, in any case, in those days they divided schools into Government schools, which were their schools, and aided schools, which were not their schools. And it came as a shock to one of them when the Governor said, in front of me, that he was wrong in assuming that school children in Singapore should be classified into two categories - Government school children and aided school children. He was told that he should regard all school children in Singapore as his children because, after all, they were children of citizens of Singapore, and all citizens were taxpayers contributing towards Government revenue which went towards supporting the schools. And if parents preferred to send their children to aided schools, why should they be forbidden from doing so? Why should they be compelled to send their children to Government schools? Let them have their freedom of choice.

Another reason why I think we should allow these two categories of schools to carry on is to provide healthy competition. Sir, if there is no competition, there is no incentive to heads and teachers to do better than they did previously. And healthy competition is absolutely necessary in order to keep heads and teachers in both types of schools on their toes, seeking new ideas and new ways of improving their schools. [t would be a sorry day for Singapore if we had a monopoly of schools so that all of them were controlled by the State. We believe in encouraging a diversity of schools, more enterprise, more encouragement given to heads and teachers to show initiative, so that if they can do things in a better way, they should be allowed to do it.

Sir, two more points. I raised the question of provident fund benefits for Chinese-medium school teachers which entered into the aided school system rather late. These teachers are on the Central Provident Fund basis, so that even if they join the school at the age of 50 with only five years more of service, they are allowed to contribute only a maximum of $25 a month. So last year the Minister for Education and the Finance Minister asked for particulars of the provident fund scheme for aided schools, and I promised I would send particulars. I did so, Sir. I wonder whether anything has been done regarding retirement benefits for Chinese school teachers in the aided school system.

There is another question, Sir, the age of retirement. In the days when Chinese schools were regarded as private schools, a teacher could teach even up to the age of 70 if physically he was regarded as fit to teach. But if he has to retire at the age of 60 and has no livelihood and his provident fund benefits are inadequate, naturally, Sir, such teachers will be in a fix. Some of them have asked whether, under the circumstances, in the case of those teachers who join the system rather late, they could not be allowed to continue even beyond the age of 60 if their health permits it and their efficiency is not impaired.

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: On this amendment, Sir, I would first like to touch on children who did not get through the English Secondary School Entrance Examination. For those who got through, the Minister has said, from what I read in the papers, that he would allocate places for them in the schools nearest their homes. But for those who were not fortunate enough to get through, if they are of the right age for a repeat class, they ware asked to go round and find vacancies should their own schools have no vacancies; and if they are not of the right age, then for a post-primary class. Anyway, that is beside the point. What I am trying to stress is this. Those who have passed the School Entrance Examination know that they are getting a place; but those who have not passed have to go from school to school to try and find a vacancy for themselves. Could the Government not arrange to allocate them places? I think that would be better because, first and foremost, it saves the poor parents, some of whom are wage earners, from spending so much money on transport in going from school to school to find vacancy.

Another point - from the educational aspect - is this. Those pupils who merit it will get priority if the Government does that, rather than depend on luck. Because if they go on their own and they happen to go first to a school which has a vacancy, they get it. And if they go all round and last of all come to a school that has a vacancy, by the time they reach there, the vacancy probably is filled. It is a matter of luck more than merit. So if the Government could arrange to allocate places, I think it will benefit these people both economically and from the educational point of view.

Another point I would like to bring to the Minister's attention is this. I have been approached by quite a number of people who have many children going to school. We know from statistics that the poorer people are, somehow or other they seem to have more children. These people find it very difficult to buy all the books at the beginning of the year. For the higher classes they may need almost all the books at the beginning of the year. But for the primary classes, especially Primary I, it is impossible for them to need all the books during the first three months of the year. Would the Minister consider allowing parents to buy books as and when they are needed? I do not think schools allow that unless the Minister makes it an instruction that the principal should allow that. I know this is a matter for the principals to take up, but probably the Minister will say that it is not practised in any of the schools. If the Minister could help by giving instructions that this should be allowed in order to help parents, I think it would help poor people quite a bit.

Talking about the 4:2 system, the Member for Farrer Park, as a layman, seems to think that people who ask for that are asking for especially favourable terms. From an educationist's point of view, I think they are asking for something which is detrimental to the children themselves, because the qualifications would not come up to the qualifications of the English-educated. And, therefore, that handicap will still remain. The idea is to bring them up so that they may stand a fair chance to compete equally. If the Minister agrees and says, "All right, do not take that exam. Go up to the top." After six years, they still have not got the qualifications that the English-educated have. So to me, as an educationist, I feel that what they are asking for is detrimental and not favourable to the children.

The next point I would like to touch on, Sir, is the question of the six-day week. A very sore point that everybody seems to be talking about! Unfortunately, I see that even the Prime Minister, when he talks about it, seems to take it from the point of view of the teachers. No one ever thinks about the poor children; or from the point of view of the children. The Prime Minister says that probably the solution lies in getting more teachers so that each teacher will have less hours to do. Unfortunately we cannot do the same for the children. Let us get more children so that each child will have less hours to do! That cannot be done for the children. While the strain is being taken out of the teachers, the poor children will have to go through that strain. I think it is a wrong line of argument to say that an adult cannot stand the strain but a child can.

Moreover, Sir, in a six-day week, when a child goes to school in the morning, he does his homework in the afternoon. If he does it for five days, the sixth day is left to him to take up such activities as scouting, cadet, St. John's, and other healthy extra-mural activities which are very good training for the child. I notice the Member for Farrer Park, as a parent, is taking it! My children are all grown up and are married, with children. I do not quite feel as much as the Member for Farrer Park does. But I do agree with him that children need a home background and training, as well as extra-mural activities which are healthy. If they go to school for six days, Sir, when are they going to take up these activities, because they go to school in the morning, and in the afternoon they do their homework? They have to study. I do not know whether the Minister realises that when children are asked to do a six-day week, they are expected to work even more than the labourers. The Labour Code says labourers must work eight hours a day, and then on Saturdays, half a day. But our children work six full days! Even on Saturdays they go in the morning and study in the afternoon. I do not think it is fair to expect our children to do more than teachers do and to do more than labourers do.

Moreover, Sir, in a school where you have morning and afternoon sessions, there is no time for school children to go back for games, because in the morning there is morning school, and children in afternoon school cannot come in the morning as they might disturb the morning school who want their P.T., and by the time they finish their P.T. the rest of the time is too hot for them. And the children in afternoon school take their P.T. towards the latter half of the period, because when they start at 2 o'clock it is too hot to play in the playground. P.T. is physical training. Therefore, they have no chance to come back for games because of the non-availability of playgrounds. For some people, Sunday is a religious day and they take up religious activities and, therefore, for the children of these people, they work seven days a week.

Sir, I agree with the Member for Tanglin who said that - I do not know whether his word was - "Commission" but I say that if the Government would appoint a commission of experts to study the effects of the six-day week on children and make recommendations to Government, it would be helping the children and the Government a great deal. When we proposed that, I heard, if I am not mistaken, the Minister for Education say "such as" - meaning people who are not affected by the six-day week. I would like to suggest this: what about those experts in the University who lecture on child psychology and on education? They are not affected by the six-day week and they could, with their experience and knowledge, give unbiased recommendations.

The last point I want to touch on is this, Sir. I notice that the Estimate for the Ministry of Education is $89-odd million as against $352-odd million total estimates of expenditure. That is a little more than a quarter of the total budget. Now, the Ministry of Education is one Head out of 57 Heads, and it is getting a little more than a quarter of the total budget.

7.30 p.m.

Rightly so, Sir. I am not complaining about that because the education of a country is very important. The progress of the State, the welfare of its people, the stability of its economy, the standard of health, the incidence of crime and juvenile deliquency and lots of other things depend on the education of the country. Therefore, I venture to suggest that the Minister too would be very anxious that the best education procurable should be got for the youth of the country. I believe I am not wrong in saying that he has made every effort to try and get good training for the teachers. Sir, although I maintain that good training does make a good teacher, it is not sufficient. Besides good teachers, we need good teaching, and unless teachers are treated fairly and justly, they are not going to give their best and their teaching will not be good teaching or the best teaching that can be obtained. Probably the Minister might say, what is Mrs Scow trying to suggest? Does she suggest that we are not treating our teachers well. I would say not all teachers are treated justly. I would like to ask the Minister, if he thinks all teachers are treated justly, what justification is there in paying women teachers less? Do they work less hours? Do they do less work in the same number of hours or produce inferior results? Is there proof that classes taught by women teachers produce worse results than classes taught by men teachers? Or do girls' schools have worse results in the Cambridge Exam ination and in the secondary school examination than boys' schools? No, it is the reverse. In the Cambridge examination, usually the girls do get better results. Do records show that women trainees in the Teachers Training College or the University of Singapore or Nanyang University do worse than their male colleagues? Do women principals, lecturers and inspectors take on less responsibilities than their male counterparts? If they do not - as an educationalist. I know they do not - is there any justice in paying them less? Now, Sir, as if this gross injustice is not sufficient -

The Chairman (Mr Mammen): I think the hon. Member should give the Minister a chance to reply. We stop at 7.45 p.m.

Mrs Seow Peck Leng: I will just say this, Sir, just to point out other anomalies. Apart from these anomalies there are others more serious. Married women teachers are worse off. They get worse treatment than unmarried women teachers. I will not go into the details of it, as there is no time. But I am sure the Minister knows that. In a comparison between men and women, at least they can say men work more, or whatever it is. Now what about the women themselves - the married and the unmarried? Do unmarried women work more than married women? If they do, then why is there another anomaly? Those women who joined Government service before 1928 are supposed to be better teachers than those who joined after 1928, because the pre-1928 teachers get better terms of service. They are pensionable and permanent, whereas those who joined after 1928 are temporary.

Most women teachers teaching in lower primary schools are teaching children at their most tender and vulnerable age. I feel, Sir, to make these teachers dissatisfied, unhappy, frustrated, will have a very bad influence on the children. If not for the sake of the teachers, at least for the sake of the education of the country and for the sake of the children of the country, I appeal to the Minister to give his serious attention to this matter and not to laugh it off.

Dato Abdul Hamid rose -

The Chairman: Mr Yong.

Dato Abdul Hamid: I think I stood up first.

The Chairman: In fairness to the Minister, I think he ought to be given a chance to reply because we have ten minutes left. Mr Yong.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I must say that I am very disappointed that under this Head for the reduction of $100, three Members of the Barisan Sosialis - the Member for Queenstown, the Member for Nee Soon and the Member for Upper Serangoon - have nothing to say. More so when Members of the Opposition, in the Member for Farrer Park and the Member for Mountbatten, have commented on the 4:2 system for Chinese schools and the comment from certain quarters - supported by the Barisan Sosialis - that those who do not pass the Government Secondary IV Examination will not be allowed to take the Government Upper Secondary II Examination is an unreasonable requirement. They have nothing else to say in this House.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: On a point of clarification.

The Chairman: If the Minister will give way.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I do not have time for clarification. To proceed with the points raised by Members of the Opposition. First, to answer the Member for Tanglin about the staffing formula. I believe I have mentioned previously that this point was put to the Teachers' Training College Advisory Board, whether a teacher trainee should be half a unit as an English schools in the past, or one unit, as in Chinese schools. Finally, they recommended to me the formula of 0.75 unit for a teacher trainee, which I accepted. This was put to the Treasury and would involve as many as 750 teachers for 1962, if this formula was accepted. It was probably thrown out by the Treasury, and I will try to bring this about in three years. So that for 1962, a teacher trainee would be treated as .92 unit; for 1963 he would be .84 unit; and by 1964, .75 unit. This is on the assumption that a trained teacher would be one unit, and he will have one free period each day. Therefore, a teacher trainee will have more free periods than a trained teacher. It is hoped that principals of schools would so arrange their staff as to permit teacher trainees to have their free period during the day that they have to go to the Teachers' Training College for their lesson. That will give them sufficient time, I think, to leave school, have their lunch and attend the courses.

I am afraid the statement made by the Member for Tanglin, that the primary school leaving examination results are bad, is not supported by facts. In 1959, only 31 per cent of the English primary school students passed this examination. This must be fully blamed on the defect of automatic promotion which we stopped, so that by 1960, there was an improvement in the examination results - not very much - by 34 per cent. This year, I am very glad to say the defect of automatic promotion is slowly wearing off. The result of the English primary schools was 45 per cent, although the general average is over 50 per cent. I do feel that by 1962 the result of the English primary school will more or less average out. There has been a definite improvement in the result for English primary schools in this common primary school leaving examination.

As regards the Central Provident Fund for aided school teachers, as in the case of the Singapore Education Service, this matter is under review.

As for the age of retirement for teachers, first of all, I would like to say that, in respect of women teachers who used to retire at the age of 45, we have already decided that the same age limit should apply to women teachers as to men teachers. We have brought the status of women teachers up to that of men, which, I take it, the Member for Mountbatten would be pleased to hear, because she seems to be a very strong woman suffragette in this enlightened age of ours. For those teachers who are aged 60, we have no objection to keeping those who have passed the normal retirement age of 55 years if they wish to continue after 60 and, in fact, thereafter, if they are hale and hearty, and their mental faculties are in order. There is one very classic example in. Dr Chelliah who is, I am sure, past 70, and who has already been through his Golden Jubilee in teaching. He happens to be a Mathematics teacher and he is of use to the school, and that is why he is allowed to carry on. But there is always this question of keeping younger men from joining the service. They do feel that the man is already long retired and he could easily leave school and give employment opportunity for younger people. That is our difficulty really.

As regards the six-day week, I have only a few minutes to answer this question. I do feel that with the improved staffing quota for schools, with more teachers, a lightening of their teaching load, which is really the crux of their dissatisfaction, by introducing extramural activities in the school curriculum (Scouting, Guiding, Brigade or Junior Red Cross) - it has been admitted by the Member for Mountbatten that because of morning and afternoon schools, children cannot go back any more for such extra-mural activities - I think the teaching load will be reduced. I am glad to say that it has been possible for the Ministry to come to a working arrangement with four teachers' unions - the Malay Teachers' Union, the Tamil Teachers' Union, the Chinese School Teachers' Union and the Singapore Teachers' Union - for an improved version of the six-day week for primary schools for next year. I think that, given this co-operation, we will be able to introduce a revised version of the six-day week for primary schools next year. I hope it will prove more satisfactory, and parents will also be pleased. It is not a secret. It has already been agreed to, but I think it requires a little bit of touching up to put it right. I think it will not be long before this will be announced. We hope we will be able to go through a tranquil period in all schools, not necessarily English schools.

7.45 p.m.

The Chairman: The Member for Choa Chu Kang wants to speak for and minute.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: (In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Education has just now alleged that because my Barisan Sosialis colleagues are not present here, we dare not put up our policy. Because the Minister had only 10 minutes to reply, the Member for Upper Serangoon therefore had no chance to speak.

Mr Rajah: I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $89,137,860 for Head 57 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

The Chairman: The remaining heads of expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order Paper are -

3, 6, 10, 16, 17, 18, 21, 28, 29, 30, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42 and 43.

Question, "That the sums stated for those Heads as they appear in the last column of the Abstract of Estimated Expenditure on pages 41 and 42 of Paper Cmd. 35 of 1961 stand part of the Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $352,920,900 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Estimates contained in Paper Cmd. 35 of 1961," put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

7.50 p.m.