PUBLIC UTILITIES BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

The Prime Minister: Sir, I lay upon the Table a Certificate of Urgency signed by the Yang di-Pertuan Negara in respect of the Public Utilities Bill.

Certificate of Urgency handed in.

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

The Prime Minister: The copies are with the Clerk.

Typed copies of the Bill distributed to hon. Members.

The Prime Minister: Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." I may add that the Yang di-Pertuan Negara has given his recommendation in respect of this Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill was introduced during the last Session of the Legislative Assembly. It was committed to Select Committee and reported by the Select Committee without amendment. However, the Assembly was prorogued before the Report could be adopted and the Bill read a Third time.

The Bill contains nearly all the same provisions as the Bill introduced in the last Session except for two changes. The first is contained in clause 40 (2) which requires that a certificate be issued by the Minister as conclusive evidence of the transfer and the vesting in the Public Utilities Board of the water, gas and electricity undertakings of the City Council and their respective assets and liabilities should such evidence be required in a statutory form: for example, by the Registrar of Stocks in which the City Council has invested. This has been done at the request of and after consultation with the City Treasurer and is intended to provide a means to dispel any dispute that might arise over the identity or amount of the former City Council assets transferred to the Public Utilities Board. A similar provision to cover the assets to be transferred to Government is also included in clause 5 (3) of the Local Government Integration Bill which is not being proceeded with on a Certificate of Urgency because, unlike this Bill, it does not need to be so proceeded with.

The second new proviso is clause 40 (2) which gives power to the Minister to direct any person to transfer to the service of the Public Utilities Board, to give such advice and to carry out such acts as may be required in relation to or arising out of the transfer to and the vesting in the Government of the assets and liabilities of the City Council and Rural Board. This provision has been put in at the request of the City Treasurer to enable that officer, who will become the Chief Financial Officer of the Public Utilities Board when formed, to complete the winding-up of the former City Council accounts, divide the assets and liabilities and transfer such to the Government and the Public Utilities Board respectively. The final City Council accounts were closed as at 31st December, 1960. Mr Speaker, Sir, I see from the notice of amendments on this Bill that the Member for Anson has proposed certain amendments.* May I say to him simply this? I will be quite happy to consider the merits of the amendments and I give an undertaking that after the amendments have been considered, if they are valid, we shall move an amending Bill in respect of those amendments. The reason why the Bill has been proceeded with on a Certificate of Urgency is that the World Bank will not lend unless we move the Bill in its present form, to which they have agreed. If I were to make any amendments, even though they may not affect the substance of the Bill insofar as they are concerned, it may lead to endless arguments with the World Bank Authority as to whether or not it has deprived them of their security on the loan. There are two conditions on which they give such a loan. One is that the public utilities are vested in a statutory corporation, which is sufficiently divested from Government control to a statutory body to ensure them certain guarantees as to the economic running of the corporation which will take into consideration the repayment of the loan. The other is the guarantee by a member nation. My colleague, the Minister for Finance, has explained the guarantee.

All I would like to say on the first point is that whilst there may be merit in some of the amendments he has proposed, I think I will be put to unnecessary argument with the World Bank to show that, in fact, it has not materially altered the worthiness and guarantee of the independent statutory nature of the Public Utilities Board. I therefore ask the Member to consider this point, that we allow this Bill to go through in its present form and, after consideration by the S.A.G's Chambers in consultation with the World Bank, if there are any amendments which the Member wishes to press, we shall proceed on an amending Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

7.31 p.m.

Mr David Marshall: Mr Speaker. Sir, I am startled by the courtesy of the Prime Minister and I trust he will not take that as a discourteous reply. I am indeed startled and I appreciate it. I would like to co-operate as much as I can. Can I have some indication, if you will permit, Sir? There is one matter of major gravity - I am prepared to concede the others - the question of ministerial interference which I have sought to amend in departmental affairs, particularly the danger of having the Minister responsible for salaries and emoluments, which would make it a political issue.

The main value of having a public utility is that the trade unions can deal with a statutory body and not on a political basis. Those are some of the important points. But the major one is clause 20 which deprives the citizen of his right to sue the Board, and I feel quite certain that the intention was not there. But I am satisfied in my own mind, Sir. They have copied it from section 396 of the Municipal Ordinance, which was modified' in section 50 of the Local Government Ordinance, and now he has copied - just one copied from the other, Sir. They forgot that in the first Municipal Ordinance, they were dealing with human beings - Commissioners -using the word "them", whereas in this Bill they are using the word "Board", which is "it". Forgive me for being technical for the moment. I am satisfied that the gist of it is that neither the Board nor any of its members, nor any of its employees would be liable for any breach of contract or tort, or for negligence in respect of any duties bona fide executed by him. So that, Sir, if I am an employee of the Board and I go to test your meter and I ram your wall and I bring down all your furniture and I injure all your children, the Board is not liable, and a great many other eventualities of that character. I feel quite certain, Sir, that after the passage of the 1955 Act which repealed the Public Authorities Protection Ordinance, that that is not the intention and that it is, shall we say, inadvertent. I am not always attaching the worst possible connotation to the conduct of the Government. I trust that I am at times, if only at times, reasonable, Sir. Here this is a very grave inroad into the security and rights of the people of Singapore. If the Prime Minister will give me an assurance that an opportunity by way of an amending Bill will be given at the next sitting of this Assembly, I will be very happy to concede, in view of his urgent request that the amendments be not proceeded with today. And if I might have the further assurance, which I feel he would be prepared to give, that if there are any people deprived of, shall we say, legitimate rights in the interim period due to an inadvertent section which deprives them of those rights, then the amending Ordinance would be made retrospective.

Mr Speaker: No Member wishing to speak on the Second Reading? Mr Prime Minister, in reply.

The Prime Minister: I give the assurance, Sir,I would be loath to give an answer forthwith on the interpretation that has been given by the Member for Anson on this point. But I accept the point that if, in fact, it was not intended to deprive any member of the public of a remedy which would otherwise have been open to him as a result of the Public Authorities Protection Ordinance, then we shall make it retrospective.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly.

Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[The Prime Minister].

Bill considered in Committee.

[Mr SPEAKER in the Chair]

7.35 p.m.

The Chairman: Unless any Member indicates that he wishes to move amendments or wishes to comment on any particular clause, I propose to take the Bill en bloc. Any particular clauses or parts of the Bill? No Member? In that case, I will take clauses 1 to 89 inclusive.

Mr David Marshall: May I ask your guidance?

The Chairman: Certainly.

Mr David Marshall: Having given notice of these amendments, and wishing to withdraw them in view of the assurance given and the particular difficulties indicated, what is the proper procedure, Sir?

The Chairman: It is just that the Member does not move.

Mr David Marshall: I do not.

Clauses 1 to 89 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

The Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.