REPORT OF COMMISSION ON ASSEMBLY STAFF

The Deputy Prime Minister (Dr Toh Chin Chye): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's recommendation to proceed with the motion standing in my name*.

• The motion reads as follows:-

That this Assembly, noting the Report of the Commission on Assembly Staff as contained in Paper Misc 1 of 1963, accepts the recommendations of the Commission as contained in Part IX thereof and resolves in accordance with such recommendations.

Members of the House will be aware from the Report which has been submitted that a Commission consisting of you, Mr Speaker, the Minister for Finance, the Minister for Health, the Minister for National Development, and the Chairman of the P.S.C., was appointed to study the terms of service of the Assembly Staff. This Commission has met and has made certain recommendations as contained in this Report. Generally, the Commission is of the opinion that the terms of service of members of the Assembly Staff should be related to those which are equally applicable to their counterparts in the Government service. I am happy to say that accord has been reached on the salary scales of the Clerk, the Clerk-Assistant, the Interpreters, the Serjeantat-Arms, and that other terms of service have also been carefully looked into.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.38 p.m.

The Minister for Health and Law (Mr K. M. Byrne): Mr Speaker, Sir, we were, in addition to being asked to consider the revision of the salary scales of the Assembly Staff, also asked to consider a proposal that the four topmost posts of the Assembly service should be removed from the civil service, and he placed in a closed Assembly Service. The main reason for this proposal is the desirability of placing such posts outside the control of the Executive Government to avoid any possibility of their being brought under the political control of the Executive Government in order to maintain the independence and dignity of the Assembly in accord with similar arrangements in the English House of Commons. Sir, in the U.K. there is not the equivalent of an independent Public Service Commission which is outside political control and entrusted with the duty of recruiting, promoting, transferring and exercising discipline generally over the civil service there. There the Civil Service Commission only recruits to the civil service and has no control over promotions, transfers or discipline. Promotion to the top posts in the civil service in the United Kingdom depends on recommendations from the Permanent Head of the Treasury, but such recommendations first receive ministerial approval before they are implemented. As the kind of service which officers appointed to serve the House of Commons renders is entirely different from that rendered by the rest of the civil service in the United Kingdom, and as promotions to the topmost civil service posts there depend on ministerial approval, there was therefore good reason for placing these appointments in a closed service outside the ordinary civil service; but conditions here, Sir, are not similar. In Singapore we have the Public Service Commission which is outside political control, exercising authority over recruitments, transfers, promotions and discipline in the civil service. Under section 46 (2) of the Singapore (Constitution) Order in Council, the appointment of the Clerk is made by the Yang di-Pertuan Negara acting in his discretion but after consultation with the Speaker and the Public Service Commission; and the recruitment and promotion of other staff of the Assembly are made by the Public Service Commission. They are also not eligible for promotion or transfer to any other appointment in the public service without the consent of the Speaker.

Sir, these provisions in themselves ensure that there is no possibility of any of the Assembly staff being brought under the control of the Executive Government. While we pay due regard to the dignity and authority of this Assembly, we are at the same time realists, and are able to recognise that there is a great deal of difference between our Assembly and the United Kingdom House of Commons, which has developed in the course of time to be a world forum. It is true that the Clerk of the House of Commons enjoys the same salary as the Permanent Secretary of a large United Kingdom Ministry, but it does not follow that because this is so, the Clerk of our Assembly who has control of a staff of only 41 and serves an Assembly of 51 Members should receive emoluments of a local Permanent Secretary who has control of a staff of many Divisions with a number of Deputy Heads and a total staff amounting to a few thousands ---

Mr Speaker: Order. I do not know what the Minister is doing, whether he is arguing against the Report or for the Report. He was a member of the Commission and all this argument could have been advanced before the Commission. We are now either to accept or to reject the recommendations of this Commission. As a member of the Commission, he has not agreed to this closed service principle. So there it is. If any other Member disagrees with that, then of course the Minister gets up and says how that other Member is wrong.

Mr Byrne: With due respect, Mr Speaker, Sir, this is the point that was discussed in the Commission, and I am only pointing out the reasons why we have in a way departed from the practices of the United Kingdom in considering the revision of the salary scales of these posts. I stand by the recommendations of this Commission, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Mr Speaker: But those recommendations have so far not been challenged. Once they are challenged, then the Minister gets up and justifies it. The proper parliamentary practice is that the Minister, as a member of the Commission, has put forward this Report. The Assembly is asked to accept the Report, and unless and until that Report is challenged there is no reason at all why the Minister should justify that Report.

Mr Byrne: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thought I would take this opportunity, in view of the difference in the salary scales, to explain what were the matters that were uppermost in our minds at the time when we were debating these recommendations. But I do stand by the recommendations in the Report.

Mr Speaker: I also wish to make another point, because if the Minister pursues that line, then, of course, the whole debate which took place in the Commission should be aired. I, as Speaker, of course, cannot take part in this debate, and on certain points I think we did differ until we reached accord, so that I do not think the Minister is following good parliamentary practice if he now urges something which he has in fact already accepted, unless and until, as I have said, somebody challenges that decision.

Mr Byrne: Mr Speaker, Sir, I bow to your ruling. All that I had proposed to do is to draw the attention of the House to matters that were uppermost in our minds at the time they were under consideration.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this Assembly, noting the Report of the Commission on Assembly Staff as contained in Paper Misc. 1 of 1963, accepts the recommendations of the Commission as contained in Part IX thereof and resolves in accordance with such recommendations.