NATIONAL REGISTRATION BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

4.46 p.m.

The Minister for Labour (Mr Jek Yeun Thong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The re-registration of the population is of vital importance to independent Singapore. National registration was first introduced in 1948 as an emergency measure, but registration under that scheme was haphazardly done. The incorrect information and the perishable nature of the identity cards issued, and the deficiencies in the registration system have made the existing system most unsatisfactory. Forgery of identity cards has been rampant and these have been sold on a mass scale to illegal immigrants.

Mr Speaker, Sir, one of the reasons for the Bill is to eradicate the forging of identity cards for sale to illegal immigrants who have imposed themselves on our social services. Since Singapore is now fighting for its survival and endeavouring to build a more prosperous and just society, it is only logical that the fruits of our endeavours should benefit only those who are right-fully entitled to them, namely, our citizens. In fact, the Singapore Government drew up a scheme as far back as 1961 for the re-registration of the population, but in anticipation of merger and Malaysia and in view of the fact that national registration would be a Federal subject, the scheme was not implemented.

Here is another clear example of how the Federal Government had deliberately neglected the interests of Singapore when we were in Malaysia. For two years while we were in Malaysia, nothing had been done by the Central Government to implement the scheme; not even a single hint from their high officials. In the meantime, they themselves had initiated and completed a re-registration scheme in the Federation and issued everyone with a plastic identity card. They had treated Singapore like a step-child or a colony where they expected to harvest 40 per cent of our Federal revenue and did nothing.

The new identity cards that will he issued on re-registration of the population will be laminated with heat-resistant plastic by means of a special process. This will ensure that the cards are forgery-proof, tamper-proof and water-proof. This is of the utmost importance because it is essential to our survival and prosperity.

The two main objects of the Bill are set out in clauses 5 and 6. First, subject to certain exemptions which will he made by regulations, all lawful residents in Singapore above the age of 12 will have to be registered. Second, those who are in possession of existing identity cards issued under the provisions of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1955, will also have to be re-registered. For the dependants of foreign services personnel, separate administrative arrangements will have to be made with the respective foreign authorities.

In the re-registration exercise, it is essential to distinguish citizens from non-citizens. It is, therefore, intended to issue two types of identity cards of different colours: one for citizens, and the other for non-citizens who are permanent residents. This will tie up with the Bill providing for the issue of work permits to non-citizens, the Second Reading of which I will move later. By a glance at the colour of the identity card, an employer will be able to know whether his workman is required to carry a work permit or not.

In view of the special significance of an identity card issued to a Singapore citizen, every person who applies for such a card will have to provide adequate proof that he is a Singapore citizen by birth or by registration. In the case of a citizen by registration, a citizenship certificate must be produced. In the case of a person claiming to be a citizen by birth, a birth certificate or other evidence to substantiate his birth in Singapore must be produced, and the onus of proving such birth is on him. However, the evidence of a birth certificate without the name of the child or a birth certificate supported by only a Statutory Declaration to the effect that the person was born in Singapore, or an identity card which only states that the holder was born in Singapore will not necessarily be accepted as sufficient evidence of such birth. This provision is necessary, Sir, because in the past we have found many people who were not born in Singapore at all but using other people's unnamed birth certificates or those of dead persons claiming to be citizens by birth. However, we will be very tactful and considerate in the implementation of this provision, for we are aware that there are still many people in Singapore who are genuinely in possession of birth certificates without names. We will use every means to track down the forgers and the impostors, and will ensure that innocent people will not be unduly inconvenienced.

For the innocent people, the re-registration will prove to be a great help in establishing their status as citizens by birth. In the past they may have encountered many difficulties when they apply for passports or for Housing Board flats or other social amenities where more stringent proof is required to establish their citizenship status. But if in the re-registration process they can prove once and for all that they are citizens by birth, then this fact will be written down on their identity cards which will serve as permanent documentary proof of their citizenship status on all future occasions. And in time to come they may even afford to discard their nameless and worthless birth certificates.

It is intended to charge a citizen 50 cents and a non-citizen $1 for the issue of a new identity card, and for a replacement identity card a flat rate of $5 will be charged. However, in the case of school children and others such as persons receiving public assistance from the Social Welfare Department, provision will be made in the regulations to exempt them from these charges.

Hon. Members will realise that re-registration will involve an expenditure of a large sum of money. The imposition of a charge on the new identity cards which are for the benefit of the people is, therefore, reasonable, for these identity cards will be their passport to prosperity and security and may last them for decades.

The Bill also provides for the compulsory notification of change of residence within 14 days of such change. For the convenience of the public, facilities will be made available at police stations, post offices, and other disseminated centres where change of residence can be effected.

Then there is the problem of how to keep the address on the identity card accurate. In many cases the addresses on the identity cards do not necessarily describe the places where the holders of the identity cards can be found. In the outlying areas, especially in kampongs and villages where road names and house numbers are not to be found, the address on the identity card may simply mean the address of a village coffeeshop which the holder frequently visits to collect his mail or sip his coffee.

Then there is also the question of colloquial names of places. Some of our streets are named after colonial rulers in the past. Their names are so difficult to pronounce that local people soon have to resort to their own way of naming the place where they live. A person may come and tell you that he is staying at such and such a house number in Tai-poh. But Tai-poh may mean anywhere in Chinatown around the Kreta Ayer area. In order to secure accurate addresses, it is our intention to send out a few teams to survey the area and to visit every family before re-registration in any particular area is attempted. The family so visited will be issued with an appointment letter showing the date when they should visit the Registration Centre and the correct description of their address.

Re-registration is understandably a massive exercise and must be carried out smoothly and efficiently with as little inconvenience to the public as possible. The work of re-registration will, therefore, be phased with school children and those in Government institutions like the Home for the Aged, and so on. They will be registered first, and the respective schools or institutions will be serviced by mobile teams. The next phase will embrace registration of workers in commercial and industrial undertakings with 20 or more persons at or near their places of work. On completion of these two phases, the third phase of re-registering the public will begin at registration centres which will be set up in various parts of the island.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the re-registration exercise does not stop at just the issue of identity cards. The system devised will ensure the compilation of more up-to-date and reliable population statistics, and in due course will give each Singapore resident a number which will be used for all purposes in future. This is an essential requirement to meet the goal of a welfare State.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Kampong Kembangan): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill tabled by the Minister for Labour can be considered to be a Bill which deserves the support of all, as it will protect the interests of the people of Singapore, and their livelihood will be enhanced. But I have a little doubt, and I am quite sure the people of Singapore are equally doubtful, and also the Members in this House, about the provisions of clause 12 of the Bill.

Clause 12 of the Bill states that (a) birth certificates without names (b) birth certificates without names but supported by a statutory declaration and (c) cards issued under the Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1955, will not be sufficient proof that such holders were, in fact, born in Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, this clause gives me grave concern, and I am quite sure to those who were actually born in Singapore and who are in possession of birth certificates without names, or those who have mislaid or lost their birth certificates. At one time such persons were informed by the authorities that there was no need for them to obtain citizenship papers as they were born in Singapore. However, when this Bill becomes law, such persons will no longer become Singapore citizens. Where do they stand, Mr Speaker, Sir? Although it has been explained by the Minister for Labour that in the implementation of the clause there will he flexibility in respect of those who are in possession of birth certificates without names, Mr Speaker, I still have my doubts because I fear that such persons will be disappointed.

Mr Speaker, I agree that there have been forgeries or falsification of birth certificates without names. Nevertheless, I believe there will be many more persons who were genuinely born in Singapore but whose birth certificates did not state their names, and persons who lost or who cannot trace their birth certificates in the Registry of Births and Deaths. I myself do not know whether the Minister for Labour has a birth certificate with his name on it. This is because our forefathers felt that birth certificates would not be an important document in later years, for in their time birth certificates were not necessary at all. They paid very little attention to birth certificates.

So, Mr Speaker, clause 12 will result in thousands of genuine Singapore citizens being deprived of citizenship because they cannot trace their certificates, or because their birth certificates do not have their names on them. And when their citizenship is deprived, they will suffer consequentially - deprivation of school facilities, social welfare aid, and such other facilities, while people who were born outside Singapore but obtained citizenship by registration could enjoy these benefits.

In the circumstances, Mr Speaker, I hope the Minister for Labour will give further consideration to clause 12, so that we will not neglect our own citizens at the expense of outsiders, particularly the benefit in respect of paying school fees. As the Minister intends to charge a citizen 50 cents and a non-citizen $1 for the issue of a new identity card and $5 for a replacement, it is a burden to wage earners in the low income group who have many dependants of ages above 12 and such persons must be given free new identity cards. Through no fault of their own, they should not be charged $5 for a replacement but a nominal fee. And I suggest the issue of a new identity card should be free of charge. Mr Speaker, this clause will also cause concern and anxiety to many people in Singapore, particularly those in the low income group, and I hope the Minister will give due consideration to the matter.

Some hon. Members rose ---

Mr Speaker: I see there are a number of Members who wish to speak. So I think this would be a convenient time to suspend. I suspend the sitting and will resume the Chair at twenty minutes to Six o'clock.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.08 p.m, until 5.40 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.40 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate resumed.

5.41 p.m.

Mr S. V. Lingam (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to associate myself with the views which were expressed by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, and I only wish to add one or two points to what he has said.

The Minister, when he was speaking on the Second Reading, said that when people register for plastic cards, it will cost them a dollar each and that if they lose them, the replacement cards will cost them $5 each.

Mr Speaker: I think he said 50 cents.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Sir, 50 cents for citizens and $1 for non-citizens.

Mr Lingam: I am sorry, Sir, If a person is affected by a fire, flood or an accident, I do not think it is fair to charge him for a replacement card, because, if there should be a family consisting of about twelve persons, this will cost them a lot.

Clause 12 (3) (b) of the Bill reads:

`a birth certificate without the name of the child, but supported by a statutory declaration to the effect that the birth certificate refers to the birth of the persons referred to in the statutory declaration'.

Sir, there are citizens of Singapore who have birth certificates without names. But their parents, if they are alive, can be asked to support their declarations for the purpose of re-registration and getting new plastic cards. The question of persons who have birth certificates together with statutory declarations made by their parents should also be looked into.

I hope the Minister will look into these two points and make this re-registration as easy as possible for the people of Singapore.

Mr S. Rajoo (Farrer Park)(In Tamil): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak on certain matters regarding clause 13 of this Bill.

Provision is being made for registration, but certain birth certificates do not bear the names of children. Names may be omitted for certain reasons when births are registered. There are some children who seek employment after graduating from schools and they have to produce birth certificates. I know of an 18-year old boy who went to the Labour Exchange to get employment. He was about to get a job, but he was asked to produce his birth certificate. The certificate did not bear any name. He had an identity card issued by the Government with his photograph and name on it. But the Committee of Selection did not accept it; they just refused, because his name was not on his birth certificate. The reason for refusal was nothing else but just because the birth certificate had no name.

If the parents of a child whose name is not on the birth certificate make a statutory declaration, and even if the Government refuses to accept the statutory declaration, then the position in such a case is that a minor citizenship can be obtained. But if, unfortunately, the parents are dead, the child is helpless. I would like to know then what will he the position in such a case? Under such circumstances, when a boy attains 21 years of age, he may apply for his own citizenship. But he may not get any opportunity of employment until he gets his citizenship. Therefore, his chances of life and employment are wasted by four years. In another case a boy has passed his Senior Cambridge examination. He applies for a Teacher-in-training post. He is rejected or asked to produce citizenship papers because his birth certificate does not bear his name. What happens in such a case is that when he applies for citizenship, he is given a period of six months or a year to finalise his citizenship certificate. He may get his citizenship a year later. But his chances of admission to the Teacher-in-training service for that year is lost.

In cases of adoption, the problem becomes more complicated. Under the circumstances, the Government should try to get the official records of the schools in which such children were educated, because their names will be found there. If the name of the child, the statutory declaration and the nameless birth certificate tally with one another, he should he given opportunities in all fields of employment.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Mr Sia Kah Hui): Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to touch on clause 12.

To a Chinese parent of the old school, the naming of a child is a very serious matter. One does not go about it lightly. He has to consult people and books and until he knows whether his child is a boy or a girl, he cannot go about naming it in advance. Very often, he waits until it is born and he takes quite a long time to think of a name that is considered suitable and respectable to the grandparents, and all the rest of it. There are all sorts of connections, even cousins and sisters; every link has to be considered. So it takes quite a long time. Not realising the importance of having a name recorded on a birth certificate, such a Chinese parent often takes no trouble to have his child's name registered. I think after a certain number of years, if a name is not registered in a birth certificate, you cannot have it done. So the chance is missed. Because of this, we know that there are a great number of people in Singapore who possess birth certificates without names. Clause 12 (3) says that a person with a birth certificate without the name of the child, but supported by a statutory declaration shall not necessarily be sufficient evidence for the purposes of sub-clause (1) . I would like to ask the Minister whether he would consider a birth certificate without the name of the child, plus a statutory declaration plus a passport --- either a Singapore or a Malaysian passport --- as sufficient evidence for the purposes of sub-clause (1) .

5.52 p.m.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson) (In Tamil): The Minister has announced that 50 cents and $1 will be collected for the issue of identity cards. There are certain people who receive public aid from the Social Welfare Department, and I wonder whether the Government will grant an exemption to them from paying these fees. They get $46 a month as public assistance for the family. If there are four members in the family, they have to pay -

Mr Speaker: Order. The Minister has said, I think in his Second Reading speech, that those who are on public assistance will not be charged any sum of money for their identity cards. Am I right, Mr Minister?

Mr Jek Yeun Thong indicated assent.

Mr Govindaswamy (In Tamil): But there are poor people who may be adversely affected; they may not be well off. If the Government is to collect $1 or 50 cents from them, they may not be able to afford it. Sometimes, the card may be lost and the stipulation is that they should pay $5. This will affect the poor people adversely. I request that adequate changes and modifications be made.

5.54 p.m.

Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to join my colleagues here who have made many suggestions and criticisms on the National Registration Bill.

Clause 16 (3) reads as follows:

`No woman shall be searched under this section except by a woman.'

Mr Speaker, Sir, in order that there should be equality, I suggest that no man shall be searched under this section except by a man. Otherwise, Mr Speaker, it would be very embarrassing for a woman to search a man!

5.55 p.m.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to be very brief. Is it the intention of the Government, as a protective measure, to countercheck the registration of citizenship by birth? Then there is no other way out but to accept the evidence of a birth certificate with the name of the child. But surely there are many ways whereby we can establish whether a claim is genuine, such as birth certificates with names of younger brothers or sisters showing the parents' names identical with those of the one who does not have his name on his certificate. I think that should also be accepted as sufficient evidence.

5.56 p.m.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have to thank my colleagues and Back-benchers for offering very useful suggestions for the implementation of this Bill. I think many Members have some doubts on clause 12 which provides that a birth certificate without a name shall not necessarily be considered as sufficient evidence of birth. I think here the operative word is "necessarily", which gives the officials in the registration centres the discretionary power to decide whether a man who produces a birth certificate without a name is the holder of a genuine certificate belonging to him.

I must inform the House that this clause is mainly devised to catch impostors and forgers. I think the officials in the centres will do everything they can to help the innocent people in possession of birth certificates without names to establish their citizenship status. In fact, in the long run, this will be of very good service to them.

The Member for Farrer Park has cited the case of a boy who has a birth certificate without name and who is finding difficulty in getting a job. Not only that; I think he will also find difficulty when he grows up and tries to get a house or a passport, because the possession of a birth certificate without a name is not conclusive proof that the certificate belongs to him. So, in the re-registration process, if this boy can prove with all the relevant documents, once and for all, that he was really born in Singapore, then this will save him all further trouble. Then he will not be faced with the same problems in future when he applies for a job or a passport or a house or any other social amenities where very strict rules have to be followed in regard to citizenship status. In the long run, I think this re-registration will benefit these people. In the re-registration process, the officials will try to help the people to locate evidence. If a person has a birth certificate without a name, then we will try to help him to locate his brothers, parents and all other relevant documents to prove that he was really born in Singapore. This provision is necessary because of the widespread forgery in birth certificates. For instance, if a person in possession of a birth certificate without his name dies, then his relative will be able to sell this blank certificate to anyone; and if we do not have a provision in this law, then anyone can turn up with this blank certificate and claim that he is a citizen by birth. So this law is to discourage such illegal activities, and I think we will do everything to see that innocent people will not he inconvenienced.

The Member for Aljunied has said that the replacement charge is a bit high for those people who, as a result of fire, flood, or other disasters, have lost their identity cards. So, this will put a very heavy burden on them, Therefore, I think in these cases, which are very exceptional and could he called an act of God, special consideration will have to be given.

As to his suggestion that the living parents of a person having a birth certificate without name can make a statutory declaration to the effect that the child was born in Singapore, I think this is a good suggestion and, in fact, the practice has been followed in the Citizenship Registry.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health has asked whether a passport, plus a statutory declaration, plus a birth certificate without name, can be considered as conclusive proof of a citizen by birth. Well, I would say that if a person can produce enough relevant evidence like a passport and a State statutory declaration and a birth certificate without name, then this can be taken as conclusive proof of birth in Singapore.

Some Members have said that the charge for the issue of an identity card to citizens at 50 cents and non-citizens at $1 is a bit on the high side. But I must point out that to issue this card costs the Government about 70 cents and the money that we are charging them is only a negligible amount as compared to the money that the Government has to spend to provide these plastic cards. We have to buy very expensive equipment from the United States and we also have to buy special plastics which can withstand very high temperature. All this costs a lot of money and this 50 cents or a dollar is only a nominal charge for them. And also considering that this card will last them for life, I think the charge of 50 cents or a dollar is comparatively cheap.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Jek Yeun Thong].

Bill considered in Committee.

6.13 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Clauses 1 to 11 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 12 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock (River Valley) rose --- The Chairman: Are you just going to speak on the Bill? You cannot move an amendment, Mr Lim. If you are going to speak on clause 12 with a view to finding out certain things which are troubling you, you may do so. Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Yes. That is what I am going to do. Question proposed, "That clause 12 stand part of the Bill." Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, the provision contained in clause 12 is going to affect many thousands of bona fide Singapore citizens who have birth certificates, but without names. Although the Minister has given the House an assurance that sub-clause (3) shall not necessarily be sufficient evidence for the purposes of sub-clause (1) and the officers in charge will be given discretion, I am afraid this will definitely open the door to corruption. I would like to seek the Minister's assurance that he will consider making special regulations, which I believe he is empowered to do in this Bill, for those citizens who were born here but who have no names on their birth certificates, and for special centres and special offices to deal with this category of persons. Column: 473 The Chairman: Are there any other Members who wish to speak on this clause? Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi ( In Malay ): At the time when the Minister was moving the Second Reading of the Bill, he stated that it would not necessarily be evidence. As was stated by the Member for River Valley, this leaves the door open for corruption, because a person who has a blank certificate and who is able to gratify the officer responsible would be issued a plastic identity card by him, while those who are not in a position to gratify to satisfy him would be told that, according to law, the birth certificate could not be taken as conclusive evidence. So I would suggest that the Minister for Labour take particular care to see that nothing would happen, as mentioned by him when moving the Second Reading, since there are many forged identity cards being sold. If this matter is not looked into very carefully, then what he fears will happen. Mr Sia Kah Hui: I think it is a very good suggestion. The Chairman: Just a minute. The interpretation is not over yet. Mr Sia Kah Hui: I think it is a very good suggestion by the Member for River Valley, that a special centre should be opened to cater specifically for people who have birth certificates without names. And to further assist these people, the Minister could issue a notice of some kind to members of the public that certain types of documents would be acceptable, and list them, something like what they have in the Immigration Department, when you apply for your aged parents to come or your wife or husband to come - they have this printed on the back of the application form. These documentary proofs must be produced before the case can be considered, so that cuts out possibilities of corruption. It means that everyone concerned knows that if he can produce certain documents, then he can satisfy all the requirements and his case will not be left to the whims and fancies of the officials concerned in this matter. Column: 474 Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta) (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, a little while ago the Member for River Valley suggested that a special registry should be set up to deal with applicants who have birth certificates without names on them; in other words, that they can go to such places to apply for identity cards. I have another suggestion. The suggestions by other Members are also good. 6.15 p.m. If such special registration offices are set up, people will be inclined to overlook the necessity to register the names of their children on the birth certificates, because they know that there is such a special registration office to suit their convenience. As far as I understand, the main reason why certain people have birth certificates without name is that their parents did not pay much attention to such practice. Only within this decade people tend to view birth certificates with more concern. So, if it is possible, the Minister may adopt some of the provisions used in dealing with people who have concubines to deal with such a situation as I have mentioned. For instance, we have a Women's Charter which provides legal protection for women. Now everybody can have but only one wife. What I mean to say is that because of past practice, there are some people whose birth certificates are without names. Is it possible not to re-register such people whose birth certificates are without names but who have sufficient documents to prove their claims? I would like to say that this is the time when everybody should know the importance of birth certificates, and if the parents overlook the importance of filling up the names of their children, then they have themselves to blame. Because if we set up special centres to register such people, then they will still be inclined to neglect the importance of having names on birth certificates. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture (Mr Fong Sip Chee): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not wish to be a fence sitter on the subject here, but there are pros and cons in this Column: 475 matter. On the subject of birth certificates without names, I think earlier on the Member for Upper Serangoon and the Member for Delta have both dealt with it to a very considerable extent. I would like to point out that there is another instance where a man could come before any of the government officers and produce a birth certificate without his name and claim it as his own. In fact, there are cases like that. Some unfortunate children were lost in the war or perhaps they passed away during the Japanese occupation in Singapore. There were no proper records kept by the authorities on births and deaths. These certificates, without the names of the children, later on found a good market, particularly with illegal immigrants, and some other people who considered that it would be more convenient to buy blank birth certificates at, say. $200 each from the parents of the children who died during the Japanese occupation and treat them as their own. Therefore, clause 12 is intended to tighten up such loopholes. I would like to seek the Minister's clarification on one other matter, that is, there are persons with birth certificates without names, and yet their flames appear on the electoral register. This peculiar situation was created by the former Lim Yew Hock Government back in 1957. I would like to ask the Minister whether the fact that a person whose name appears on the electoral register and who at the same time has a birth certificate without his name on, but has no citizenship papers, could be regarded as having sufficient evidence to prove that he is a citizen of Singapore? As I said earlier, the provisions are intended to regularise the very peculiar position prevailing now. I do urge the Minister to see that no undue and unnecessary inconvenience is caused in cases which they consider to be genuine. Another point. Mr Speaker, is that when this Bill comes into effect, a person can he confronted by the authorities which say that the possession of a birth certificate without his name is not sufficient evidence to prove that he is Column: 476 a citizen of Singapore. It appears to me that there is no provision in the Bill to cover the interim period. In such a situation, a person applying for his registration card cannot prove that he is a citizen of Singapore, whether or not the status quo of the legal position of these people is maintained or recognised by the authorities. Mr Sia Kah Hui: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister. If I am not mistaken, I think the public generally assume that if their names are on the electoral registers, then they are Singapore citizens. I think probably that would be the impression of the public. Is it the intention of this Bill that those people whose names are on the electoral registers, but who cannot produce documentary evidence to prove that they are either citizens by birth or citizens by registration, will have their names removed from the electoral roll? The Chairman: Mr Minister, in reply. Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir,I have already said that this clause is not designed to catch innocent people. If it is so, then I am afraid quite a number of us here will he caught by this Bill, and found without citizenship status. I, myself, am in possession of a certificate with a different name. The peculiar custom of our people here is that when a father is blessed with a child, he cannot know first whether it will be a boy or a girl. If it is a boy, he has to give him a boy's name, and if it is a girl, he has to give her a girl's name. After it is known that it is a boy, the whole family becomes excited. So, for a period, no name is given to him. Temporarily he will be called "Ali Kow" or by some other name. When the midwife calls, they just give his nickname. When he grows up, they find it rather awkward for him to carry on still with the old nickname which describes him as a pig, a cow or a dog. So he has to change his nickname to a proper name. Quite a lot of our citizens here, although they were genuinely born in Singapore, are either in possession of birth certificates without names or with different names. Column: 477 The officials in charge of registration will have to be very careful in weighing the pros and cons of each case. Some Members have suggested that special centres should be set up, to deal with these certificates without names. I think this is a very good suggestion. If this is to be carried out, I think one centre will not be enough, considering the large number of persons without names on their birth certificates. This is a good suggestion and it will be passed on to the officials in charge of registration for them to make recommendations. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health has asked whether applicants of new identity cards should be asked to produce any type of document. I would say yes, because clause 19 provides power for the Minister to make regulations, and among the subjects under clause 19 (2) (c) is "the nature of information and documents to be furnished for the purposes of registration". I would say, when the re-registration campaign is started, a complete set of regulations will be published informing the people about the type of documents they have to bring with them to the centres. 6.30 p.m. As to the remarks about the electoral rolls, some people have birth certificates without names, but their names appear in the electoral rolls and they have voted in several elections and the Referendum. This is because our electoral rolls were compiled in accordance with the counterfoils of our existing identity cards. When we issued identity cards in 1948, no proof was required to substantiate the claim that a person was born in Singapore. In those days there was no citizenship and the people did not pay much importance to citizenship papers; that was when we were still under colonial rule. In those days, the official just took the word of the applicants for granted. If they said that they were born in Singapore, the officials just put down on their identity cards that they were born in Singapore. If they said that they were born in China, then the identity cards would Column: 478 show that they were born in China. Because of this, our electoral rolls are actually not very accurate, as they were compiled according to the counterfoils of these identity cards. In future when we have completed our re-registration campaign, if we find that some persons with identity cards show that they were born in Singapore, but if we can prove that they were not born in Singapore, then I am afraid their names will have to be struck off the electoral rolls unless they apply for citizenship under registration. Otherwise it would not be fair to put the person who is not a citizen on the electoral roll. I think that is all I have got to say. Question put, and agreed to. Clause 12 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 13 to 20 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. Column: 478 REGULATION OF EMPLOYMENT BILL Order for Second Reading read. 6.36 p.m. Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, we are all aware that the influx of people from Malaya has been on the increase. The majority of them have come with nothing other than their bare hands and hungry stomachs, because their Ministers have not done anything to improve their lot in the Federation. In 1964, we had a net increase of some 10,000 Malayans. In the first ten months of 1965, we saw a further increase of some 10,000 more. The Prime Minister of Malaysia, in answer to a question in his own Parliament, said that there were 800 families from Singapore who had applied to go to Johore to open up the jungle. This is not a true statement of fact, Sir. The figures in our Registry of Persons show that from August to November this year 6,319 Malayans came down to Singapore as against 423 Singaporeans going up to Column: 479 the Federation in the same period. I do not think these 423 Singaporeans have gone to Johore to open up the jungle. I suspect they were managerial staff or skilled labourers of Singapore commercial firms on transfer to the Federation. In November alone 2,320 Malayans came down to Singapore as against only 78 Singaporeans going up to the Federation. Nobody in his sound mind would abandon the comfort of city life and go into the wilderness unless he is driven to it. But we are not driving away any of our citizens to the jungle. In fact, some of the Singapore U.M.N.O. members have accused the Government of forcing the people to evacuate their slums in the kampongs and putting them into flats which are the products of modern civilisation. Hitherto, we have freely allowed workers from Malaya to come to Singapore to seek employment, because, before us, there was a golden avenue to economic union and a Common Market. But the prospects dimmed and gradually disappeared because of the policy of the Government of Malaysia to isolate Singapore and pressurise her into economic subjugation. Since their Government is not SO friendly to our people and tries to stifle our industrial growth, why should we make our amenities available to their people? We can no longer allow the Federation Ministers to dump their unemployed into Singapore at the expense of our citizens. They must be made to do some work and face reality. Nor can we allow non-citizens without skill to impose themselves on our educational, medical, housing and other social facilities and amenities. These we have provided at enormous cost for the benefit of our workers in order to bridge the gap between the haves and the have-nots, thereby building a just and equal society. It is with considerable reluctance that the Government has decided to introduce this Bill to provide some measure of control. If such a decision is not taken, the standard of living now enjoyed by our workers will be seriously affected. Our economic and Column: 480 social burdens will become unmanageable, and our attempt to build a more just and equal society will he nullified. Sir, the intention of the Bill is not to bar all non-citizens from employment. Under it, all non-citizens, whether they are seeking employment or are already in employment at a basic salary of not more than $750 a month, will he required to obtain work permits. For practical application and administrative convenience, this rate of pay is considered to be sufficient to cover all workers in the unskilled and semi-skilled categories for the purpose of regulating their employment. Control will only be exercised at the point of recruitment, because it is our intention not to impair the free movement of persons between Singapore and Malaya. Work permits will be freely issued to non-citizens who have special training, skills and qualifications. In fact, we will welcome them because there are ample employment opportunities for skilled workers and professional persons who can contribute substantially to our economic development. But work permits will not be issued to incoming non-citizens in the unskilled and semi-skilled categories. Mr Speaker, Sir, I must assure the House that the enforcement of the Bill will not give rise to adverse repercussions. Non-citizens already in employment for some considerable time will not be displaced. They will be issued with work permits so that they may continue in employment even though they do not possess the required skills. Allow me to elaborate a little on the basis on which work permits will be issued. All non-citizens who have been in employment before the 1st of June, 1961, will be issued with work permits liberally, whilst those employees who began employment between 1st June, 1961, and 16th September, 1963, will be given sympathetic consideration if they are married and their wives are permanent residents of Singapore. Those employed after 16th of September, 1963, but before 9th of August, 1965, will also be given the same consideration if, in addition to satisfying these two conditions, they have children who are Column: 481 permanent residents of Singapore. Special consideration will also he given to non-citizens who are permanent residents and already in employment if they are children of Singapore citizens, or whose children are Singapore citizens. It must be remembered, however, that each application will be considered on its own merits and that while we may issue work permits to non-citizens already in employment, we cannot promise that they may be issued with work permits again if they fall unemployed subsequently. I must stress that work permits will not be issued to recent arrivals with no family roots in Singapore, including those who have been in employment since 9th of August, 1965, unless they possess special skills. The provision of this Bill can only reduce the pressure of population from Malaysia. With Singapore serving as a beacon for a high standard of living and an equal and just society in the dark sea of a feudal, corrupt and unjust society, I feel that people will continue to gravitate towards Singapore. There is nothing we can do about it. Our next step will be to strengthen the various licensing authorities, like the Hawkers Department and the Registry of Vehicles, so that our streets will not be choked with hawkers and pirate-taxis from the Federation. The main object, of course, is not to drive the people back, but to stop a future influx. These measures may, in the long run, have beneficial effects on the people of the Federation, for once we make them realise that they cannot escape from their cruel reality by taking a trip to Singapore, they will stay put and rally more people to fight for a better life in the Federation. This will shake the whole structure of the existing social system and spark off a revolutionary wind of change and, in the end, the common people who are true Malaysians in heart will emerge victorious. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 6.47 p.m. Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi ( In Malay ): Mr Speaker, on the whole, Column: 482 this Bill is good for the people of Singapore. It will mean more employment to the people of Singapore. I merely wish to touch a little on what has been explained by the Minister just now. Non-citizens who are already in employment will be issued with work permits. Those who were employed before 1963 will he given sympathetic consideration. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, I fear that with regard to those already in employment before 1st June, 1961, employers will misuse the provisions of this Bill by terminating the services of those who are non-citizens of Singapore before 1st June, 1961. This will give an opportunity to employers to retrench workers because, according to clause 7, workers who have been retrenched because of their work permits being withdrawn cannot, or the unions cannot, negotiate with the employers on this matter. This is in clause 7 (3) (a), (b), (c) and (d). Under clause 7 (3) (a), the union cannot represent such category of workers and negotiate with the employers. No action can be taken by such trade unions. Under sub-clause (d), the matter cannot he discussed under the Industrial Relations Ordinance. Since this Government is a pro-labour Government and it has an Industrial Relations Ordinance, I hope the Minister for Labour can enlighten me further in respect of non-citizens who are already in employment before 1st June, 1961, so that they will not become the victims of those employers who are anti-union. Mr Speaker: Mr Jek Yeun Thong, in reply. 6.50 p.m. Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir, our first responsibility is to our citizens. For those who are non-citizens but who have been resident in Singapore for quite some time - not after Malaysia but long before Malaysia - then the scheme here will provide that they be issued with work permits liberally. For those who were already in employment before 1st June, 1961, they will be eligible for work permits and will be allowed to keep their employment. Column: 483 The Member for Kampong Kembangan has alleged that an employer may try to exploit the workers by abusing the provisions in this Bill. In such a case, I think inspectors of the Labour Ministry will have to keep an eye on such employers. This will clear the doubts of the hon. Member. As to the disability of the union to take up the case for dispute of a worker who is dismissed because he is not issued with a work permit by the Government, I think this restrictive provision is necessary. Because if this Bill is enforced, there may be some cases where the Commissioner for Employment is unable to issue a worker with a work permit, and in such cases the employer, under the provisions of this Bill, will have to dismiss the worker, if we allow trade unions to take up these cases for dispute, then there will be disputes all over Singapore. This situation will not contribute to the stability of our economy, and I think it is most undesirable. So because of the possibility of such a situation arising, we have to put in this Bill the provision that trade unions cannot either take up the case of a worker who is dismissed because he was not issued with a work permit, or bring it up before the Arbitration Court under the provisions of Column: 484 the industrial Relations Ordinance. This provision is necessary to safeguard the peace in our industrial field; otherwise if the Government decides to cancel the work permits of workers in several firms, we will have widespread strikes all over Singapore. Therefore, if we are to enforce this Bill and the measures provided in it, it is necessary that we have to make such a provision. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly. Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Jek Yeun Thong]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. Mr Speaker: Mr Minister, will you move the adjournment of the House? ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn." - [Mr Jek Yeun Thong]. Adjourned accordingly at Two minutes to Seven o'clock p.m.