STATEMENT OF EXCESS FOR 1964 First Report of Public Accounts Committee (Paper Parl. 6 of 1966) and Statement of Excess of Expenditure for 1964 (Paper Cmd 19 of 1965) AND SECOND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR 1966

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

3.11 p.m.

The Chairman: The Statement of Excess for 1964 is contained in Paper Cmd. 19 of 1965, and the Report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Statement of Excess is contained in Paper Parl. 6 of 1966. No notice of amendment has been received and there is only one Head of Expenditure, Head 18, Hospitals Division.

The sum of $397,696.24 for Head 18 ordered to stand part of the Statement of Excess for 1964.

Question, "That the sum of $397,696.24 shall be supplied to the Government under the head of expenditure for the public services shown in the Statement of Excess for 1964 contained in Paper Cmd. 19 of 1965", put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

3.14 p.m.

The Chairman: Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1966 contained in Paper Cmd. 16 of 1966.

There is only one head of expenditure in the Supplementary Estimates and two notices of amendment in respect thereof have been received. Head 0901 - Ministry of Labour. Mr Lingam.

Mr S. V. Lingam (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3003.*

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Lim Cheng Lock.)

Mr Speaker, Sir, the re-registration of persons started a few months ago and is now about half-way through. Numerous questions were raised before the re-registration began and many other difficulties were faced during the process of re-registration.

3.15 p.m.

Through anticipation and experience the Government has been good enough to find solutions to most of the problems. But, Sir, I am sure hon. Members will agree with me when I say that there are still quite a number of difficulties which have not been solved in the way they should have been. In spite of the Minister's assurance, in the case of a person who has an unnamed birth certificate but who holds an identity card issued before 1949 - I am subject to correction - in which the place of birth is shown as Singapore, the officers at various centres would not accept that person as a Singapore citizen by birth at the time when the re-registration started. But now I understand that the position has been clarified and there is no difficulty on that point. Sir, if this had been done right from the start, much difficulty would have been saved both by the public and the authorities.

The next problem which still remains a problem is wrong spelling. Take a Chinese name. When a Chinese character is written in English, I think the spelling varies according to the dialect. And as this is going to be the last chance, as the Minister stated earlier, for anyone to do such corrections, I hope the Minister will direct his officials to be considerate and allow such corrections. For instance, if there is a request for Teh - T e h - to be corrected to Tay - Tay - it will be too much to ask that person to go and take a deed poll. Similar difficulties arise in the case of Indians and Malays. Ramasamy may like to write his name Ramaswamy, that is, with an addition of "w"; or Ramasamy Sellapa would like his name and his surname abbreviated to S. R. Samy. And a Malay whose name is Abdul Rahim Ishak would like his name called as A. Rahim Ishak. Sir, I am giving you these names as examples because you will find all these names in this House and with such modifications. I would not call these as changes, Sir, because nothing in the name is changed. These are corrections or slight modifications. Maybe some registration centres are allowing such corrections. But it should be a general rule, because when a team goes to the community centres there will be thousands and thousands of such cases, I am sure.

Another point I would like to raise is the fee for the new identity card. The Schedule to the Regulations under the Act says 50 cents for a citizen's I.C. and $1 for a non-citizen's I.C., and $5 for a replacement. Sir, suppose a child who was born outside Singapore applies for an I.C. He will be given a non-citizen I.C. That is well within the law. A few months later this child, who earlier has obtained a non-citizen I.C., gets his citizenship and when he goes to the Registration Office and requests for a new I.C. for citizens, he is told that the fee is $5. I cannot understand this. The fee of $5 is for a replacement. But in this case no one will say that is a replacement. The child surrenders the old IC, and requests for a change as his status has changed. So, Sir, I request the Minister to see that the Schedule is interpreted correctly.

The Minister has replied to my queries earlier. I quote column 94 of the Hansard dated 21st April, 1966. This is what the Minister for Labour said:

'Mr Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member has raised the question of names being wrongly spelt either in the birth certificates or in the present identity cards. I wish to assure the Member that in the re-registration exercise, this matter will be rectified once and for all. Any mistakes in the spelling of the names will be given sympathetic consideration and if these are genuine errors, they will be rectified in the new identity cards. In the case of an illiterate applicant, it is suggested that his friend should assist him by writing out the correct spelling of his name on a slip of paper which he should bring at the time of re-registration.'

Sir, I quote this just to remind the Minister what he promised earlier. But as it seems that such cases are not being considered sympathetically, I would like to request him to issue clear instructions to the registration centres setting out what they should do. Where the officers could do such minor corrections, Sir, the people should not be referred to Headquarters but should be dealt with by the registration centres themselves.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock (River Valley): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Labour is seeking a supplementary vote of $1,450,630 and I feel this House is entitled to a more detailed explanation from the Minister as to how this supplementary sum is required, which is about 140 per cent more than the original estimate of $1 million when the Budget was approved in December last year.

The next point I would like to raise is that the first and second phases of re-registration are now in progress and I have come to understand that in certain cases during the re-registration of school children, forms had been filled in by the parents and submitted to the registration teams, and when the pupil received the new identity card back, the information contained therein was different from that provided by the parents. When this was drawn to the attention of the registration team, the school teacher was told that they could not do anything about it and that the pupil would have to go to Empress Place. This may be an isolated case, but I feel that if the people working in the registration teams are not careful in writing out the new identity cards, the public may be put to unnecessary inconvenience, not through their fault, of having to go back again to Empress Place for correcting the new identity card. Here I hope that the Minister will tell the registration team to be absolutely careful when writing out these cards for issue.

Another point which I would like to raise is that since our new identity cards are important documents, some care should be taken in writing the information on them clearly. There are some cards which have been written on and scratched and rewritten again, and I think this is not desirable.

One more point I would like to raise is that when the third phase of re-registration commences, which is meant to re-register the general public, here again I feel that the Citizens' Consultative Committees of the constituencies together with the Member of Parliament of the constituency, should be consulted and their assistance sought in providing suitable places in each area where the general public have least inconvenience in having their cards re-registered. Likewise, the Ministry should also look into the different language speaking groups and send the language speaking group concerned to attend to the people. This will save a lot of trouble in the language problem.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the national registration campaign started about three months ago. So far we have registered more than half a million people - to be exact, the number of persons registered up to the 13th of August is 566,540 persons. Judging by the number of persons we have registered for the period, I should say that we have done quite fast work. The workers employed in this registration campaign are recruited from a list provided by the Public Service Commission. They are mainly young boys and girls freshly graduated from secondary schools and, because of their lack of experience and training, some allowance must be made for their work. But so far, we have found that the number of mistakes made in the identity cards in comparison with the number we have registered is very few. Nevertheless, we will try to ensure that mistakes will be as few as possible. If the mistakes made in the new identity cards are due to our own fault, then, of course, we will offer free replacements, but the applicants must provide their own photographs. I think we cannot help that, but I hope the public will forgive us for this.

The Member for Aljunied has raised two points. The first is about the names on identity cards. If you look at the new identity cards, you will notice that in addition to one column for the name, there is another column for the alias. A person is allowed to have any number of aliases, but the name appearing on his old identity card must appear on his new identity card in order to provide a continuity. But if a person feels that his name should be spelt in such and such a way, we have made provision for that and I am sure the workers in the registration centres will oblige. But sometimes people are quite difficult to please. Some of them may want to have their names written in such a way or in a short form. Some may want to have their names written in a long form. Some may want their names to be spelt in Cantonese or in Mandarin. But we cannot help that. If we are to accept all these demands, then the work of the registration campaign will be slowed down. Nevertheless, we will try our best to accommodate all these demands.

As to the second point raised by the Member for Aljunied regarding the replacement of an identity card for a person who has changed his citizenship status, I would say that where the replacement is not his fault, then the normal charge of 50 cents will apply. But where, for instance, the replacement is due to his own carelessness or loss, then the fee of $5 will apply.

As to the point raised by the Member for River Valley that during the third phase when we go out to the community centres to register the general public as a whole, they would appreciate the help of Members of Parliament and the Citizens' Consultative Committees in the various areas, we are, in fact, now making plans to bring in Members of Parliament and members in the Citizens' Consultative Committees to help us carry out the registration in their various constituencies. I hope the Members of Parliament on our side will volunteer and, in fact, mobilise their workers and helpers in their constituencies to help us in the registration campaign so that the work can be speeded up.

As to appropriate language group teams to be sent to the registration centres, we are making every effort to send proper language groups to the various areas.

Another important point is the amount of money we have asked this House to vote for the registration campaign. The original sum of $1 million put down is for the initial work. This includes the purchasing of machinery and stationery and other items. We now find that this sum is insufficient. Our estimated total expenditure for this year amounts to about $2,395,827 of which $1,619,837 is for Personal Emoluments, $188,860 is for Other Charges Annually Recurrent, and $587,128 is for Other Charges Special Expenditure. Of the $1 million which was provided for in this year's estimate, $44,800 was transferred to meet expenses in connection with the operation of the Regulation of Employment Act, that is, with regard to the issue of work permits. Thus a sum of $1,450,630 is required to cover expenses in connection with national re-registration up to the end of this year. So you will see that most of this money is required for Personal Emoluments. This is for the employment of a large number of temporary workers in these various schemes.

The Chairman: Will the Member for Aljunied and the Member for River Valley consider withdrawing their amendment in the light of what the Minister has said?

Mr Lingam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have just one point to raise. I am really not very happy with the Minister's reply because this is the same old thing that he said on the 21st of April in this Chamber.

Sir, I hope that whatever he has said today will be carried out by him and his Ministry.

Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,450,630 for Head 0901 ordered to stand part of the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1966.

Question, "That the sum of $1,450,630 shall be supplied to the Government under the head of expenditure for the public services shown in the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1966 contained in Paper Cmd. 16 of 1966", put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions.

Resolutions reported -

"That the sum of $397,696.24 shall be supplied to the Government under the head of expenditure for the public services shown in the Statement of Excess for 1964 contained in Paper Cmd. 19 of 1965."

"That the sum of $1,450,630 shall be supplied to the Government under the head of expenditure for the public services shown in the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1966 contained in Paper Cmd. 16 of 1966."

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolutions accordingly agreed to.