ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR 1968 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [2nd Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

2.34 p.m.

Head 0601 -

Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, 1 beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001+.

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr. Lim Guan Hoo.

Sir, having gone through all the heads of expenditure of the various Ministries in the 1968 Estimates, I am drawn to some curious footnotes that appear on pages 153, 155, 156, 158, 159 and 161 which explain the posts of some of the officers in the Ministry of Education who are drawing, in addition to a salary, certain allowances. For example, a footnote appearing in page 153 states:

'(v) In certain cases, holders of these posts draw in addition pensionable allowances of $120, $180, $240, or $300 p.m.'.

Sir, I have been trying to find out whether other Ministries have payments of these so-called pensionable allowances. In fact, I believe I can see none. I suppose these so-called pensionable allowances are given to certain officers who have been promoted, say, from the post of teacher to principal, or lecturer, or school inspector, or specialist teacher. If my supposition is correct, I am inclined to believe that the payment of such kind of allowances is far from satisfactory. I would like to know whose brainchild it was to grant such pensionable allowances, and how much it has cost us each year when this system was instituted.

Furthermore, is the Minister for Education aware that the other Ministries have no such system of pensionable allowances? To me, Sir, it would appear that any officer in the Ministry of Education who has been promoted, be it to principal, inspector of school, specialist teacher, inspector, or lecturer, would automatically enjoy such benefit in pensionable allowances. However, I must stress that I am not against these civil servants obtaining any higher pay if they so deserve as a result of being promoted. Therefore, I would like to propose to the Minister for Education that this kind of payment be scrapped and in its place a proper salary structure be instituted so as to give not only uniformity in the salary structure but also opportunities to aspirants to reach the very top rung of the education ladder.

Mr Lim Guan Hoo (Bukit Merah): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with what the Member has said on the amendment. Not very long ago when the Minister for Education proposed the Nanyang University (Amendment) Bill, I pointed out that there was a loophole in it, namely, that there was only provision for a Vice-Chancellor without a Chancellor, although the Chairman of the Council, as stated by the Minister, was in name compatible with that of Chancellor. But actually the nature of the duties of the Chairman of the University Council was not suitable to make him a Chancellor of Nanyang University, because the Chairman of the Council shall be elected by the Council from among its members while a Chancellor is usually not appointed by election. The Minister did not take proper steps to amend the law but allowed it to remain as it was. Through his toleration, the designations of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor have been officially announced to be the "Vice-Chancellor" and the "Chancellor" respectively in the text of Chinese translation. These difficulties arise when there is a translation from English to Chinese and vice versa.

The Chairman: Mr Lim, you are speaking about a body set up by statute, and you are referring to matters which are not within the responsibility of the Minister. So that no matter how long you speak on this, if the Minister stood up and said, "These are not matters within my responsibility," that would be an adequate reply. Can you please relate your remarks to his functions as Minister?

Mr Lim Guan Hoo: (In Mandarin): Sir, can the Minister pay special attention to what I have suggested and whether he will consider introducing amending legislation? Because of the technicalities of translation, there is confusion in the term "Vice-Chancellor", and I hope the Minister will do something about it, because the law was introduced by him and passed by this House. So I feel that he must look into this problem. And even though it may not be within his direct jurisdiction, he has the responsibility to see it rectified.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, as a graduate of Nanyang University, I think I have the duty to speak a few words on behalf of my University. As everybody knows ---

Mr Lim Guan Hoo: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to clarify. If the Member wants to argue on behalf of the Minister, I think it is quite all right. But if he wants to argue on behalf of the University, I would like to ask whether that is permissible under our Standing Orders.

The Chairman: Mr Lim, I have not yet heard what Mr Ho is going to say.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Bukit Merah is rather sensitive.

Sir, everybody knows that Nanyang University has been in existence for 11 years now. There have also been quite a number of graduation ceremonies - eight altogether. There are more than 3,000 Nanyang University graduates, some of whom have gone abroad, some are already working, and some are serving society. Many Nanyang graduates have achieved distinction in higher institutions abroad. There are also many eminent and successful Nanyang graduates serving in various Government departments and commercial and industrial circles in every walk of life and their achievements can be seen by all to be quite meritorious.

Although the Government is giving equal treatment to Nanyang graduates, when these graduates apply to join Government service, the Government seems to be hesitating about the recognition of Nanyang University degrees. The Government does not seem to have taken any decision on this matter, although in the past I have already said that this question is very pressing.

2.45 p.m.

We can only hear the sound of Government promise without its being actually put into practice. If this problem is not solved, it will embarrass many of our Nanyang graduates who go abroad for further studies. The reason is that many foreign universities have recognised Nanyang graduates because they have achieved good academic results. Yet our own country is not giving them any recognition. Sir, after the reorganisation, Nanyang University has already been put on the right track. It is now prospering and marching along the right path. It holds out great promise for the future. I think the time has now come for Government to recognise Nanyang University degrees. I hope the Minister will try his best to help so that Nanyang University degrees will be recognised early and Nanyang University graduates will benefit from it. I am looking forward to this good news. Can the Minister tell us when the Government intends to help Nanyang University?

The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Mr Speaker, Sir, the pensionable allowances referred to by the Member for Punggol is, in fact, known as "post allowances". The system of post allowances in the Education service was first introduced in October 1953 with retrospective effect to 1st January, 1950. It formed part of the overall salary revision which was approved after negotiations between the then Government and the trade union then representing the teaching profession. The new salary scales and the post allowances were written into the Education service scheme forming part of the Scheme for Higher Services, 1953. In the course of negotiations, the Graduate Teachers' Association, which has since gone out of existence, played a prominent part. Under the scheme, post allowances ranging from $120 to $360 per month are attached to certain posts such as lecturers in the Teachers' Training College, Inspectors of Schools and principals of primary and secondary schools. These allowances become pensionable emoluments as soon as the officers concerned are emplaced on the pensionable establishment. In other words, for pensionable officers these allowances attract variable allowance in the same way as basic salary and are taken into account for purposes of computing pension and gratuity. This system of post allowances, I agree, has led to many anomalies in the service, chief among them being the fact that principals of secondary schools draw a higher rate of allowance than Inspectors of Schools when logically it should be the other way round. Because of different rates of allowances being attached to different posts of more or less the same responsibility, it is not possible to transfer officers of comparable qualifications and experience from one post to another in the interest of the service and of the officers themselves. I, therefore, agree with the Member for Punggol that the system of post allowances should be abolished in favour of different salary scales for different grades of officers with a variety of Posts requiring the same qualifications and experience within each grade. My Ministry has, in fact, made representations along these lines to the appropriate quarters and the outcome is being awaited.

The Member for Bukit Merah has raised the question of the Chinese translation of the terms "Vice-Chancellor" and "Deputy Vice-Chancellor". Mr Speaker, Sir, the nominal head of a university is the Chancellor whose functions are mainly statutory and ceremonial. The administrative and academic head of a university is the Vice-Chancellor whose duty it is to conduct the day-to-day affairs of a university. In Chinese universities, however, there is no post corresponding to that of a Chancellor and in Nanyang University there is also no provision for such a post. Consequently, the Vice-Chancellor of Nanyang University is designated in Chinese as "Head of the University", that is, Seow Chang, and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor is known in Chinese as "Deputy Head of the University", Fu Seow Chang, which in fact describe their respective functions accurately.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I quite sympathise with the Member for Jurong's concern over the question of recognition of Nanyang University degrees. In fact, this question has been receiving the attention of the Government for quite a considerable time. At the last convocation ceremony held in May 1967, I did make a statement that the question of recognition would be resolved in about two or three years' time. However, judging from the rare of progress in the University, both in the academic field as well as in University organisation, and also judging by the better qualified staff that are being recruited at the moment, I am quite prepared to say that the question of recognition of Nanyang degrees would be resolved by the next convocation, much earlier than what I had originally anticipated.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, we have been given a detailed explanation of a system that was instituted by the previous Government and which led to so many anomalies in the salary scales of the teaching profession. Schemes agreed to in January 1953 had retrospective effect to January 1950 -three years and it was known as the Singapore Education Service Scheme. The Minister has just explained that the Ministry is already aware of such a defect in the salary structure and has written to some quarters making representations with a view to rectifying such anomalies. I shall be grateful if he will name the quarters and when this was done.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I cannot be held responsible for what took place way back in 1953 or 1950. Anyway, for the information of the Member for Punggol, the representation of my Ministry was made to the Salaries Commission.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: When will the report of the Salaries Commission be out, Sir?

The Chairman: That question is best addressed to the Minister for Finance.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: I want a vote to be taken, Sir.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for [-lead 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1219.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in the provision of the Estimates for 1968 in respect of teachers-in-training at the Teachers' Training College, it is noted that 1,495 posts had been abolished. In 1967 provision has been made for 4,082 teachers-in-training, whereas in 1968 Only 2,587 posts will be provided. Can the Minister clarify whether the abolition of the 1,495 posts means that there are more than sufficient teachers for all the schools in our Republic and that the intake of student teachers to undergo training at the Teachers' Training College in 1968 will be less by that number?

3.00 p.m.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, the decrease in the number of posts for teachers-in-training reflects the increasingly rapid reversion to full-time training in the Teachers' Training College. Unlike part-time trainees, full-time trainees are not paid a salary and consequently no posts need be entered in the Estimates for them. That we are able to revert to full-time training shows that the part-time system of training introduced in 1960 has, to a large extent, overcome the teacher shortage. It is expected that no more part-time trainees need be recruited in the Chinese medium for primary schools next year, and the same situation will apply to the English medium part-time trainees in the next two or three years. It is confirmed that the reduction of 1,495 posts of teachers-in-training means that the intake of part-time trainees in the Teachers' Training College will be reduced by that number in 1968.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong: In view of the information given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Kampong Kembangan): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1221.

Sir, with the rise in the number of births in Singapore and with the increase in the number of children registered in schools, I do not see any increase in this provision for 1968 as against 1967. Can the Minister say why the provision for 1968 is not increased?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, this subhead refers to Teachers of Religion in Malay schools. In 1968, there will be an increase of 27 Malay-medium classes in the secondary level, but a decrease of 13 Malay-medium classes in the primary level. The net increase is, therefore, only 14 classes. There is provision in 1968 for employing a total of 41 religious teachers and this number is adequate for our needs.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): With that explanation, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1431.

It is generally known that with a few exceptions, school for school, student for student, and even teacher for teacher, the aided schools seem to be doing better than the Government schools. Why is this so? I have no doubt the Minister for Education will be able to give good reasons for this. But having good reasons for the present state of affairs is one thing and finding means to improve the situation is another. It is to be noted that 25 per cent of our Budget, which is equivalent to $151 million, is to be expended on education. If we are to get equitable returns for this large sum of money spent, and more important, if we are to ensure that our younger generation will grow up to be well-educated, well-trained and well-disciplined citizens of the future, then we must see to it that every child in school is given good education and that every teacher is of the right calibre and is playing his expected role in our education system. That this is not so is seen in the apparent disparity in educational standards between aided schools and Government schools generally.

One of the factors responsible for this unsatisfactory state of affairs is the quality of teachers taken in by the Teachers' Training College. At one time, due to the rapid increase in the number of schools and due to the shortage of suitably qualified personnel to be trained as teachers, the Teachers' Training College had little choice. The situation is now quite different. With the large number of Senior Cambridge and Middle School graduates coming into the employment market every year, it is now possible to recruit teachers-in-training who are not only well qualified academically but also capable and dedicated in moulding the children to become useful and responsible citizens. In this respect, Sir, the conduct of teachers must first be re-examined. It is not my intention to criticise the teaching profession for the members of which I have the highest regard, and indeed there are a good number of teachers who are above reproach. The House will no doubt agree that wearing tight jeans and drain-pipe trousers and the keeping of long hair by teachers are not good examples for the children. These and other undesirable forms of conduct of some teachers during school hours are frowned upon not only by parents but also by respected and dedicated members of the noble profession. I therefore urge that such elements be seriously looked into by the Minister. I have no doubt that any measures taken by him will have the support of the parents and the teachers' unions, for this will help to preserve the dignity and respect of the profession.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, I agree with many of the remarks made by the Member for Anson.

The Minister for Health (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): I strongly agree.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: I can assure him that every possible step is being taken to improve the quality of teachers. I think there are many reasons why the performance of the aided schools is better compared with the Government schools. I do not think there will be enough time in this House to dwell in detail on the factors. But suffice it to say that aided schools, as a whole, have a more stable staff as the teachers are not liable to be transferred from school to school and, in many respects, the teaching staff are more dedicated, if not for other reasons, at least for their own survival.

I agree with the Member for Anson that the standard of education in schools depends to a large extent on the quality of the teachers and, in this respect, various steps have been taken by the Ministry to ensure that the teachers recruited are of a high quality and that those who have been recruited in the past will be brought up to the sane level. For this, various kinds of in-service courses are being organised by the Teachers' Training College.

As for the appearance of teachers in schools, I think the Member for Anson will recall that at the sitting of Parliament in September, I made a statement that teachers should dress decorously rather than decoratively. Subsequent to that, I had a discussion with all the teachers' unions in Singapore. I am glad to say that all of them expressed support. The Singapore Teachers' Union, in fact, have circulated some rules for the guidance of their members as to the way teachers should dress and behave in schools. When the new term begins in January, if the Member for Anson will go round and visit some of the schools, I am sure he will notice an appreciable difference.

Mr Govindaswamy: I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2123.

The allocation for free text-books and stationery for pupils for 1968 is no different from the amount for 1967. Many schools are unable to provide free text-books to pupils who deserve them. In Kampong Kembangan Constituency, there are schools where a number of students deserve to get free text-books but, unfortunately, they could not be given and their applications were refused. Therefore, I would request the Minister to increase the allocation for Kampong Kembangan in view of the fact that the parents there are in the low salary bracket and in order that children who deserve to get free text-books can continue their education in the schools.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, the school enrolment will increase by about 15,000 next year and the provision for the free text-book scheme is the same for 1967. However, this does not necessarily mean that fewer pupils will receive the loan of text-books. This is because schools have accumulated large stocks of books over the last few years and the funds provided will be utilised for the purchase of new books and for the replacement of old books which are worn out.

The conditions for the issue of textbooks on loan to students are made in such a way as to enable deserving students to enjoy this privilege on a priority basis. Although the Member for Kampong Kembangan has mentioned several deserving pupils in his constituency not being able to receive assistance under this scheme, I can assure him that if these pupils are really deserving of help, as he has said, and if he can supply me with the details, I am quite prepared to look into these few cases that he has in mind.

3.15 p.m.

But as he is aware, the financial resources of the State are limited, It is not possible to get something more for the free text-book scheme without affecting some other Ministry or some other items of expenditure which are equally important.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): With that assurance by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 2124.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the education policy of the Government of Singapore gives equal treatment to all four streams of education - Malay, Chinese, Tamil and English. The Malay schools receive Government assistance. Recently a Committee was set up to collect funds for the building of a secondary school. Can the Minister say whether a similar grant-in-aid will be given to the proposed Islamic Secondary School?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Islamic Secondary School mentioned by the Member for Kampong Kembangan has not yet been built, it is not likely that it will come into existence in 1968. So the question of grant-in-aid for this school does not therefore affect the current Estimates. Consideration for a grant-in-aid can only be given when the school is established and application for aid is submitted. There are conditions to be met before aid can be given. It is not possible at this juncture to give blanket approval for a project which has not yet materialised.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0601 be reduced by $100*.

• The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Chow Chiok Hock. Mr P. Govindaswamy, Mr Teong Eng Siong, Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi, Mr Ho See Beng and Mr Tay Boon Too.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the educational measures that have been put into practice are more or less based on the 1959 educational policy. But we are aware that certain policies have not been carried out, one of which relates to teacher training. Every year, we spend quite a large sum of money on teacher training. We know that the Teachers' Training College, apart from providing training in teaching methods, has not provided the most important kind of training, namely, the development of the outlook of teachers. In view of the fact that Singapore has been independent for nearly three years now, we would like all students to realise that this country belongs to them. It is, therefore, very important that we should instil national consciousness in their minds. It follows that the trainee teachers must also be imbued with this quality, otherwise the minds of their pupils will not he instilled with national consciousness. I remember that not long ago certain Chinese schools did quite well in this aspect of education, and they instilled a feeling of patriotism in their pupils. Of course, many schools are teaching civics and other subjects pertaining to patriotism, but if the trainee teachers themselves are not properly taught in this respect, they will not cut a good image with their students. I would like to quote from the booklet "The Tasks Ahead - P.A.P.'s Five-Year Plan 1959-1964" under the chapter of "Spring Source of Our Nation" to show that certain policies or measures have not been carried out:

Our teachers must therefore realise the important role they play in the building of a united democratic Malayan nation. And they must learn that their duties do not end with the imparting of text-book knowledge. They have a whole generation of children to mould into a national pattern. To do this successfully, they themselves must acquire those social values and convictions which they will have to impart to the young. It is unlikely that we shall succeed in building a Malayan nation unless teachers know exactly what this means and understand exactly what they have to do.'

Therefore, I feel that now that we have gained independence, our young generation must be imbued with national consciousness and the persons who teach them are the teachers. But there is a lack of such training for teachers. They themselves have not realised the important task of education. They treat it as a means of livelihood and not as their vocation or as part of their duties. They treat their work in the same routine manner as the civil servants. The Teachers' Training College should institute such training in the courses for teachers in the coming year so that our young generation can better absorb social values and convictions.

There is another aspect in the P.A.P.'s educational policy which has not been carried out, namely, the main objective of training our students to become useful citizens so that they can adapt themselves to our economic policies and the task of nation building. They will be the next generation who will lay down the foundations of a socialist society. If our industrial capacity is weak, this is because of the educational policy under the colonial regime which was very backward. In order to expand our industry and economy, we must make full use of our talents. A nation can exist only because it has the capacity to produce all the material resources and goods to feed its people. Singapore does not produce any natural resources and, therefore, our productive capacity must be fully geared to the utilisation of our human resources. Our educational policy should place emphasis on the training of people in order to achieve such an objective. There are many schools in various parts of the island and all children of school-going age are assured of a place in school.

3.30 p.m.

But when the P.A.P. came to power, the objective was not to produce white-collar workers. Our objective is to produce technicians. But up to date there is a lack of technical schools and technical training for our pupils.

The Chairman: Madam Chan, I think Mr Teong is trying to catch my eye.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: I will take another three minutes.

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mei yio sze chien.

The Chairman: Order.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): I therefore hope that in our educational development for the future, we must stress the importance of scientific and other technical institutions so as to produce all the technicians and technological personnel required and to achieve a balance in educational development.

Mr Chow Chiok Hock (Ulu Pandan): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will try to finish what I have to say in two or three minutes.

Sir, the Ministry of Education, in implementing equality of treatment to all the four streams of education and in the inculcation of national consciousness in our next generation, has achieved much. This cannot be denied. But there is still room for improvement. For instance, the Member for Anson has mentioned just now that our aided schools have achieved a better performance than Government schools. Why is this so? Why does the Minister for Education send those selected by the P.S.C. to Chinese schools and they are regarded not as Government servants, whereas those who are selected by the P.S.C, and sent to other schools are regarded as Government servants? Can the Minister give me a satisfactory reply? Also why does the Ministry not allow other aided schools to be developed into Government schools? Generally speaking, our aided schools can do better than Government schools.

A further point is that in certain integrated schools, some of which are having three languages and some two languages, the principals sent to them normally can speak only one language. For instance, in an integrated school where there are two languages, English and Chinese, the principal sent to this school is conversant only in English, or conversant only in Chinese. Thus, the results of such an appointment will not be very good.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree that the introduction of political study courses for trainee teachers is important. In fact, this has been done for the last two or three years. All teachers-in-training in the T.T.C. attend a 30-hour course on civics and government, and full-time students attend a 90-hour course on political studies. These courses have recently been revised with the aim of focusing attention on Singapore's current political, social, economic and cultural problems. Similar courses will also be conducted for principals of schools and trained teachers.

It is our view that good teachers will be better teachers if they fully under, stand the problems confronting Singapore in the context of a changing world.

As for the question of technical and vocational education, the shortage is not at the school level but at the craft training level. There are enough technical and vocational schools in Singapore today, but there are not enough vocational institutes to provide craft courses for those who are leaving these schools. And as the Member will be able to see in the Estimates, we have made provision for four new vocational institutes next year. And it is hoped that when these four institutes are eventually completed in 1969 or 1970, the shortage will be resolved.

3.35 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Madam Chan.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $151,601,230 for Head 0601 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0701 -

Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng (Joo Chiat): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1301.

Mr Speaker, Sir, for some time now a storm has been brewing in the rather sedate atmosphere of the medical and pharmaceutical world. Dark and thundery clouds have threatened to blacken this shining and friendly skyline and claps of rumbling discontent have echoed occasionally through the columns of our daily newspaper. I see that my colleague, the hon. Member for Tampines, has been exposed to some of these outbursts and has, with great dexterity, managed to dodge the scathing and sarcastic bolts from the pestle and mortar of the pharmaceutical colleagues. This eternal and purely locally peculiar dispute of our qualified pharmacists is in many ways understandable as being suitably trained in the art of pharmacy. They feel they should inherit the useful and sometimes mystifying world of drugs and dispensing. I, as a medical man, do not begrudge them their rights of dealing with drugs. I am rather sad to see so much encouragement has been given to the idea of producing as many pharmacists as possible from our University without one iota of thought being given to the consequences if the markets for qualified pharmacists in Singapore should become saturated.

Mr Speaker, Sir, judging from this dispute, I feel our small island has probably reached this saturation point so that our qualified pharmacists are now feeling the pinch of not being able to find enough jobs to justify their position in our society. Something should therefore be done to absorb this surplus, and I feel the Ministry of Health should be able to do this. I note that only 35 pharmacists are in the employment of the Ministry. This surely is a very small number in the health service which covers the whole of our island. Is it not possible for the Minister for Health to consider increasing the number of pharmacists employed and thus reduce the tension of anxiety and frustration among the graduates in pharmacy?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I myself have noted with concern the unnecessary exchange of views expressed by doctors and pharmacists during the last few months when I had already appointed a committee to investigate into this problem. This committee has already been in session since April of this year and it has had more than a dozen meetings. I believe it is already at the last stages of drawing up a report. It will, therefore, be invidious on my part to try to attempt to answer the questions posed by the Member for Joo Chiat.

May I first say that in establishing the committee, I had taken the precaution to have adequate representation from the doctors. There are three representations from the medical profession, three from the pharmaceutical profession, and I tried to balance the two forces with another three who are complete outsiders and who had nothing to do either with medicine or with pharmacy. One of them is the Deputy Chairman of the Public Service Commission. And I also had two other individuals one of whom is the Director of the Singapore Institute of Management, so that the question of costs would be very much in the minds of the members of the committee, and, thirdly, a female member of the Bar to introduce a little of the female element into the discussion.

The Chairman: So that there will be a rational approach to the problem!

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I should think so, Mr Speaker. Because it is essentially a male committee and so there should always be some female representation. I will, however, try to take up two points raised by the Member for Joo Chiat.

He has mentioned that the University of Singapore appears to be producing more graduates in pharmacy than there are jobs available for them. It was with this in mind that the fourth term of reference of the committee was as follows. I quote:

'From the available facts and having: regard to the recommendations made on the above [that is to say, the other three terms of reference for this committee on the pharmaceutical profession and the dispensing of medicine], to estimate the requirements for qualified pharmacists for Singapore for, say, the next five years from 1968 to 1972.'

So it will come within the terms of reference of this committee who, I think, would be in the best position to assess, first, the number of graduates already in Singapore, and how many of them may not be able to find employment easily, and therefore what we should do for the foreseeable five years ahead. So I hope the Member for Joo Chiat will be a wee bit patient as I anticipate that the report will be ready perhaps within a month or so when it will be published.

The other point that Government should try to employ more than 35 pharmacists - we, the big employer, the model employer, how about giving more jobs to pharmacists - I think one has got to be careful there. No graduate of our University should feel that once he graduates and qualifies, then automatically there is a job available in Government service. I think that would be a very dangerous assumption. I believe the Government should employ a percentage of each year's graduates, but surely not in order to meet the unemployment situation. I do hope that the committee would recommend that Government would employ more qualified pharmacists than has been the case previously. But, Sir, I hate to anticipate what the committee's findings will be, and here again I would prefer to wait and see what the report is like and Government will then be in a position to express views on the committee's report.

Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng: Sir, I am satisfied with the Minister's explanation, and therefore I withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

3.45 p.m.

The Chairman: We have reached guillotine time for Head 0701.

The time allotted for Head 0701 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with:

Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng:

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3001.

Mr P. Govindaswamy:

(3) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $100.

The sum of $4,911,550 for Head 0701 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0702 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1201.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Health under the dynamic leadership of the present Minister has made such dramatic improvements in our health services that our island Republic is now reputed to be the cleanest city in this region. One of his many achievements, which has gained world-wide recognition, is the reduction of our baby population. But another equally significant achievement of comparable standard is his reduction of the fly and mosquito population. To attempt to enumerate all his outstanding achievements would be superfluous, but I am sure the Minister will have no doubt about my sincerity -

The Chairman: Order, order.

Mr Govindaswamy: --- when I say that his achievements in the past four years ---

The Chairman: Order. Mr Govindaswamy, you have got five minutes to make your point under "Medical Officer-in-Charge, Outpatient Services". Mosquitoes come under the next head.

Mr Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am coming to that line. We hold the Minister in the highest esteem. Sir, I wish to bring the attention of this House to one defect in our health services. I hope the Minister will, in addition to the usual reply that "the matter is receiving attention", also take effective measures to remedy this defect. Sometime back the Minister very capably solved the intolerable over-crowding at the General Hospital Outpatient Department by setting up numerous outdoor dispensaries all over the island. Then, as suddenly as this growth in the outpatient services began ---

Mr S. V. Lingam (Aljunied): On a point of information, Sir.

The Chairman: Mr Govindaswamy, are you prepared to give way?

Mr Govindaswamy resumed his seat.

Mr Lingam: I have an amendment here and guillotine time is approaching.

The Chairman: All I can say is that there will be other occasions when Mr Govindaswamy comes after Mr Lingam. You can show him then the same consideration that he shows you now, Mr Lingam.

Mr Govindaswamy: Only a few minutes, Mr Speaker, Sir,I will finish up. This again brought improvement in the service. But now with the increase in the population, with the increase in demand for medical services, long queues at Government outdoor dispensaries are now a regular feature again. Is the Minister still consolidating his dispensaries, or is he now ready to embark on another expansion programme, which seems to be already overdue. I hope he will examine his attendance figures at the outpatient dispensaries and either increase the staff or set up more dispensaries to relieve the poor sick patients.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think it is really time for a great expansion of the medical services. I think it is still necessary to consolidate. But whatever it is, we did make an attempt to increase our staff. We asked for another 46 doctors for next year, of whom 18 would be for the outpatient services. But I am sad to say that the Ministry of Finance threw the whole proposal out.

Mr Govindaswamy: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Head 0702 - guillotine time.

The time allotted for Head 0702 having expired, the following amendment, standing in the name of Mr S. V. Lingam, was not proceeded with:

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1461.

The sum of $45,928,200 for Head 0702 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0703 -

Mr P. Selvadurai (Bukit Panjang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1124*.

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong.

This concerns the work of Senior Public Health Inspectors. There are really two points which I would like to raise. The first one is that it is known that over the past year the density of mosquitoes in Singapore has risen tremendously. It is also known that, based upon a recent survey conducted by some officers of the Ministry of Health, about 51 per cent of the septic tanks of the housing estates in Singapore are breeding grounds for mosquitoes. I would like to know what the Minister is able to say on this.

The second point is that huge colonies of rats have made the Kandang Kerbau Market their habitat. Is it possible for the Public Health Inspectors to do something about this?

The Chairman: Madam Chan?

Madam Chan Choy Siong: I am not moving.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree that the mosquito density in Singapore has been on the increase. This has been so not only recently but over a period of time. There are various explanations for this unfortunate situation. I think it can be said that while Singapore has been fortunate in that, although we are situated within a malarial region that extends for hundreds of miles around us, Singapore is supposed to be malaria free. We have been able to conquer the malarial scourge although we are in the heart of this area. We do occasionally have cases of malaria, about 100 to 200 cases per year, when they get hospitalised. But these are generally imported cases. They got the infection somewhere else, and then when they come here they have the fever. It is diagnosed as malaria and then they are treated. But all this while the department has been concentrating on what is known as anti-malarial work, leaving aside the other mosquitoes which can be just as troublesome, just calling them nuisance mosquitoes. This problem has been deteriorating for some time for various reasons, partly because of the rapid development of Singapore with housing estates where trees have been lopped off and the drainage is bad. In fact, in Singapore all that is needed is just a wee bit of water to be left for a week, and it is possible to breed mosquitoes. We have a situation where the drainage is bad. It is applicable almost everywhere in Singapore. There has also been a deterioration in the Public Cleansing Services. The situation is worsened by thousands of unlicensed hawkers, and sometimes even licensed hawkers, throwing refuse into the drains and clogging them up. We have, therefore, a problem which we have inherited with the passage of time, so much so that it will, I am afraid, take quite some time before we are in a position to say that Singapore will be mosquito-free. An attempt has been made to improve the public health situation in various parts of Singapore. We are at present concentrating on the city area. I am afraid that, unless the nuisance is very bad in the rural areas, the concentration for the present and the near future would be in the city, and then later on it will be extended to the rural areas.

Next comes the question of septic tanks. This, unfortunately, does not come within the province of the Ministry of Health. It comes within the Ministry of National Development under sewerage. We have taken up the matter with them and the reply given is that they will play their part by spraying anti-malarial oil on to these septic tanks.

As for the rat colonies, I think this is really an index of refuse in the particular place. I think there are colonies of rats even in the best of cities. However, I do not wish to belittle this public health problem of what the Member for Bukit Panjang says, "rat colonies in Kandang Kerbau Market". There are rat colonies in almost every market. However, in view of his complaints, I shall get my department to try to do something more in Kandang Kerbau Market to exterminate the rat colonies as fast as we can and, at the same time, this problem if it is found to be of such a nature as to warrant further attacks in other markets.

Mr Selvadurai: Mr Speaker, I am more than satisfied with the answer given by the Minister. May I beg leave to withdraw?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong -

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1125.

The Chairman: Madam Chan, Amendment No. (2) .

Madam Chan Choy Siong: I am not moving.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1281.

We have a quarantine station here and all deck and other passengers who are suspected of having epidemic diseases are detained here. But I am told that the conditions of the station are not very good. It seems that the inmates face threats from insects like centipedes, etc. Moreover, I have heard complaints about the pots and utensils given to the inmates for cooking facilities during their stay in the station. If these complaints are true, I am sure the Minister will take steps to remedy them.

Another point I would like to submit for the Minister's consideration is this. Is it possible not to detain deck passengers unless they are suspected of having diseases? Sir, all passengers from foreign countries who come by boat or aircraft should have their health certificates. This being so, I can see no reason why they should be isolated for three days. I do not know whether the Minister is aware that certain deck passengers who come to Singapore disembark at Penang, because there is no quarantine in Penang, and these passengers arrive in Singapore even before the saloon passengers of the same ship disembark at Singapore. Sir, if the intention of detaining deck passengers is to prevent diseases from spreading, I think it is being defeated for the reasons I have stated earlier.

In view of the above, can the Minister consider abolishing the quarantine detention of deck passengers who are not suspected of having any epidemic diseases? This will save them from undergoing unnecessary difficulties and expenses.

4.00 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Aljunied has raised three points on the question of quarantine. Our quarantine station is situated at St. John's Island, which is a very beautiful island indeed. I do agree that sometimes conditions may not be as good as one would want and there could be room for improvement. The Member says that the inmates, when placed in the quarantine station, would be subject to threats of insects like centipedes. I think even we, who live on the fair island of Singapore, are subject to this. It could happen. There are centipedes, lizards, and so on occasionally, but I have not had any reports to this effect. If there have been reports, I would expect that the matter has been looked into.

What I consider as a question which needs a fuller answer is the Member's suggestion that deck passengers, when they come with health certificates, should be exempted from quarantine. This is what exactly health certificates are meant for. When people travel from country A to country B, they should be in possession of valid health certificates. But I am afraid that there have been occasions when such certificates have been forged. In those circumstances, it is not possible for the Ministry of Health to relax regulations because Singapore is situated among countries that are habitually endemic with very serious infectious diseases. We cannot accept a situation where just allowing one case to slip through with a forged certificate, as happened in 1949, would have caused a spread of small-pox which would then endanger not just the health but the lives of thousands of our people. Let me give an example, Sir, of the real threat which Singapore faces daily. I refer to our Government Gazette which regularly publishes statements of quarantine notifications of serious infectious diseases which are current in neighbouring countries. I am referring to Notification 3626 of our Government Gazette which gives a statement of quarantine notifications in force on the 8th December, 1967. They are: Country Disease Number of Districts Burma Plague 1 China Small-pox 4 (Cholera 20 India ( (Small-pox 23 (Small-pox 7 Indonesia ( (Cholera 1 Philippines Cholera 3 Thailand Cholera 1 (Plague 3 Vietnam ( (Cholera 2

I do not think we can possibly take chances when we are right in the heart of all these areas that have these infectious diseases which are endemic and as long as we have a situation where it is very easy just to get medical certificates for a small fee. May I, Sir, refer to the publication produced by the Regional Office for the Western Pacific region of the World Health Organisation of the first regional seminar on international quarantine which was held at Manila early in April this year. Just to quote two very important paragraphs. Page 18 of the Report, paragraph 11 (2.2) on vaccination:

'Vaccination against small-pox is a reliable quarantine measure for the prevention of small-pox. It is regrettable that forged vaccination certificates are still occasionally discovered. The co-operation of all governments in controlling the issue of international vaccination certificates is very necessary.'

Another important paragraph, page 24, paragraph 17 (5). I quote:

'After 15 years of application, some of the provisions of the international sanitary regulations have been found by some governments to be inadequate for protection of their own territories. In the light of the changing epidemiological situation, traffic development and scientific advances, there is a need for a review of the regulations and revision if required.'

Sir, if Singapore has been free for years from small-pox, cholera, plague, etc., it is because we have taken very stringent regulations against incoming visitors. I think it is necessary to maintain this for our own sake.

Mr Lingam: I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Inche Rahamat Bin Kenap (Geylang Serai): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1601.

Sir, in the Republic of Singapore, sanitation in the rural areas on the whole is excellent. However, there are defects which can be found and need to be improved in the administration of the Public Cleansing Department. Workers in this department work to rule in specified areas without giving due attention to the rubbish which cannot be cleared on that particular day. This will be a source of danger to public health. I have come across rubbish dumps which stench. It is more so if it is on the evening of a Saturday. And then if Monday is a public holiday, the situation is aggravated. Such rubbish dumps are heaped up and they block the roads. This causes a traffic jam in that particular street. This has happened in Changi Road opposite Changi Market, and at Geylang Serai near the Geylang Serai Market. This goes to prove that the Public Cleansing Department cannot control its workers. This will endanger the health of the public.

I have had occasion to complain to the health officers at Katong over the telephone and my complaints have been accepted in good faith. But I regret to say that only for a certain period of time were the health standards maintained. After that, the former bad state of affairs continued. I believe that so long as the administration of the department is not reorganised, this state of affairs will continue in the rural areas.

Another point I wish to say is that in Geylang Serai there are many drains which have been neglected. One or two drains may have been cleaned by the workers, say, once in four months or once in six months. As Geylang Serai is a low-lying area, if the drains are not cleaned, the water will remain stagnant and this will be a breeding-ground for mosquitoes. I believe the problem of mosquitoes cannot be controlled until and unless the drains are flushed. I hope the Minister for Health will consider this matter so that the health of the public can be looked after.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with the Member for Geylang Serai that the public health conditions in Geylang Serai are not as good as we would want them to be. But there are a number of historical factors, some of which have already been mentioned by the Member himself when he said that Geylang Serai is a low-lying area. If it is low-lying, therefore, deep drainage is difficult, and drainage comes within the jurisdiction of another Ministry. But somehow or other we seem to be saddled with all the complaints which we try painfully to carry on our shoulders. If an area is low-lying and waste water cannot flow, then it becomes stagnant water, and within a week it is very easy for a mosquito to lay eggs and there would be larvae and then mosquitoes. So the basic problem is how to drain an area well. I think it is going to take a lot of effort on the part of the Ministry of National Development to try to drain all our low-lying areas well so that water will flow readily, easily and, therefore, there will be less breeding-places for mosquitoes.

Secondly, the Member for Geylang Serai will appreciate that most of the drains in Geylang Serai are not concrete drains which are found in most of the built-up areas, but they are earth drains. In other words, a few feet of earth have been dug away and water is allowed to flow in, which means that if there is a bit of rain or when there is a bit of flooding, the sides of the earth drain go into the drain itself and therefore greater stagnation results. These are problems of engineering. They need more than just putting anti-malarial oil into the drains to prevent mosquitoes from laying their eggs and larva-hatching. These are serious problems and I think my colleague, the Minister for Law and National Development, and his Ministry have indicated that it will take some time before they can deal with this problem.

As regards public cleansing for which I assume full responsibility, I myself have visited Geylang Serai Market as announced three weeks ago. I must say that I am very dissatisfied with the public health conditions of this market and its surroundings. But whatever it is, I think it is a great improvement on what it was some months ago, before the overhead bridge was built across Changi Road at the junction of Changi Road/Joo Chiat Road, when it was necessary to resettle a large number of hawkers who had congregated around this junction and outside not only Geylang Serai Market, but also Joo Chiat and Changi Markets. I think there has been a great improvement. Thanks to the assistance of the Member for Geylang Serai and the Member for Joo Chiat, an attempt has been made to bring order out of chaos at this junction. Things have improved considerably but it must be admitted that there is still a lot more to be done. When I visited Geylang Serai Market, which was built at a cost of $400,000, I saw refuse all around the market, and a lot of refuse on its roof thrown down by tenants of multi-storeyed flats.

4.15 p.m.

This is a ridiculous state of affairs - people living in flats just throwing rubbish outside their backyards on to the roof of a Government market. It has been cleaned before. So we are dealing with a situation where the public are responsible for the refuse and not playing their part by having it placed in chutes specially meant for the disposal of refuse. When we have a situation like this, I think it will take some time to educate the public. Of course, I have to get more work and more efficiency out of my work force. They will play their part. If ever the Member for Geylang Serai has a complaint to make - and he should make it not by just ringing up the Health Officer for Katong, which he has done, but by letting me know - I will see that he is relatively satisfied, as I cannot promise him that Geylang Serai will be very clean, but it will certainly be much cleaner than what it is today. He did indicate that there is a lot of refuse on Saturday evening, that it is worse on Sunday, and still worse on Monday if Monday is a holiday. We have stopped the overtime racket of the Public Cleansing Department early this year. It is because we wanted to break the racket that the workers were misled into a strike. Now having broken it, I think it will be very foolish to revert back to Sunday and public holiday work at double and triple pay. I do not think this will be re-introduced so long as our work force is able to perform its functions thoroughly during week days. But it is the policy of the Cleansing Department that if there is a public holiday following a Sunday, work will be done on the public holiday. In other words, there will be no refuse lying about uncollected for 48 hours. But we do want to instil into our work force the fact that they will work on Saturdays, that there is no work on Sundays unless it is really very, very necessary and that if there is a holiday on a Monday, they are expected to work on that day. So the situation of refuse left lying about for 48 hours will never arise.

Inche Rahamat Bin Kenap: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to explain that the earth drains are choked and full of rubbish and brush. If they can be cleaned, at least the filth in the drains can be reduced somewhat.

The Chairman: Mr Yong, do you wish to say anything in reply to that? I think it was nothing more than in the nature of a suggestion.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I think the Member for Geylang Serai indicated grass in drains. Exactly, sometimes the grass on the sides is cut and chucked into the drains. When grass is cut, it should be taken away. This adds to the rubbish that goes into the drains. Everything is thrown into the drains - tins, bottles, grass and boxes. So if the public are so irresponsible as to keep on piling these things, there is a limit to what our public cleansing workers can get rid of. So I do not think the blame should be put on just our workers. The blame must be put on the irresponsible members of the public whom we have to educate, and perhaps in time if persuasion fails, I will have to ask for powers to fine them.

Inche Rahamat Bin Kenap: (In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1741.

Sir, various Members have spoken at length on mosquito larvae, rubbish thrown into drains and a lot of other complaints. The Minister has pointed out to us the difficulties faced by his Ministry. This is not only a problem that has to be tackled by his staff but it is also a matter that concerns the attitude of the public. In this respect, I would like to make a suggestion. Since the fault does not lie with the actions of just one person alone, and it is not the responsibility of anyone, I would like to see a campaign conducted by the Ministry of Health - a campaign against filth, pests, mosquitoes and the throwing of rubbish - in conjunction with other relevant organisations. In other words, there should be something like a tripartite organisation to conduct this campaign.

The Minister said some time ago that there was a plan under way to launch a public campaign to promote cleanliness, and so on, but so far this has not materialised. I hope he will launch it to clean up our city.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I am grateful to the Member for Delta for suggesting this anti-movement, anti-this, anti-that, and so on. We have health education in the Ministry of Health. We do understand and appreciate that education and persuasion are important. I have been in charge of the Ministry of Education for one term of 4� years and I know that education takes time - not just a matter of months. Human cussedness being what it is, it may perhaps take years before people can be trained to do the things we want them to do. It is not just that because we have a movement that within three or six months, there will be less mosquitoes. It will have to take a longer period of time - years - before the results can be seen. So we have not lost sight of the importance of education. It is being done, sometimes very quietly and without fanfare. This has not been a section that has been sleeping. I think it has done a considerable amount of work - public cleansing for what it is worth over radio and on TV, and in the newspapers. Anti-malarial work is being done not throughout the whole of Singapore but in various constituencies, like Geylang West, Tanjong Pagar, Anson, Telok Ayer and now Hong Lim. We are tackling the problem of public health in toto, not only the licensing of thousands of hawkers in these constituencies but also the clearance of unauthorised structures over drains used by hawkers and also by members of the public, the unslabbing of drains, drains which have been covered up over the last five or ten years to look pretty in order to allow hawkers to carry on with their trade, but which increase the problems of public health because underneath, these slabbed drains are choked with refuse. Water cannot flow through them. All this is not done in just a matter of months. This is a legacy of years of neglect and it will take years of determined action not by just the Ministry of Health but by even the Ministry of Education. We are now instilling into our young in schools the way to behave and how not to litter playgrounds and class-rooms. Education in schools and over radio and on T.V. is going on continuously.

So we will try to have this anti-movement, but I think it does little to catch the public eye. It is more important that we do good work consistently.

Mr Lee Teck Him (Tiong Bahru): (In Mandarin): The Minister for Health has said that he is paying a lot of attention to matters pertaining to health but that much of it depends on the co-operation of the public. This is correct. This year, the sum allocated to the Ministry of Health is quite substantial. I think more pasars should be built on a large scale to concentrate all the hawkers together, otherwise we will arrest them. We will first give them a warning; we will fine them the second time; and we will cancel their licences the third time. It is only by going about this in a strict way that we can make a success of our administration. But we cannot arrest them before the setting up of large markets to accommodate them, because they have also the responsibility of looking after ---

The Chairman: Mr Lee, if you are going to speak much longer on hawkers, your remarks may be more appropriate under subhead 1831 which is the next amendment, although I appreciate you may have fears that we may not reach the amendment because we are getting very close to 4.35 p.m.

Mr Lee Teck Him: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for that, but allow me to speak a little while longer.

The Minister has also said that health education is going on in the schools and elsewhere. We should educate the pupils to pay more attention to health matters. Campaigns should be carried out in the streets during their vacation terms. Health teams should go round the schools and streets to persuade people to abide by the health code and the correct code of conduct, and so on. Even a Minister should pick up any rubbish that he finds on the floor. I will also pick up any rubbish that I find on the floor. If everybody does this, then we will have a clean country. But we must first start with the hawkers. First, we must resolve their problems of livelihood and then we can take strict measures against them for any infringement of the health code. So the Minister should set up more markets for them - the more the merrier - in order to accommodate all of them. A lot of money has been allotted to the Ministry of Health. So I hope the Ministry of Health can do this.

The Minister for Finance (Dr Goh Keng Swee): I have been unwittingly drawn into this controversy as I have been pointed out as the villain of the piece.

When people want to build markets and they want the Government to fork out the money to build them, may I ask them, how many vacant stalls are there in the existing markets'? You will be astounded to know that in some markets three-quarters of the stalls are vacant. So what is the point of building more markets when you cannot even fill up the stalls in the existing markets?

4.30 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Mr Chor Yeok Eng): (In Mandarin): Sir, just now the Member for Delta has mentioned the point that during Budget time last year I myself had said that we were about to conduct a health campaign among members of the public, and that so far nothing has happened. I would like to add something to what the Minister has said just now. We are now consulting the Citizens' Consultative Committees in certain constituencies to organise this sort of campaign. Other than the constituencies which the Minister has mentioned, because of shortage of staff and personnel in the C.C.C.s of other constituencies, we have not been able to start. I hope that in the not too distant future we will see the Citizens' Consultative Committees in the constituencies seeking help in the promotion of this health campaign.

Dr Chew Chin Han (Tampines): Sir, I will speak on hawkers, and I think I had better wait until Mr Lingam has moved his amendment.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: Sir, I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1831.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since the introduction of the Hawkers' Code, the Minister has vigorously embarked on an ambitious programme to reorganise our hawkers. He first started with the Geylang West Constituency, then the Anson Constituency, and then the Tanjong Pagar Constituency. But I was told that the Minister also intends to reorganise the hawkers in the Telok Ayer Constituency. While he has improved the hawker situation generally, the problem now is that some of the hawkers in these constituencies feel that they have been especially singled out for licensing procedures, whereas their counter-parts in other constituencies are free to conduct their petty trading without restriction. The result is that hawkers who are granted licences for pitches in these constituencies have migrated to the free zones.

It appears to me to be unfair to the hawkers in these constituencies to subject them to rigid discipline, while others are spared of this control. Therefore, I call upon the Minister to suspend disciplinary measures against the licensed hawkers until such time as the licensing system can be applied universally to all hawkers throughout the island.

In places where the licensing of hawkers has begun, there seem to be more hawkers than before. This means that each licensed hawker can now do less business than before. Therefore, I propose that the licence fees for day business be reduced from $10 to $6 and those for night business be reduced from $20 to $12. Perhaps the Minister may be aware of the fact that some hawkers are unable to pay their licence fees due to lack of business.

The Chairman: Dr Chew, you have very little time left.

Dr Chew Chin Han: Sir, the problem of hawkers has indeed always been a difficult one. Though at present the hawkers are being reorganised and resited, they will continue to exist, if not flourish, owing to our social and economic reasons. They have in the past indeed provided convenient services to the people and have been a great help to those who are unemployed.

Sir, one will probably agree with me that if Singapore is going to become a garden city, the hawkers will have the duty to co-operate with the Government. It is a well-known fact that among the hawkers where the food is good, the place is always less desirable. Here, I would like to name three localities just as examples. (1) Beach Road, where the satay is good, everything is good; but whilst the mouth is tasting the good satay, the nose smells something unpleasant and the feet are resting in dust and mud. (2) New Bridge Road, just outside the Chinese Tong Chai Medical Hall, there are at least 20 different types of food. Excellent food it is. There may be new stools, new tables, but before one can really sit down, one has already kicked so many craters in the compound. And if he does not fall, he will probably fall whilst sitting on a stool which is standing on uneven ground. (3) Hokien Street, where the hawkers specialise in the famous palatable Hokien wee and quick service, they open till early in the morning. But the environment and chairs and tables often curtail one's enjoyment of the food ---

The Chairman: Order. I must now call the Minister to reply very, very shortly. Mr Yong.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I would like to answer the Member for Anson first. I am afraid we are not in a position to reorganise all the 51 constituencies at one time. That is why we have to go in stages. There is no question of singling out any of the hawkers. The worst situation is in the city area. So I am afraid we cannot suspend action, because if we did, we might as well do nothing, and go back to chaos.

I am also afraid that it is not possible to consider a reduction of licence fees, because they are already nominal. How much more nominal fees do the hawkers want? After all, we have to pay for the services of the public cleansing workers. They do not do it for free; neither do the hawkers' inspectors. They have all got to be paid salaries. And the number of licences that have to be issued - the stationery involved - all this has got to be paid for.

As regards the statement made by the Member for Tampines that nice places for hawker food are unfortunately not nice places for the nose. That is exactly the situation. When they have good business, they should be doing their business in proper shophouses where the surroundings are clean. That is what we hope the future will bring - that by slowly reorganising the hawkers, they will be selling their food inside shop premises. Perhaps it will be a little more expensive than what it was before, but I think the public are prepared to pay a bit more for their food because they can enjoy it under healthy hygienic conditions.

Mr Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not satisfied with the reply of the Minister ---

4.35 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. We have reached guillotine time. Mr Govindaswamy, do you want me to put your amendment to the vote or you want do to withdraw?

Mr Govindaswamy: Sir, I wish to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The time allotted for Head 0703 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with:

Madam Chan Choy Siong:

Mr R. A. Gonzales:

(7) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10in respect of subhead 1856.

Mr Teong Eng Siong:

Mr S. V. Lingam:

Madam Chan Choy Siong:

(8) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $100.

The sum of $26,608,350 for Head 0703 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0801 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock (River Valley): Mr Speaker,

Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sure the Minister is aware that a new form of gambling under the guise of football pools is being legalised and introduced in Malaysia, like the Social Welfare Lottery. Given time and an efficient distribution system, and with the encouragement of the Press, this form of gambling will find its way into Singapore. I do not think we can afford to see large sums of our money flowing out of the country, and in this respect I would like to ask the Minister what he proposes to do - whether he intends also to grant a licence for the operation of a football pool in Singapore. If the answer is in the negative, what does he propose to do with people who indulge in this game of chance or gambling?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, the answer is in the affirmative. In fact, I am haying negotiations with two organisations who can provide the know-how and management to run football pools in Singapore.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3012*.

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ng Yeow Chong.

Sir, we are asked to approve a sum of $300,000 for this item. Is the Government going to organise a trade fair in Singapore during 1968? Or is the sum asked for to send delegations overseas to attend exhibitions organised by other countries?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: The Member has asked whether we are going to hold a trade fair in Singapore next year and whether the $300,000 is for this purpose. I think that is his point. The answer is no. We are not going to have any trade fairs in Singapore, and if we did, it would cost much more than $300,000. Let me inform Members of the House what is involved in organising trade fairs. Last year a trade fair was held in Bangkok for the ECAFE region. Singapore was given the first option to hold this trade fair. I was then in the Finance Ministry, and I made inquiries into the cost of holding such a trade fair. Experts from other countries were called in and they had a look at the possible trade fair ground which was the old Kallang Airport. Estimates were made of the different kinds of facilities which would be required of a world trade fair for the ECAFE region and of a standard which ECAFE had in mind. The cost was something in the region of $90 million - the whole lot to be borne by Singapore. We do not have that kind of money and so we passed off this option, and the trade fair was held in Bangkok.

Sir, either in 1969 or 1970 there will be the Osaka Expo, or an Exposition in Osaka. When I was last in Japan, I got in touch with the organisers of this Expo and asked them what, in their opinion, should Singapore spend on its pavilion in the Osaka Expo, assuming that we do participate in it. I explained to them that we are a small poor country and what I really wanted from him was an idea of the minimum sum that we would have to spend in order not to disgrace the Republic. And he said, "$15 million". This kind of money, Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid we do not have.

This $300,000 is really for participation in rather modest trade exhibitions in various countries, not in any way up to the standards of the Osaka Expo or that kind of trade fair.

4.45 p.m.

This $300,000 is really peanuts, but I am afraid that is all we can afford.

The Chairman: Mr Ng Yeow Chong.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong: I am not speaking.

Mr Lingam: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3023.

Sir, I want to know to whom these scholarships are paid and why they are named "Malaysia Scholarships". Can the name be changed to, say, "Singapore Scholarships" or something like that?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: This vote has a long history, going back to 1961. In July 1961, there was held in Singapore the Eighth Regional Conference of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association where the then Minister for Education announced the offer of ten special scholarships each year for students from Sabah and Sarawak. These were to be given special treatment by way of training places and the awards were to be known as "Malaysia Scholarships". A separate vote was created in 1963 to finance them. But when we joined Malaysia, the territories of Sabah and Sarawak also joined Malaysia simultaneously with us and technically it was not possible to award scholarships to these scholars from the Colombo Plan vote. So to overcome this difficulty the Malaysia Scholarship scheme was introduced in a separate vote made up for them. Since we left Malaysia in 1965, scholars from Sabah and Sarawak were again eligible for Colombo Plan scholarships and, in fact, this would be the way in which they would receive their training in Singapore. So the present vote is really meant for the 15 scholarships awarded and expected to be outstanding in 1968. The amount of this vote, of course, will diminish in course of time as the scholars complete their studies and return to Sabah and Sarawak.

Mr Lingam: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3026*.

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr. Ng Yeow Chong.

Sir, a sum of over $7 million has been entered for the purchase of property for Overseas Missions. Can I ask the Minister what property has been purchased overseas so far, and what other property he proposes to purchase with this sum of money and from where?

Mr Ng Yeow Chong: I am not moving, Sir.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, the following properties have been purchased. In Australia a chancellery has been bought at 8 Mugga Way, Canberra. In the United Kingdom a residence for the High Commissioner has been bought at 62 Redington Road. In Australia a residence for the High Commissioner has been bought. In New Zealand a residence for the High Commissioner has also been purchased. This is a property at 12 Tensing Place, in Wellington. We have also bought a residence for our High Commissioner to Malaysia at 42 Jalan Perkeliling in Kuala Lumpur. A residence for our Ambassador to the United States has been purchased at 2205 Foxboro Place, Washington. There are still other properties to be bought, a chancellery in Washington and a chancellery in London. We may also have to buy property in Djakarta, Hong Kong, Bangkok and Tokyo. In addition to buying these properties, there is the cost of furnishing both the chancelleries and the residences of our Ambassadors abroad.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of that information, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $l00+.

• The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Teong Eng Siong and Mr Chow Chiok Hock.

Mr Speaker, Sir, before I speak on this topic. I would like to ask your permission to speak a few words on some other topic. I hope you will not hurry us too much when we are speaking, otherwise we cannot speak because Budget time should be the time for us to air our complaints. So if we have any complaints, we should make use of this time to raise them, otherwise we will not have much time to air our complaints.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that every responsible citizen will not have any objection to the various items in the Estimates.

4.50 p.m.

[Mr Tang See Chim in the Chair]

Madam Chan Choy Siong: One of the reasons is that at the moment the person in charge of financial affairs is an experienced as well as an intelligent economist, Dr Goh Keng Swee. However, the most urgent problem today is whether the Government is effectively controlling all the items of expenditure without any waste. Sir, I wish to mention some Government departments where there still exist a number of problems. I will make use of this opportunity to list them one by one. For example, at the moment, there is still the problem of corruption in Government departments. It has not been completely eliminated. Of course, when I mention this problem of corruption, I must say that in accordance with the P.A.P. policy in 1959 when we came to power, we did try to eliminate completely the problem of corruption. I can say that we have had some success in this task. However, I believe this problem cannot be completely eliminated in a short time. Compared to other countries, Singapore is better than them a hundred times. But I hope the Government will not be complacent in dealing with this problem. As long as there is any corruption, I hope the Government will try its best to eliminate it.

Another point is that the bureaucratic attitude of public servants is still prevalent in various Government departments. Ever since the Government came to power, we have tried to eliminate it so that all the public servants can carry out the policy of our Government. As a result, the people in Singapore have been praising the Government for the effective measures taken. In each department there should be a courteous atmosphere when civil servants are dealing with the public. But I do not understand why this problem has gradually come back again in every department. There is again this attitude of discourtesy. If the Government does not believe this, I think every Minister should inspect the various departments in his own Ministry, as was done before, and he will discover that this attitude exists. The civil servants are not only impolite to the public but also to Members of Parliament. They are impolite and do not regard us as Members of Parliament. I am sure many Members have had a similar experience and will agree with what I have said. If we allow this state of affairs to continue, then, as an effective Government our policy will be defeated. In addition, after our party came to power, a course of training was organised for the public servants. If this is the result of such a course of training, then I think such training was completely useless.

Another point I wish to bring up is the waste of public property. In many departments some public servants are very careless in using Government property. They do not know how to economise. We all remember that we have to economise public funds because these funds come from the people. They have worked very hard for them. If we do not investigate this problem carefully, then the task of nation building will be endangered. I hope the Minister will carry out a careful investigation into the problems I have mentioned.

5.00 p.m.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I note that the estimate for this Ministry has reached the figure of $57,776,690. This is about $4 million more than for 1967. This means that this Ministry has expanded and there are more items of expenditure. In the past, this Ministry has made great achievements in its work, such as the issue of new currency, the expansion of new industries, and effective control of the revenue of our country. All these achievements should be praised by all. Undoubtedly our present economic position is very sound and stable. Therefore, the various schemes and policies of the Government have been fully implemented. The national income of our people has also increased. This is because of the general improvement in the economic situation and the standard of living of our people. But it cannot be denied that there are certain difficulties facing our country, namely, the problem of unemployment. This has also been recognised by the Minister as the most serious challenge facing us. How are we going to overcome this serious problem? I feel that the Minister for Finance should adopt better and more effective measures to deal with this and to expand industries, tourism and external trade in order to solve this problem of unemployment step by step.

Finally, I would like to ask the Minister a few questions. First, whether he intends to set up a price control committee or bureau in the very near future in order to control prices of goods. This scheme is being practised in many countries. We know that the stabilisation of prices will bring about a peaceful and stable situation and keep the social order in manageable proportions. Otherwise there will be fluctuations in prices which will cause a lot of difficulties to the people's livelihood and will affect other economic factors. I hope the Minister can pay attention to this.

Secondly, ours is a developing country. The development projects need large funds which come from taxation and the issue of public loans. Sometimes you have to get loans from international organisations. I would like to know how much we have borrowed from international organisations or from which country and how much interest we have to pay every year.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

5.05 p.m.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: The Member for Delta has raised three important points. First, corruption. She says that although there have been improvements since we took office, there are no grounds for complacency and we should always be vigilant in stamping out corruption. I entirely agree with her. We cannot afford to relax the slightest in the maintenance of a vigilant attitude towards corrupt officials. We have the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau which is doing a good job of work. For instance, in my Ministry they have investigated into alleged corrupt practices in the Import and Export Office, as a result of which 12 officers have been interdicted and they are going to be charged in court. We cannot be too vigilant in searching for more offences and weeding out corrupt officials. The final responsibility, of course, rests with the public. If they know that corrupt practices are going on, they should report them forthwith to the C. P. I. B.

The Member's second point was about the bureaucratic attitude in the civil service. She said that after 1959 we effected a great improvement and that lately there has been a gradual reversion. Public officers are more prone to be rude not only to members of the public but also to M.P.s. I do not know what the truth is, but I will not be surprised at all if there is a lot in what she says. All I can say is that every Minister, and every Parliamentary Secretary for that matter, should look out for examples of discourteous conduct by civil servants towards members of the public. And when they come across such instances, the persons concerned should be subject to disciplinary action. I cannot agree with her more that we must not allow any relaxation of the high standards of courtesy we expect from civil servants and employees of statutory authorities. As for rudeness to M.P.s, I shall be grateful if any Member of Parliament, who has been so treated by civil servants, will report immediately such an occasion either to the Minister of the Department or to me and I will undertake to make immediate investigations into the incident.

As regards waste of public funds, it is no use pretending that public property or public funds are not being wasted. I will give you an example. The T.V, cameraman dogs Ministers on public occasions and eventually we get about six seconds on T.V. To take these six seconds, I suspect they shoot about five minutes of film, thereby wasting not only film - that is not so important - wasting not only developing solutions to develop this film, wasting not only the contact prints that have to be made, but also the time of the editor and the splicer. I hope something can be done in this respect. This is just one occasion ---

An Hon. Member: Resign!

Dr Goh Keng Swee: No, no, heaven forbid. These things do happen and all I can say is that everybody should keep a sharp look-out for these things and put a stop to them when they are detected.

The Member for Sembawang says we should have price control because other countries are having price control. I ask him to name one country in South-east Asia where price control has been introduced and is effective. Let us forget about it. It is all right for propaganda purposes to say "Let's control prices." But everybody knows that if an open economy like Singapore's, you cannot have that.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, just now I mentioned that many countries are practising price control on goods. As to its effectiveness, it is another matter. I did not refer to South-east Asian countries. I just said in some countries in the world.

The Chairman: Mr Teong, I have no doubt that if you furnish the Minister with a list, he will have investigations conducted.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, let us not go for this kind of propaganda stunt. Price control will be ineffective in Singapore. The only way to keep prices reasonable is to have a lot of competition so that nobody monopolises anything and is in .a position to exploit the public.

Foreign loans, so far as the Singapore Government is concerned, amount to only $12 million. They consist of an interest-free loan granted by the United Kingdom Government in 1953 to help us over war damage compensation. $11,580,000 of this loan is still outstanding. Then there is the Colonial Development Welfare Loan granted in 1954 and $� million of this is outstanding. So Government has borrowed something like $12 million. On the other hand, we have about $1,200 million invested abroad or, in other words, lent to other countries. So we are a net lender of capital, not a borrower.

Of course, the Public Utilities Board, the Port of Singapore Authority and the Telephone Board have borrowed money from the World Bank. These are for what people call self-liquidating projects. In other words, they are not Government loans, as the term is understood, but are loans to pay for actual economic projects which will pay for themselves, like the loan to build a power station or extend the power station, to extend the supply of water, to expand the port and to expand our telephone services. All this means more money is earned to enable the loans to be repaid. But as for Government loans as such, they amount to only $12 million.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $57,776,690 for Head 0801 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0803 -

Mr Tang See Chim (Choa Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0803 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 2041.

Sir, I was rather interested to note under subhead 2041 that the allowances to the descendants of Sultan Hussain, amounting to $70,000, had been voted each year. I just want some explanation from the Minister for Finance as to what are these allowances and whether there is any way of reducing them or not paying them at all.

5.15 p.m.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, this is an obligation which we have inherited from the distant past. In fact, we have to go back to the foundation of Singapore itself, back to the year 1819 when Sir Stamford Raffles landed at the mouth of the Singapore River. In that year, some 66 acres of land in Kampong Glam were allowed for the use of the heirs of Sultan Hussain and his descendants. The Sultan occupied the land until he died in 1835 and this property had been passed on from generation to generation.

In the year 1897, the Courts of Singapore ruled that the land belonged to the Colony of Singapore and not to the Sultan's descendants but that they were allowed to make use of it. So in the administration of the properties under the Sultan Hussain's Ordinance, provision is made for an annual payment to be made to the family and descendants of the late Sultan, and throughout the years the net revenue has been paid out to the descendants and this amounted to $63,379.99 in 1964. In 1965, it was $60,422.38. In 1966, it came to $61,005.85. There are now 23 beneficiaries and all payments are made in accordance with the provisions of the law.

There is no way of reducing this payment and I think we should honour this historical obligation which we have inherited from Sir Stamford Raffles.

Mr Tang See Chim: I am quite satisfied with the explanation and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0803 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2052.

The Chairman: The hon. Member is not here.

The sum of $1,944,200 for Head 0803 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0804 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2159.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this is the first time I note that a sum of $5,000 has been entered in this year's Estimates as a grant to the Chinese Physicians Association.

May I ask the Minister whether there are any special reasons for this grant and will it not open the way for other associations to ask for similar grants?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, although charitable allowances appear under the heading of my Ministry, in fact, individual items are the responsibility of other Ministries. In this case, I suspect it is either the Ministry of Health, since this is a physicians' institute, or it might even have been at the instance of the Prime Minister who spoke to some medical institute yesterday. So I am afraid I cannot enlighten the hon. Member.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

The Chairman: Is it the pleasure of hon. Members that leave be given for withdrawal of the amendment?

An hon. Member: No.

Question on the amendment put and, negatived.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2281.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I imagine that I will be in a similar position, as the question I am going to ask concerns the Tourist Promotion Board which is under the charge of the Minister for Law and National Development. I might as well ask my question in case the Minister for Finance would like to answer it.

Sir, the Tourist Promotion Board has a three per cent cess levied on all tourist hotels with a minimum of one dollar. I believe the object of levying this cess on tourist hotels is to obtain revenue for the Tourist Promotion Board for the promotion of tourist activities. But this cess is in turn passed on to the tourist, in addition to his hotel accommodation, he pays this cess and not the hotel.

I would like to ask either the Minister for Finance or the Minister for Law and National Development whether this is the right way to promote tourism.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, I think it is the right way to promote tourism. Other countries have this kind of cess which is passed on to tourists. They also have sales tax which is passed on to tourists. I have gone to many countries and stayed in many hotels and, quite frankly, the charges in some hotels in some cities are quite appalling. Ours are really cheap compared with what we have to pay in other countries.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of this, would it not be fairer if this cess is extended to cover more hotels than to confine it to persons living in a few tourist hotels to pay this cess? In view of the present boom experienced by the hotel industry, will it not be beneficial to the Tourist Promotion Board if this cess is extended to cover more hotels?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: No, I do not think it is equitable to require some hotels, who are really no better than lodging-houses, to pay this tax, because under no conceivable circumstances would international tourists be patronising them. The Tourist Promotion Board makes up a list of tourist hotels and these are the hotels that benefit most directly from the promotion activities of the Board. So it is fair that these hotels pay their contributions. The other hotels do not. It is true that some second-rate hotels may benefit from the present shortage of hotel rooms, but this can be regarded as only a very temporary phenomenon. But I must ask the hon. Member not to believe that the tourist hotels are only the very big hotels like Goodwood, Raffles, Inter-Continental, and so on. Some of the smaller hotels are also paying cess. The Mayfair Hotel, for instance, is paying tax.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2341.

Sir, this subhead concerns the Amenities Fund for Students in the United Kingdom. As I understand it, the provision for this year is $31,000 and for next year it is $25,800. I would like to know what sort of amenities our overseas students, especially in the United Kingdom, are accorded, and whether the reduction in the vote will mean a similar reduction in amenities.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, I am afraid I must give the same reply which I gave the Member for River Valley when he raised his first inquiry. This vote appears under the Public Service Commission. I think there has been a slip-up in the transmission of responsibility for answering these matters. My Ministry was under the impression - quite erroneously as it has turned out - that these questions would have been answered by the Minister responsible for the operation of these allowances. Apparently it is not so. So I do apologise to the House for being unprepared to answer matters which, strictly speaking, do not fall within my responsibility. I think this is a thoroughly bad show. I hope that next year somebody will make sure that when it comes to considering this particular head of expenditure, the Minister who is in charge of actually operating this vote will be present to reply to hon. Members.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am rather disturbed that the Minister for Finance has not been able to answer the little question that I posed. But it does come under the head "Contributions and Charitable Allowances".

In view of the explanation given by the Minister for Finance, I will not press the matter further and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: The next three amendments (4), (5) and (6) relate to similar matters and, in the circumstances, it might be most useful and time-saving if the Members did not move them.

The following amendment stood in the names of Mr Lim Cheng Lock and Mr Tang See Chim -

(4) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2352.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: I am not moving.

Mr Tang See Chim: I am not moving.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Lim Cheng Lock -

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2381.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: I am not moving.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting -

(6) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2382.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: I am not moving.

The sum of $9,028,700 for Head 0804 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

The Chairman: I think it might be convenient to take the suspension now.

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

Mr Speaker: I suspend the sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 6.00 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.30 p.m, until 6.00 p.m. Sitting resumed at 6.00 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head 0806 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0806 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3017.

Sir, a sum of $350,000 has been entered in the Estimates. I assume that this is to set up a department for the Export Incentive Scheme and to implement the provisions of the Bill which has been passed by Parliament. May I have more details and information from the Minister?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: The Member is quite correct in his assumption that this expenditure is to be incurred in respect of administration of the economic expansion incentives schemes. As Members know, this scheme provides for a reduction of 90 per cent of income tax on profits earned from certain types of exports, namely, exports to new markets. In order to prove this kind of export performance, a manufacturer will have to submit to the Comptroller of Income Tax, Customs certificates certifying that these goods, in fact, have been exported. So it can be seen that this scheme will involve the Customs in a considerable amount of additional work, and this sum is to provide for the additional expenditure required. The $350,000 is made up as follows: Staff $302,000, Other Charges Annually Recurrent $12,000, Equipment $36,000.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: I beg leave to withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $5,974,300 for Head 0806 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0807 -

Mr Tang See Chim: Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1101.

Mr Speaker, Sir, recently there has been a spate of upward revisions of property tax, especially in the rural areas. I can quote examples of upward revision in my constituency, Choa Chu Kang, which caused tremendous distress among my constituents who are rural folks and earn their living by farming, and generally are poor people. I appreciate that legally the levy of a property tax has no reference to the income of a property owner. Property tax is levied according to the annual value, i.e. what a property can fetch in rent. Let me give an example to the House how inequitable sometimes the rigid application of the law can be.

Let us say a family has only a house which is assessed by the Property Tax Division as a property capable of fetching $300 income a year, which means $25 a month. This is the rent that the property would fetch at market rates. Then the Property Tax Division proceeds to levy a tax on the property, i.e., 18 or 23 per cent or whatever the rate is on this annual value of $300. If, say, it is 18 per cent, the head of the family would have to pay something like $48 a month. But the rent is the sole income of the property owner. However, if, for example, he has a sum of money and, instead of investing it in a piece of property, he puts it in a bank and earns interest. Let us say he gets an equivalent of $300 interest a year. Now, if that is his sole income, he would be free from payment of income tax, because his income is $300 a year only. And since he has no other income than this $300 he need not have to pay income tax. But if he were to be so foolish as to put his investment into a house, as mentioned earlier, he would have to pay the Government $48 a year.

As I have said, as far as the law of property tax goes, the Property Tax Division is quite correct in assessing this case. But I think they are applying the law far too rigidly. If I am not mistaken, there is provision in the Property Tax Ordinance for relief, but this provision is never made use of and never applied. I wonder whether the Minister can assure the House that in deserving cases for relief, he will ask the Comptroller of Property Tax to invoke this provision liberally.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, since this amendment has been moved by my colleague, the Member for Choa Chu Kang, I have also to move my amendment* on the same subhead, but the difference is that my amendment is to reduce the subhead by the whole sum. I should, however, like to speak on the amendment moved by the Member for Choa Chu Kang.

• Amendment (2) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 1101.

Sir, I am fully of the same view as that expressed by him. But I have something more to add, and I hope that the Minister for Finance will look into such matters. First of all, Sir, I refer to the application for transfer of ownership in respect of those who own houses. This concerns my constituency very much. I have had on many occasions received complaints from my constituents, especially those involved in applying for transfer of ownership.

If I may trouble the House with a little bit of detail, Sir. Let us say, for example, that Mr A bought a house from Mr B some 15 years ago, and that house has been given a number. Today with the social amenities available to him, for example, electricity and water supplies, Mr A wishes to apply for such services. But unfortunately, Sir, on the property tax bill, the name of the owner is different. In other words, the previous owner's name is given on the bill.

Mr A has to make an application to have his name registered in the owner's list. Unfortunately, too, Mr B, who sold the house to Mr A, could not be traced. There arises the complication. Poor Mr A would probably have to make a statutory declaration to the effect that to the best of his knowledge and so on and so forth, he is the sole owner of the house. And I take it that the Property Tax Division would come to his assistance. The rural folks now realise that with such amenities available at their doorstep, they can have them, and in order to facilitate such matters the Property Tax Division should come to their assistance.

The second point I want to raise is this, and that is in regard to renumbering of houses. I think this issue is not new, it has been brought up in previous Budget sessions, and today I have to bring it up again for the simple reason that some houses in certain areas have been renumbered and some have not. The main reason I was given to understand was that the owner's name, as listed in the register of owners, was different from that of the present, and hence a number could not be given. Of course, in this case the Minister could get a better look at it and say, "Will the Member submit me a list of names and so forth, and I will look up?" I say, Sir, that such cases do exist.

With that I come to my third point, and that is the application for a house number. This subject again is not new, and I am sorry I have to trouble the House again with a little bit of detail just to see how a house number applied for would be given. It goes like this. First, you have an unauthorised hut or dwelling house, to put it whatever way you like.

Mr Tang See Chim: Demolish it.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: The Member for Choa Chu Kang is of the opinion that it should be demolished, but I would say that if the Minister says, "Go ahead with the demolition of all the unauthorised structures in Choa Chu Kang," I think the Member for Choa Chu Kang will be the first to stand up and say, "Sir, these are the reasons, and on compassionate grounds they should not be demolished, etc., etc.". I think he was probably not attentive during the previous years' Budget debates if he was here.

The position is this: you have an unauthorised dwelling house in existence for umpteen years - 10, 15, 20 years - and there is no house number. And as I have mentioned just now, with such social amenities available at the doorstep, the owner of this unauthorised dwelling house comes along and says, "Can I apply for a house number?" But before he does so, he has to make an application for the retention of an existing house, for which a form is supplied by the Chief Building Surveyor. No doubt it does not concern the Ministry of Finance, but somehow it will and I will dwell on it later. This applicant fills up the form and sends it to the Chief Building Surveyor's Department, which is the processing department, because after investigation by their officers a temporary permit will be issued. This temporary permit costs $12 per year and is subject to renewal.

6.15 p.m.

Prior to that, Sir, up to 1965, as far as I can remember, the temporary permit was only $2. With effect from last year it was increased to $12 - a 600 per cent increase - for one year to have a temporary permit. Be that as it may, Sir, to obtain a temporary permit sometimes takes a couple of months. That may be the earliest, if not much later. The next process would be done at the Property Tax Division, which is a unit in the Department of Inland Revenue. The Property Tax Division would send its own officers to the site and investigate again and find out which number to give. Here is where it is my unfortunate lot to have to bring to the attention of the Deputy Commissioner of Property Tax the fact that there has been undue delay of months.

Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi): Years.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Years, my hon, colleague has just mentioned. But I would say years is a bit exaggerated, Sir. I would say it would take months and probably up to a year. My unfortunate part was having to write to the Deputy Commissioner of Property Tax. I have on record in my own file of "Meet the people sessions" copies of such memoranda sent to him and in most cases there was no reply. I am just wondering what this Division is doing. Just to get a house number! A chap who could not get it would come to me and ask, "Please, Mr Ng, can you help?" All right, there goes a copy of my note. No reply. I can dig it up and show it to the Minister himself. I think this is going too far, Sir. Something must be done.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: This is not empty talk.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: This is no empty talk, as my colleague, the Member for Changi, has stated.

The other point, Sir, is my last point. My colleague, the Member for Choa Chu Kang, has mentioned the annual value of property in the rural areas. Bear in mind that most of the houses in the rural areas, whether they are in Changi, Choa Chu Kang, Tampines or Punggol ---

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Or Sembawang.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Or Sembawang, as the case may be, are known as temporary structures with temporary permits. The Inland Revenue Department, through the Property Tax Division, would come along and say, "Look, chum, we will have to assess your property which no doubt is temporary in nature at a high rate." And when we write to the Deputy Commissioner of Property Tax, he would say, "1 am afraid I cannot reduce the annual value. Therefore, you have to pay so much." I hope the Hon. Minister for Finance will sympathetically consider what I have mentioned and also those points raised by my colleague, the Member for Choa Chu Kang.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, there is no gratitude ever in these matters. Only - when was it? - three years ago, maybe four, we reduced the rate of property tax on owner occupiers of attap huts to $6 per year. If they are owners -

Mr Ng Kah Ting: On a point of clarification, Sir.

Dr Goh Keng Swee resumed his seat.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I do not think it was a reduction. As far as I can remember, the property tax bills in respect of temporary huts were made out for at $1.92. I can show the Minister such bills. Then there was an increase to $6. I do not think there was a reduction, Sir.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: There was a reduction, maybe before the Member was elected. I cannot be wrong. It happened in this House. This $1.92 is not property tax. It is quit rent or something like that. We are renting out land in the rural areas at ridiculously low prices. Our rural folks are really spoilt. If they were farmers, say, in other countries, the landlord would take over half of their produce to start with, and the Government would take half of the balance. This goes on in all agricultural countries. And here, what do we charge them - $1.92 a year - not a month - quit rent. Then the owner occupiers pay $6 instead of $48. We are giving them a present of $42 a year. Far from being grateful, they ask, why are we charging so much for those who are renting out their houses? If they are poor farmers - men who are that poor - how can they build a house to let out? They become landlords. They are not poor farmers.

Mr Tang See Chim: On a point of clarification, Sir.

Dr Goh Keng Swee resumed his seat.

Mr Tang See Chim: Perhaps the Minister for Finance might have misunderstood the position here. Quit rent is very different from annual value. Moreover, annual value is assessed irrespective of whether the owner occupies the house or not, although, of course, there is a difference in the rate of assessment. If it is owner-occupied, the rate is slightly lower.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, the rate is considerably lower. How can you say $6 is slightly lower than $48? It is considerably lower. Owner occupiers of attap dwellings pay $6 property tax a year. There are 12,000 owner occupiers enjoying this concession. So I think Members representing the rural constituencies might have a kind word for the Finance Ministry when discussing property tax. Now, of course, the point is why 18 per cent if they rent out the dwellings? Why not 18 per cent? They are landlords; they are not farmers. They are all renting out their property. If they have built a stone or concrete building, they pay 18 per cent. So if they build a wooden structure with attap roof, why should they be exempted from property tax?

The Member for Punggol has brought up a number of points about transfers of ownership and applications for house numbers. I must say that his knowledge of this business is quite encyclopaedic, and I cannot claim to rival his knowledge of this subject. I am not, of course, being subject to so many applications at "Meet the people sessions". This is a vexatious problem. I do not pretend that it is not a vexatious problem. These people are often not well educated and not educated in the law and administrative processes. This is a subject which I think really does not fall within the province of the Property Tax Department. This is, if I am right, something which concerns the Registrar of Deeds. Or is it the Land Office? When it comes to matters of ownership of property, naturally the Property Tax Division must be careful about recognising who is the owner of any particular property. In the instance mentioned by the Member for Punggol, the original owner is missing. Surely this is a proper reason why the Property Tax Division has to be most careful about who is the real owner. Otherwise more owners might be missing! In spite of all that, the Member has talked about delays in getting numbers. My information is that the number of applications received for house numbers and which is still outstanding as of this moment is 347. So it cannot be all that large, considering the number of attap huts in the rural areas. It may be 30,000 or more.

As regards the reduction of annual values, there are set procedures laid down. No doubt these procedures entail a lot of difficulties and trouble which are beyond the rural folk to comprehend. But here again I must remind hon. Members that the annual values attached to these properties are very low. $300 a year would be an exceptionally high figure. Most of them would be in the region of $150 to $180 a year. So it cannot really be said that this involves great hardship on the rural folks. On the question of whether we should simplify our procedures, I think the opinion of Members from the rural constituencies is that we should simplify them. I am willing to listen to any reasonable suggestion for simplifying procedures. if hon. Members have any good proposals, I will give them the fullest consideration.

The Chairman: Mr Tang?

Mr Tang See Chim: I am not speaking.

The Chairman: Mr Ng.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, can I just pick up two points which the Minister has said? First is the question of quit rent. I said that the bill was a property tax bill and it was $1.92 which was collected until about 1960. From 1961, below $2 no collections were made. This is the point I want to bring home. And I can supply the Minister such bills.

The second point is about the transfer of ownership. As I understand it, the question of ownership does not relate very much to the Registry of Titles and Deeds.

6.30 p.m.

In this respect, Sir, let me explain. For example, if Mr A wants to apply for transfer of ownership and hw cannot trace the previous owner, he makes out a statutory declaration. Or in another case, if the house was registered under the name of one of his parents who had passed away many years ago, all the brothers and sisters would have to become signatories to that particular statutory declaration which does not bind the Property Tax Division to any liability, to the best of my knowledge. In other words, the registration of ownership only means that the tax on such property will be duly collected by the Property Tax Division. Hence there is no connection between the Registry of Titles and Deeds and the Property Tax Division.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, I will look into this matter and see whether or not we can simplify proceoures.

As regards $1.98 property tax, I will accept the Member's word for it. It just shows that the person in question had been under-assessed before. [Laughter].

The Chairman: Order.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: This tax must have been laid down in the reign of Queen Victoria and has not been changed since. Some years ago the Land Office, which was then in charge of collecting these revenues, had an enormous backlog and they were fighting very hard to reduce it. It was not until this work had been transferred to the Inland Revenue that much progress was made. I think the Member should congratulate the owner of this house on having escaped an upward revision for so long.

Mr Tang See Chim: In view of the Finance Minister's explanation, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Mr Ng, I take it that you are not moving amendment No. (2)*.

• Amendment No. (2) reads as follows:

That the sum to allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 1101.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: I am not moving, Sir.

The Chairman: Mr Ho Kah Leong, amendment No. (3) .

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1111.

We all know that one of the objectives of our Party is to build a non-Communist democratic, socialist society. We wish to resort to peaceful means to achieve social reconstruction. In other words, we want to adopt peaceful ways and means by which we could reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, I regret to say that at the moment there is a small number of public servants who do not seem to understand the principles of democratic socialism. They still have the attitude of the colonial days. I want to quote a few examples to substantiate what I have said. We all know that a high percentage of our country's revenue is from property tax. Of course, the more property tax we collect, the more is our revenue and this is a very good thing. However, I think assessment on properties should be based on the background of the owners. Some assessors do not seem to understand the conditions under which the rural dwellers live. Hence, their assessment on properties is excessively high. In certain areas, because of land acquisition for military or development purposes, the people have been resettled elsewhere. Of course, the Government is justified in acquiring these lands in the national interests. Before they were resettled, these people had been occupying certain pieces of land. Generally, the land area was many times larger thaii the land given to them on resettlement. On these larger areas of land they could plant vegetables and fruit trees and make a living out of them more easily. Generally speaking, the income of the people who have been resettled is less than their income before their resettlement. Sometimes when they are resettled in a low-lying area, these people will have to spend several thousands of dollars to try to drain off the area in order to build their homes and make a living out of the land. As such, the livelihood of the rural people is more difficult than before the resettlement.

As the Minister has said, before the people were resettled, most of them were living in attap houses. They were enjoying a certain concession on property tax by paying only a few dollars per year. If they were staying in attap houses, the property tax was only $6. When they moved out, they could not carry the attap houses with them. So they have to build new houses to stay in. Some assessors, who do not quite understand the conditions of these people, value these newly-built houses at many times more than what was assessed before, and sometimes as much as 700 per cent more. On the one hand, the income of these rural people who have been resettled has dwindled. On the other hand, their assessments have been increased. This is the point.

Another point is about pigsties and chicken pens. Most of the rural people keep fowl, pigs and other domestic animals. They spend a lot of time, energy and a great deal of labour in rearing their domestic animals. But very often there are cases of losses and these figures are unknown. For instance, not very long ago there were certain cases of swine fever and other animal epidemics, causing great losses to some of the farmers. Even if they can make some money out of rearing domestic animals, it is only meant to eke out a living. From what I know, every pigsty keeper has to pay the Government licence fee of $12 for a pigsty. These pigsties and chicken sheds cannot avoid the assessors' valuation, and for these things, their owners will have to pay property tax. So the owners have to pay double taxation. I have not found anything in the law saying that there should be a property tax on pigsties and chicken sheds. I think this is merely a requirement by the assessors. Here I would most earnestly appeal to the Hon. Minister for Finance to consider my appeal. There are two points. First, to reduce the property tax in the resettlement areas. Secondly, to exempt chicken sheds and pigsties from property tax. If the Minister for Finance can agree to these suggestions, I know the rural people will be very grateful to him.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully agree with the sentiments expressed by the Member who has just spoken. We all know that the rural people are generally very poor. Their only means of maintaining their livelihood depends on rearing pigs, chickens and other domestic animals. Their income is merely to maintain their families at subsistence level. If the property tax is too high, they might meet with certain difficulties and might not be able to maintain their livelihood. There are certain difficulties facing the people of my constituency. Every year some people have to pay $100 to $200 per year in property tax on chicken sheds and pigsties. The pigs and chickens do not know how to pay property tax. So the owners have to pay for their accommodation. We have to consider this. The Minister has said that taxes have been reduced for 10 years in succession. Agriculture and animal husbandry have also declined. If that is a fact, we should improve the lot of the rural people.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, Members appeal for a reduction in property tax in respect of pigsties and chicken pens. For their elucidation, there is no property tax on pigsties and chicken pens, because I entirely agree with the Member for Sembawang that pigs and poultry cannot pay tax. We do not tax them. What happens is that the Health Department levies a fee of $6 a year on every pigsty.

An hon. Member: $12.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: $6. Maybe these people have two pigsties. The Health Department render services to farmers so that their pigs are healthy. There is no collection of any sort for poultry pens.

6.45 p.m.

As for farmers being worse off, farmers in every country say this thing. The Member for Jurong should be very fortunate that there are fewer farmers there and more workers. So I would have thought that the reduction in the number of farmers is really to the advantage of the hon. Member.

I think what he has said about hardship in resettlement cases should be taken seriously. I am sure that hardship could have arisen in some individual cases but not generally. I think there should be some machinery for detecting these cases of hardship so that action can be taken to mitigate the effects. This is really a matter for the Minister for National Development. I suggest to the hon. Member to bring it up before him.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the explanation given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Bernard Rodrigues -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3014.

Mr Bernard Rodrigues (Telok Blangah): I am not moving, Sir.

Mr Ho See Beng (Bras Basah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated or Head 0807 be reduced by $100.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it is high time that the Government adopted a realistic policy on the implementation of the income tax laws.

Of course, nobody will disagree with the Government that it must endeavour to collect as much tax as it can from those who have to pay tax according to law. But the taxing of a worker's gratuity or ex-gratia payment, when it is given to him, say, on premature retrenchment or under any circumstances, can hardly be considered just and equitable. The argument may be put forward that if this gratuity is deposited with the C.P.F., it will not be taxed. I do not think this is a good solution to the worker who does not have a job. What is he to live on until he reaches the age of 55? If he does not get a job to enable him to support his family, you do not expect him to live on thin air. The employment opportunities for men in the age group of 45 to 55 are very slim, and this is particularly so when they reach the age of 50. Do the authorities consider that they can afford to be taxed? I urge the Minister to consider the exemption of tax on gratuities or ex-gratia payments made to retrenched workers. I suggest that if tax has to be paid, a certain formula should be worked out whereby the total gratuity should be divided by the number of years from the lime that a worker is retrenched up to the age of 55, and that this sum should be allocated as earnings for each year up to the age of 55 and taxed in the normal way if he is within the taxation bracket.

Mr Bernard Rodrigues: Mr Speaker, Sir, I only have one question to ask as a result of what the Member for Bras Basah has said. Will the Minister for Finance consider granting an amnesty over a fixed period of time to tax-dodgers to reveal their hidden assets and income which, when revealed, will not be taxed on condition that such assets and income are capitalised and invested in industries selected by his Ministry?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: The Member for Bras Basah wants to know whether retirement benefits paid to people now employed by the British defence forces will be liable to income tax when they are retrenched. The answer is that special provision will be made to exempt such payments from income tax. This is a matter which concerns the Minister for Labour who is now working out a comprehensive scheme to help these people through their period of difficulty. So far as I am concerned, I can say that the gratuities paid to the Base workers retrenched from the British armed forces will not be taxed.

As regards tax exemption for tax-dodgers, if they bring out their assets and invest them in a way which commends itself to us, I do not really like to give a snap decision now. I would like to think this matter over. There are obvious pros and cons to it. But the Member for Telok Blangah will rest assured that I will give consideration to his proposal. I cannot say at present whether it will be favourable or otherwise.

Mr Bernard Rodrigues: Mr Speaker, I have another question to ask in view of what the Minister has said. Is he prepared to consider exempting those retrenched due to Singapore's industrial programme from paying income tax on their gratuities'?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: I think this is really a matter for the Minister for Labour who is going to introduce a scheme which will cover persons retrenched not only from the British Bases, but also employees retrenched as a result of cessation of business, or because they are redundant, or for one reason or another. I think that is entirely a separate matter and should be dealt with in the ordinary course of income tax administration.

Mr Ho See Beng: Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the assurance given by the Minister for Finance that he will consider exempting payments made to prematurely retrenched employees from income tax, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $4,180,080 for Head 0807 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0809 -

The Chairman: Mr Sim Boon Woo is not here.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0809 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*.

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo.

Sir, with the rapid industrialisation programme and our export drive, I think it is important that our Trade Division, particularly the Import and Export Office, should be efficient, helpful and incorrupt.

Early this year, certain persons in the Import and Export Office of the Trade Division were involved in alleged corrupt activities. Can the Minister say whether investigations in the Depa rtment have been completed and whether he is satisfied that it is now satisfactorily reorganised?

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Sir, it is never possible to eliminate corruption completely. Corruption always exists even to a minor degree. What is important is that every effort should be made to detect corruption and to prosecute the culprits. In this instance, the C.PI.B, investigations into the Import and Export Office have been concluded and, as I said in reply to earlier questions, the result of the investigations is that 12 officers have been interdicted. Charges have been preferred against some of these officers, while charges of arrest are being cleared with the Solicitor-General. The Public Service Commission has also appointed Committees of Inquiry and they will be holding disciplinary proceedings under the Public Service (Disciplinary Proceedings) (Procedure) Rules, 1964.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the information, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn

Madam Chan Choy Siong (in Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0809 be reduced by $100.

It is important that the Trade Division should be efficient in controlling the prices of goods in this country. Certain shops have lodged complaints. For example, the Government has intioduced quotas and import duties because of our industrialisation drive in order to protect local industries for domestic markets. The question arises whether local products are sufficient to meet local demand. Many small shops dealing in textiles have experienced a shortage of such goods.

7.00 p.m.

On the one hand, they are not able to import foreign textiles to meet the demands of their consumers because of the quota system, which therefore results in complaints lodged by the shops. On the other hand, this also affects the consumers and increases their burden because the local products are insufficient to meet the demands of local consumers and therefore results in an increase in prices, thus leading to an increased burden for the lower and middle income groups. Apart from textile goods, there are other local products which are manufactured locally. They too have the same problem.

Another point is that at the moment there has been a general increase in the prices of goods, especially since the devaluation of the Pound Sterling. At that time, for the convenience of exchange, merchants raised the prices of certain goods. For example, ground nuts or peanuts were sold at 80 cents per katty formerly, but in order to facilitate the coin exchange, they have raised the price to $1 per katty. Another example is milk. Formerly it was sold at 65 cents per tin, but it has since been raised to 70 or 75 cents per tin. These are all daily necessities, and the increase in the prices of these necessities has led to an increased burden. In actual fact, our Singapore currency has not been devalued and, with the introduction of the new coins, merchants should reduce their prices in order not to cause hardship to the general public. But up to date we have not seen any reduction, and the Ministry of Finance has not taken any steps to stop the increase in prices or to bring the prices down to their original level. The general public are suffering and this will increase their burden. On the other hand, their salaries are not increased. Therefore, I request the Minister for Finance to take suitable measures to deal with the general increase in prices.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: The general position about the supply of consumer goods produced by our industries is that the supply is ample and quite adequate to meet domestic demand. Should any shortage develop temporarily, the action to be taken by the Ministry is to abolish quota restrictions or otherwise increase the imports of such goods. This has happened, as I explained to Parliament some time ago, in respect of a number of commodities.

As regards the increase of prices, I do not get the impression that there has been a general increase in prices since the devaluation of Sterling. The market was greatly upset about a week or two because of this wretched coin business. This has sorted itself out. As I have often informed Members, some prices do go up and other prices do come down. And by selecting prices which go up or prices which come down, you can prove any point you want. But as I have said, I do not get the impression that there is an abnormal increase in prices. Rather, at about this time, the festive season, there is nothing much to justify increased prices. But that is what one suspects when people are buying more for Christmas and the New Year. And I would say that for this year prices have not gone further up than in previous years.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,620,460 for Head 0809 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0901 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in moving this amendment, I wish to touch on the Central Provident Fund, which is under the charge of the Minister for Labour. We are all aware that the Central Provident Fund, ever since its establishment in 1955, has been a very good source of provision of capital to the Minister for Finance for economic and other development. Since 1955 amendments have been introduced from time to time to improve the collection of contributions from members and employers, which is a good thing. But other than amendments for tightening up the evasion or avoidance of collections, I think no other provision has been made to improve the social benefits for its contributors.

Sometime in November I asked the Minister whether he would look into the feasibility of setting up a committee to examine the possibility of allowing members of the C.P.F. to use their contributions as down-payments for purchase of houses in order to promote home ownership among the lower income group and, if necessary, to recommend such amendments to the C.P.F. Ordinance. The answer I got was that 74 per cent of the contributors have less than $1,000 in the Fund. This means that 26 per cent of the contributors have $1,000 or more in the Fund. Is the Minister not aware that this 26 per cent, though it may be in the minority now, will be a big minority as the years go by, and will outnumber the 74 per cent? Is it not time now to sit down and consider what improvements can be worked out for the benefit of its contributors?

I am aware that the C.P.F. is a good source of capital accumulation for the Minister for Finance in his economic projects, but surely I think the contributors themselves should have first priority for their own benefit or for their own family benefit.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with all the reasons given by the Member for River Valley. But I think that since he has been so enthusiastic in his proposals, perhaps this matter has some relationship with his position, because he appears to be a member of the middle class. His proposal is to help more people in the middle class to own houses.

One of the aims of the C.P.F, is to enable an employee, whether in the Government or in the private sector, to have certain funds to live on after he has retired. But we know that if a worker should begin working at the age of 20 years and retire at 55, it would be quite a long time before he could make use of his provident fund. To him, it is not quite economical, and although a certain rate of interest is paid by the C.P.F., it is very low. So the suggestion by the Member for River Valley that Government should consider allowing members of the C.P.F. to make use of their fund as a deposit to buy houses, is, I think, a very useful and good suggestion. Since our Government is one that looks after the interests of the people, we should always listen to the views given by the people. I hope the Minister can give serious consideration to the suggestion of the Member for River Valley.

If we can accept suggestions from the people, we can help them to raise their standard of living, because with their own housing accommodation their livelihood will be better. I believe if we can do that, many people will thank our Minister for Labour.

Mr Selvadurai: Mr Speaker. Sir, since we are discussing the Central Provident Fund, I would like to raise one particular point. I wonder if some alleviation could be brought about.

7.15 p.m.

At present, as the law stands, a person can only withdraw his fund when he reaches the age of 55 or, if he wants ti withdraw the fund before the age of 55, he should be unemployed for not less than two years and he should not be likely to be employed further. In my constituency, I have periodically come across people in the age group of 40 to 45 who have been retrenched and are unable to find jobs. They have been unemployed for two years -some less than two years; some more than two years. By definition, as the law stands, these people cannot withdraw their funds until they have reached the age of at least 53. It is not very likely that these people would be able to get jobs because of the unemployment situation. Nobody is prepared to give jobs to people of this particular age group. They want younger people as far as possible. Is it possible to look into this question and provide a means of amelioration so far as this category of people is concerned'?

The Minister for Labour (Mr Jek Yeun Thong): Mr Speaker, Sir, ever since the setting up of the Central Provident Fund in 1955, not a single year has gone by without someone asking for his money to be released for some reason or other. This year we have three. The answer to this is very simple. Human nature is such that so long as the money is there, the temptation or the urge to spend it is always there. We, as trustees of the people's money, will be failing in our duty if we do not do our best to resist this demand t get the money out and spend it. Thriftiness and the habit of saving are things which we must try to teach our people to accept. The Housing Board's introduction of the house ownership scheme has let loose a series of fresh demands to draw the money out, and this time on the grounds that they use tht; money as down-payments to purchase Housing Board flats. I am afraid they have got this all wrong. House ownership is something we are encouraging the people to achieve. But they must achieve this by some other worth while means and not by utilising the money which they have set aside for old age security. If they really want to have a house or a flat of their own, they should try to do this by working haider, by putting in extra effort in productivity, earn more and put in extra efforts to save that extra money to achieve the object of house ownership. This will make their achievement more precious to them at heart. In this way, they will not only have a house of their own, but when they reach the age of 55 they will also have a lump sum of money to see them through in their old age. I am sure this is more beneficial to the individual as well as to the economy of the country as a whole. There may be other perfectly legitimate grounds on which people would want to draw their money out of the Central Provident Fund, such as unemployment, hardship, sickness, or a desire to finance a business venture. But I am afraid once the opening is allowed, the temptation to draw some more money from the C.P.F. is always there and in next to no time there will be no more money left. So the question is very simple. Do we or do we not want savings for old age security? If we want to save for old age security, we must not touch the money. If we touch the money, there will be no old age security. You cannot have your cake and eat it.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister is evading the issue. The Central Provident Fund was introduced for the specific purpose of making provision for employees in their old age, and what we are suggesting to the Minister is not in a sense to withdraw the money from the C.P.F., but to ask the C.P.F. to come to some arrangement with the I-lousing Board whereby it would be easier for contributors who have a certain sum in the C.P.F. to purchase houses which they could now enjoy instead of waiting until their old age.

Mr Selvadurai: If I may say so, Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think the Minister has really answered the problem that brought out about the category of people between the ages of 40 and 50 who are unemployed and unable to get employment because of their age factor and who want to take this money out. Otherwise, in the meanwhile they are destitute.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: I do not think I am evading the issue. The issue, as I see it, is very clear, whether we want to draw the money out or not. I would say they should not draw the money out, and they should leave it there until they reach the age of 55. Otherwise who will look after them? Whether you call it house ownership or you buy a house from the Housing Board, or you pay money to a man who is out of work at the age of 45, he is still drawing out the money. So the main issue here is whether we should allow that withdrawal before he reaches the age of 55. If we want, we must take the matter up quite differently. But somehow or other the line must be drawn somewhere. We have decided, and rightly decided, that the line should be drawn at the age of 55. That is it.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): I would like to ask the Minister only two questions on the Central Provident Fund. Will the deposit in the Central Provident Fund earn interest, as in the case of banks? if this money is put in the Central Provident Fund without the C.P.F. giving any interest, as the banks are giving, then the value of their deposits will, in actual fact, depreciate. We know that as society progresses, the prices of daily necessities increase. For instance, if you have put in $1,000, then by the time you withdraw it, it may be worth only $500. If a reasonable rate of interest is paid, then the money will not depreciate in value.

Another question is this. When a person is sick, can he withdraw a certain amount of money from the fund in order to look after his illness and see him through? Suppose he has no other member of the family who can look after him, and he may not have reached the age limit, and suppose, unfortunately, he dies of the sickness, what will happen to him?

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: The Member for Delta has asked whether the money paid into the C.P.F. will earn any interest. The answer is yes. At the present moment, the interest in the C.P.F. is at the rate of 5� per cent per annum, and we are going to increase it to 5�, per cent for the account in 1967.

As to the other question whether a man can withdraw his money if he is sick, the answer is again no. If he is sick and really destitute, I think our hospital facilities are so good that he can just get in and stay in a free ward. This is again another excuse to get the money out, and I do not think that should be allowed.

The Chairman: I think we have had enough debate on this topic. Mr Lim.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendments stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong ---

(2) That the sum to be 0901 be reduced by $10 head 1101.

(3) That the sum to be 0901 be reduced by $10 head 1103.

(4) That the sum to be 0901 be reduced by $10 head 1151.

The Chairman: Madam Chan, amendments (2) , (3) and (4) .

Madam Chan Choy Siong: Sir, I am not moving them.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1251.

This relates to the Registry of Citizenship. Mr Speaker, Sir, every week during my "Meet the people sessions", about 20 per cent of the applicants come up with problems relating to their citizenship applications. You can broadly divide the category of people into three. The first are those who have been in Singapore for a long time - 15 or 20 years - and who want to apply for citizenship. The second category are those whose parents have become Singapore citizens, whose brothers and sisters who were subsequently born after them were born in Singapore and are Singapore citizens. But unfortunately the eldest child was not born in Singapore but was born at the hospital in Johore Bahru. He came to Singapore within a month of his birth and he has been in Singapore ever since. He is not a Singapore citizen and he has applied for his citizenship. The third category are those students who want to pursue their higher education and apply for what is known as junior citizenship. In almost every one of these cases, they had been interviewed by the Registry of Citizenship from between six and eighteen months, and up to date they have not had any reply, either of rejection or acceptance. Can the Minister let us know whether some form of procedure can he devised so that people are categorised, and those people who ought to be given citizenship or ought to be considered as quickly as possible are considered first and some kind of decision is made in these cases.

7.30 p.m.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: The Member for Bukit Panjang has raised this matter about citizenship. It is a rather delicate and complicated matter. The granting of citizenship to a person is a very important matter. Citizenship in any country is not freely given. It confers certain rights and privileges on a person. In our case, it gives him the right to work, to apply for a house, to get places for his children in our schools. It ako imposes certain obligations on him to the State. We do not want citizens of convenience. There are people who want Singapore citizenship for obtaining travel documents. They always rush to the office and say that they want to have a passport and that they want out citizenship. There are also others who want citizenship to obtain social benefits like housing, education, public assistance and jobs. The Registrar of Citizens has to process every application for citizenship very carefully to determine that the applicant not only possesses the necessary residential qualification, but also that he is of good character and is prepared to be loyal to the Republic, and is not just a citizen of convenience. It takes time to investigate thoroughly each and every application for citizenship. Therefore, the delay in many cases is unavoidable.

It is also rather difficult to categorise, as the Member has suggested, because it is so difficult to determine the urgency of each case. So we would rather that they take their turn.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: Sir, I share the same sentiments as the Member for Bukit Panjang. In my "Meet the people sessions", I have 50 per cent of the people talking about citizenship. In his case, he has got only 20 per cent of the people trying to apply for citizenship. From all these cases we know that most of the applicants have applied for more than one year, or sometimes more than two years, without being granted citizenship. From what I know, they really meet the conditions stipulated and some members of their families are citizens. For instance, the applicant's father is a citizen whereas the mother may not be a citizen. So I hope the Minister can look into this situation and urge the Registry of Citizenship to pay special attention to this matter. Just as the Minister has said, with citizenship a person can have a lot of rights. Will it not give people a wrong impression because there is an increasing number of citizens? If there are more citizens in the making, then our Government will have to spend more money with the added burden of having to look after them. So we make use of this tactic of delaying to avoid this issue. Can the Minister clarify whether it is because of this that there is a delay in granting citizenship?

The Minister has said that the applications should go through a thorough investigation. But I would like to know whether, in actual fact, this has taken place, because sonic applicants have waited for so long and they have not even been called for interview. How do we know whether any actual investigations have been carried out? Can the Minister explain?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, as I will not be moving my amendment No. (6)* pertaining to the same subject, I would like to speak on amendment No. (5)+ now.

• Amendment No. (6) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 1251.

• Amendment No. (5) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1251.

I quite understand and appreciate the difficulties in obtaining citizenship as explained by the Hon. Minister for Labour. My two colleagues have brought up almost identical points and they are centred on the time it takes for a person to acquire his citizenship. We all know that citizenship is priceless in that it accords a holder all the privileges pertaining to the State he lives in. I have just one little point in addition to what the other two Members have brought up. I am given to understand that when a person, who is eligible to apply for Singapore citizenship, goes r0 the Registry of Citizenship to make a formal application, all he is given is a blank form and he is asked to pay a certain sum as stamp fee and told to come back much later. I would suggest that before such a form is handed to an applicant, an explanation is given to him as to what he is expected to do with it.

I am also given to understand that there have been cases where the officers in the Registry have been discourteous to the public. Of course, here again, Sir, I anticipate that the Minister will say, "Will the Member for Punggol name me one instance where such an incident happened?" I think I am quite prepared for it because one of my C.C.C, members was involved when he brought a friend along. It appears to me that it was not discourtesy but the attitude of the officers in the Registry, and I would like this to be rectified.

Furthermore, will it be possible to minimise any undue delay? I shall be grateful if the Minister will give details of the number of applications received by the Registry concerned and the number approved in respect of months.

Mr Ho See Beng: Sir, my complaint against the Registry of Citizenship is somewhat different. 1 think there is or there has been a controversy between the Registry of Citizenship and the immigration Department. A number of applicants for citizenship certificates apparently are able to meet the qualifications laid down in the Citizership Ordinance such as residential qualification, language test and so on and so forth. But the applicant has received a reply from the Registry of Citizeiship to the effect that he has got no family roots, which means that the applicant is a bachelor and, therefore, is not entitled to a citizenship certificate. On the other hand, Sir, I think you are aware that last Friday, the Minister of Defence, who is also in charge on immigration, stated that he is not going to allow young women or even women of 83 to come in. But the applicant for a citizenship certificate has his wife in China or in Hong Kong. Apparently under the circumstances, this applicant has to divorce his wife and get himself married to a local girl here before applying for a citizenship certificate because the Immigration Department will certainly refuse to allow his original wife to come into Singapore. How is this man going to establish his family roots? This is really very absurd.

Mr Lee Teck Him: (In Mandarin): Sir, allow me to say a few words. It is really very difficult for people to apply for citizenship. I do go to the Registry of Citizenship and ask the officials why so and so has applied for citizenship for so long and the matter is not finalised yet. But the reply given is that it is a C.I.D. matter. Because of this, the leople hate the C.I.D. The investigations of the C.I.D. are entirely wrong and have adversely affected many people. As a result, applicants find it difficult to get citizenship. So the people turn round and hate the P.A.P. Government for its inefficiency. I suggest that if the C.I.D. is incapable of investigating the character of the applicants, then I think it is better to hand over these duties to the Citizens' Consultative Committee concerned so that within one week the committee will be able to finish off this work of investigation. Some people have been waiting for four or five years and yet the reply given is that the matter has not been investigated yet. This being the case, why should the C.I.D. earn their living? The people will only hate the P.A.P. Government. I suggest that if the C.I.D. or the immigration Department cannot carry out their duties, then they had better hand over the duties to the Citizens' Consultative Conimittee which will be able to finish off the job in less than a week.

Also, those people from the Federation of Malaysia who do not have Singapore citizenship cannot come here to get married and cannot pay a visit to their parents. So the members of these families hate the P.A.P. Government. This state of affairs should be rectified. Facilities should be given to these people to make periodic visits here, say, two weeks or so. How can you disallow them to come here? This would be creating a very bad effect and would be strangling the Government's own neck. If people want to come here and get married, you should allow them to get married. Why do you delay people's auspicious occasions? What state of affairs is this? You say the Government is good. Wherein lies the goodness of the Government?

7.45 p.m.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Let me deal, first of all, with the complaint of the Member for Sembawang that he is plagued by non-citizens during his "Meet the people sessions". He has said that 50 per cent of the people coming to see him in these sessions are non-citizens asking for citizenship. I would have thought that Members elected by the citizens of Singapore are solely responsible to their electorate and that when they meet the people, they should spend most of their time with their electorate and not devote 20 per cent or 50 per cent of their time to non-citizens who do not have the vote. These people do not count at all when the ballot boxes are opened. So I just do not understand why Members are so excited over the non-citizens. Of course, we, as human beings, sympathise with them but we as elected Members also have our duties to our citizens who have elected us.

Mr Selvadurai: Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification. In many instances, the persons who come to see us are, in fact, Singapore citizens. Let nie give an illustration by way of amplification. What really happens is that a father comes to see me. He and his wife are Singapore citizens. Three of his children are also Singapore citizens because they were born in Singapore. But the fourth one is not a Singapore citizen because of the fortuituous circumstance in which he was born across the Causeway. The father wants to know wh this fourth son cannot be a Singapore citizen, although he has been in Singapore ever since one nionth after his birth. We must look after the interests of these people as well.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: For that matter, many of us have sisters, brothers and friends all over the Federation of Malaysia and, in fact, all over South-east Asia. Are we able to give citizenship to all of them? We may have a relative or a friend in Johore Bahru. Must we immediately give them Singapore citizenship just because we are Singapore citizens'?

The Member for Sembawang suspects that it may be due to the delaying tactics that we are adopting. But I can assure him that this is not the case, because the Citizenship Registry at present has a very small staff. In fact, the staff has not been increased for the last three or four years in spite of the increasing number of applicants. There are at present more than 159,000 noncitizens in Singapore holding blue identity cards, not counting those holding Federation identity cards. You cart just imagine how much tinie it will take for the staff to deal with all these people rushing in to get citizenship!

As to the question of rudeness in the Citizenship Registry raised by the Member for Punggol, I do not think the rtaff of the Registry are unduly discourteous. But I suspect that it is because they have to say 'No' all the time and that when they do so, their faces may look somewhat unpleasant and this may evoke an emotionally adverse reaction from the applicant. I do not think we can avoid that.

The Member for Tiong Bahru suggests that the delay was due to the C.I.D. -

Madam Chan Choy Siong rose -

Mr Jek Yeun Thong resumed his seat.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: Mr Speaker, Sir, we still have many Members who want to speak on the other subheads. But we have only ten minutes left before we adjourn. I wonder whether we will have time to speak on the other suhheads.

The Chairman: Madam Chan, the position is this. I have no power to stop any Member speaking until we reach guillotine time. I have made attempts to persuade Members to shorten their speeches in order to give others who want to speak an opportunity, and in reply they say, "Three minutes more," or "Two sentences more," but they go on speaking much longer. Last Friday, I faded to persuade Members. I see little point in trying now. I will let them speak until they have spoken for 15 minutes or we reach guillotine time. I will then enforce Standing Orders to the letter. Mr Jek.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am more frustrated than the Members themselves because I have prepared a lot of notes which I have not been able to disclose to Members!

Let me turn to the point made by the Member for Tiong Bahru. He suspects that the delay is due to the C.I.D. I do not think so. I do not think it is wise to let our Citizens' Consultative Committees handle all the citizenship investigations.

Mr Selvadurai: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Mr Ng Kah Ting is not moving his amendment No. (6)*.

• Amendment No. (6) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 1251.

Mr Chow Chiok Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, there are a few minutes left. May I take amendments (7)+ and (8)++ together, as the Member for Kampong Kembangan is not here to move amendment (8)?

++ Amendment No. (8) which also stood in the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi, reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1351.

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Chow Chiok Hock: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1281+.

I will also range over amendment (8)+.

• Amendment No. (5) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subheda 1251.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since the introduction of the new identity cards, many Singapore born citizens have lost their rights. For instance, those born in Singapore after 1948 received cards showing that they were British subjects. Possibly there were some who were born during the Japanese occupation, but their identity cards or birth certificates were lost. When these people went to exchange their old identity cards for new ones, the National Registration Office issued them with blue identity cards indicating that they are non-ciizens who have lost their citizenship rights. So I urge the Minister to look into the cases of those people who were born after 1948. If they can produce evidence to prove that they have not left Singapore during the last ten to twenty years, they should be issued with red identity cards so that they can obtain work permits. The blue identity cards were issued only at the beginning of last year, it has only been one year since the issue of the new identity cards. On the other hand, those born in the Federation -

The Chairman: Mr Chow, I do not want to cut you short now. But will you please try to listen to Madam Chan's plea?

Mr Chow Chiok Hock: Sir, I have only one or two sentences to complete my speech.

(In Mandarin): A number of citizens who have come from the Federation and stayed here for a certain period have been given work permits, but those who have stayed here for a longer period and who possess blue identity cards have not been able to get work permits. If we have already recognised them as permanent residents of Singapore and have issued them with blue identity cards, we must also let them have work permits so that they can make a living in Singapore.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: The only solution for those born in Singapore who hold blue identity cards because they do not have birth certificates is to apply for citizenship in order to get pink identity cards. I do not see any other possible solution for them, because they must prove that they were really born in Singapore in order to qualify for citizenship. If such proof is not available, I do not think there is any other way by which we can issue them with pink identity cards.

I regret to say that we cannot relax the regulations regarding the issue of work permits at the present moment. In view of the retrenchment of workers in the British Bases, the issue of work permits will be more strictly administered. I am afraid I have to say 'No' to the Member's plea, though very reluctantly. But this is something we have to do to ensure the survival of our citizens. The employment opportunities in Singapore are very limited, and if we do not confine them to our citizens, I am afraid Members will face more trouble during the elections.

Mr Chow Chiok Hock: I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (9)*, Mr Selvadurai. I am afraid there will be hardly time for you to rise.

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ho See Beng.

Mr Selvadurai: Perhaps you will allow the Member for Delta to speak first.

The Chairman: Madam Chan.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Thank you very much. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0901 be reduced by $100.*

• The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ho See Beng.

Everybody knows that the P.A.P. Government is a pro-labour Government and because of this it had received the support of the people of the middle and lower income groups from 1959 to 1963. It has issued a series of booklets outlining its policies in various fields and I quote:

'Though the P.A.P. Government is a pro-labour Government ---

8.00 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Moment of Interruption. Would Members like to continue with the debate on the Ministry of Labour tomorrow at the cost of the debate on the Industrial Arbitration Courts?

Some hon. Members indicated assent.

The Chairman: There are about ten minutes left for this Head tomorrow. It is up to hon. Members to decide how to share that time among themselves. So I will not conclude the debate on the Ministry of Labour. I will deal with the point first thing tomorrow afternoon.

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

The Minister for Culture and Social Affafrs (Inche Othman Bin Wok): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for 1968, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Speaker: So be it.