STANDING ORDERS OF PARLIAMENT (Amendment)

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Deputy Prime Minister whether he is aware that certain sections in the Standing Orders of Parliament are irrelevant, and whether he will take steps to amend them in order to bring them into conformity with our independent status.

The Deputy Prime Minister (Dr Toh Chin Chye): Mr Speaker, there is a Standing Orders Committee and if the Member for Punggol will write a memorandum to you or to the Standing Orders Committee and indicate which sections of the Standing Orders are irrelevant or out of date, I am quite sure the Committee will look into the matter and make the necessary amendment; I, for one, am not particularly aware of sections in the Standing Orders which are irrelevant at all.

Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Deputy Prime Minister aware that since the Standing Orders were drawn up, they have been amended several times? But subsequent to our achieving independent status and the passing of several Acts, namely, the Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1965, and the Republic of Singapore Inde pendence Act (No. 9 of 1965), I believe there are consequential amendments necessary to be made to the Standing Orders. For example, in the Standing Orders, under the section "Order of Business", one sees "Yang di-Pertuan Negara's Address" and "Messages from the Yang di-Pertuan Negara". I would say that, in order to keep our Standing Orders up to date, amendments are necessary.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: I admire the Member for Punggol for being up to date in this sense, but I would say that, as far as principles regarding the conduct of business in the House are concerned, there has been no necessity to make any significant changes. As the Member himself has pointed out, the Standing Orders are reviewed from time to time to bring them up to date according to conditions prevailing in the House.

The references that the Member for Punggol has pointed out require only minor amendments with regard to nomenclature, and I am quite sure. Mr Speaker, that you yourself can handle that, and that the Government Printer will only be too obliged to bring the present Standing Orders up to date in the light of the new Constitution.

Mr Tang See Chim (Choa Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, you will recall that during the Budget debate in Committee of Supply, time and again we ran into difficulties about guillotine times. Would the Deputy Prime Minister not agree that there is now occasion for extending the time for the Budget debate in Committee of Supply?

Dr Toh Chin Chye: There may be a good reason if the Member for Choa Chu Kang can argue before the Standing Orders Committee in order to revise the times now allocated for the Budget debate in Committee of Supply. It is quite true that when the present times were drawn up, it was in the light of the situation when much of the business of the House and of the Government came under Malaysian Central Government control. Therefore, we found it was unnecessary to spend that much time as we had done before we joined Malaysia. However, now that all of the powers have reverted to the Singapore Government, it may be necessary for us to look into the matter. If the Member for Choa Chu Kang or, for that matter, any other Member of the House, would like to send in memoranda to the Standing Orders Committee, I am quite sure we will all together be able to bring up to date the Standing Orders to a state which will fit the present times.