PENSIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

3.38 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr Tang See Chim): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Civil Service Salaries Commission, under the chairmanship of Mr G. J. Harvey, recommended in its report that provision be made in the Pensions Ordinance for the premature retirement of an officer or groups of officers under special circumstances where, to quote the Commission, "there can be no possible shadow of criticism of the officers concerned."

There have been instances where it is clearly in the interest of the service and of the officers concerned to allow them to retire. Under the law as it stands, such retirements can only be effected under the provision relating to retirements in the public interest. This is not satisfactory because, through usage over the years, there is a stigma attached to retirements in the public interest. To retire officers under this clause simply because of the absence of a more appropriate one, results in casting an unfair slur on the officers concerned. The amendment under consideration is to rectify the situation by providing for premature retirements that are not made on disciplinary grounds.

This Bill seeks to amend the Pensions Ordinance to allow an officer who has completed not less than 15 years of service to be retired. In order to protect the interests of officers, such retirements may only be allowed with the consent of the President on the specific advice of the Cabinet. An officer retiring in such circumstances would be eligible for normal retirement benefits based on the number of years of service he has put in.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.41 p.m.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Parliamentary Secretary enlighten me on this point? I wish to know whether a serving officer with 15 years' service can retire under this Bill in order to secure a better job?

Mr Tang See Chim: No, Sir. An officer can only be retired if it is in the interest of the service as well as the officer himself. If he wishes to retire in order to secure a better job, such retirement would not be in the interest of the service.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Tang See Chim].

Bill considered in Committee.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

3.43 p.m.

Clause 1 -

The Chairman: There is a note,

In page 1, line 4, to leave out "1969" and insert "1970".

That will be done.

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 -

Question proposed, "That clause 2 stand part of the Bill."

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Under the Pensions Ordinance, 1956, a serving officer may be pensioned off in the public interest. May I ask whether there is any difference between retirement under that Ordinance and the present amendment Bill? If there is no difference, then what purpose does this Bill serve to amend the Pensions Ordinance?

Mr Tang See Chim: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Anson had not been paying attention to what I said on the Second Reading of this Bill. I said quite clearly that retirement in the public interest carries a certain stigma. It is presumed that the officer who was retired in the public interest was not up to his task and was therefore asked to retire "in the public interest".

There have been very clear instances where it was in the interest of the officers concerned as well as in the interest of the service that they should be retired. But under the existing Ordinance, that is not possible because an officer can only retire on reaching the retiring age or be retired in the public interest. The purpose of this amending Bill, therefore, is to make retirement possible for an officer whose behaviour cannot be criticised. In the words of the Commission: "there can be no possible shadow of criticism of the officers concerned."

3.45 p.m.

The purpose of this Bill is that where it is in the interest of the service as well as the officer concerned that he should be retired, he could be so retired under this Bill without any stigma attached to his retirement.

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, can the Parliamentary Secretary state whether under this amending Bill we can deal with those officers who are inefficient?

Mr Tang See Chim: Although the Member's remarks were on the principle of the Bill and should have been raised at the Second Reading, I do not mind answering him. The answer is no. For those officers who do not perform their duties efficiently, they can still be retired in the public interest under the provisions of the old law. But the present amending provision is to enable officers to retire when their retirement is, in fact, in their interest as well as in the interest of the service, with no stigma whatsoever attaching to such retirement.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.