PRESIDENT'S SPEECH Debate on the Address (Fourth Day)

Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [30th July, 1971],

`That the following Address in reply to the speech of the President be agreed to : -

"We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the Second Session of this Parliament.".'.- [Dr. Chiang Hai Ding].

Question again proposed.

2.40 p.m.

Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon (Tiong Bahru): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, yesterday just before the adjournment I was saying that the President had in his speech commended the Government for its achievements in the field of housing. Through the agency of the Housing and Development Board, it is planning to build, for the period 1971 to 1975, one flat every 26 minutes, thus solving the housing problem of our people. From now on the Board is aiming to build 20,000 units each year so that in five years' time it will have built 100,000 units for our people. In addition to "quantity" housing, the Board will now pay attention to "quality" housing, that is, improvement in the design of the flats, and there will also be emphasis on the comfort of living in a healthy environment. It is anticipated that by 1975 there will altogether be about 1.2 million people staying in Housing and Development Board fiats; that is to say, another half a million people will have been moved into the Board's houses. In this respect, we can be both pleased and proud of the Board's plans and achievements.

However, I am now reminded of certain problems relating to the allocation of flats. In my "meet-the-people" sessions, I hear complaints from my constituents that they had applied to the Housing and Development Board to rent the two-room or three-room flats without getting any allocation, although they had waited for two or three years. After repeated inquiries, the reply given was that all the newly-built two-room or three-room flats were mainly meant to be sold direct to members of the public under the home ownership scheme. Even if there are occasional vacancies in such flats, they will first be allotted to families affected by resettlement. People who are staying in one-room flats have to seek larger accommodation if the membership in the family has increased. However, on applying to the Board for larger flats, their requests will usually be met with a similar answer. There will also be a long delay of two or three years before a reply is given. Sometimes no reply is given. Even if they wish to buy such flats they will have to register afresh and queue up. There is no priority or concession for them at all. At the earliest, they can get a new flat only after one or two years' waiting. Usually, if everything goes well, they will be able to get new accommodation after waiting for three or four years. No wonder there are complaints all round! I feel that the Housing and Development Board should first clear up these "old accounts".

As regards those who are affected by urban renewal, rural redevelopment and resettlement schemes, the Government has announced that, because of our improved economic situation and a better capacity to pay the people affected by them, the rate of compensation will now be raised to a more rational level. Although this is good news, these people have to live in a different environment, and whether they have to change their careers or resume their old trade, the Government should make it a point to give them some sort of technical assistance in addition to financial aid or compensation. We know that usually in the past, in order to clear up a piece of land for redevelopment purposes within a stipulated time, the people staying on the land were cleared out by the Resettlement Department in a haphazard manner. Once the people had been cleared out of the site, the move was regarded as a success by the department concerned. Whether or not these resettled people can live on the new site is nobody's business. As a result, we received complaints from these people that long after they had moved into the new site there was still no water supply and electricity, let alone other sanitary facilities. Even in their newly-settled areas, they were usually interfered with by other Government departments which accused them of putting up illegal structures without sanitary facilities or of not having obtained any permits from the Fire Brigade. Some of them have been asked to remove again very soon after resettlement. All this shows the result of insufficient care taken by the authorities in dealing with people affected by resettlement. In respect of industrialisation, we have the Economic Development Board to help the industrialists set up factories. Similarly, I hope the Government will give the people affected by resettlement some technical assistance to help them rebuild their homesteads and avoid unnecessary loss or wastage.

From the start the President has said in his speech that after six years of independence we have shown that Singapore is viable. She is gradually developing into a centre for manufacturing, servicing, communications and transportation.

In spite of the total withdrawal of British troops, which will be completed by the end of the year, facts show that we not only will not have large-scale unemployment, but, on the contrary, because of economic progress, will be short of labour, particularly skilled technical workers. Therefore, the Government has adopted a more liberal policy in regard to the question of issuing work permits to non-citizens. This new policy is necessary in view of our national service policy which has absorbed many of our youths. Many non-citizens have been engaged in these jobs instead, so that economic production and growth may be maintained. However, we should consider whether or not the issuance of too many work permits to non-citizens will affect the employment opportunities of our own citizens after they have completed their term of national service. In spite of Government legislation for their protection, at present there are still some employers who employ discharged national servicemen in an opportunistic manner because they have no confidence in them. So the Government should try to adopt proper measures to deal with this situation so that employers will have more confidence in discharged national servicemen.

Improvement will be made in the fields of transportation and communications to achieve efficiency and speed. In view of the increasing number of vehicles on the road, the Government has plans to improve the traffic system, and an evaluation of a mass rapid transit system for Singapore will also be made. However, with the increase in the number of vehicles and the increase in the number of accidents on the road, the question of insurance cover for vehicles and accidents is also important. There was a case of a youth who was knocked down by a car and half his body was paralysed. The court awarded the youth about $100,000 as compensation. But the youth could not get a single cent because the driver who had knocked him down had given false particulars when applying for a policy from the insurance company. On this ground, the insurance company disclaimed liability and refused to pay the youth. Similar cases have happened before. Therefore, I would like to urge the Government to work out a scheme whereby victims of accidents or their families can get the compensation due to them.

In the Presidential speech, mention has also been made of the reorganisation and improvement of our social welfare services. This is, of course, good news. But I would like to see a review of the scheme of public assistance paid to the poor and the sick by the Social Welfare Department. According to the present scheme, the guardian parent of the sick or poor can get $21 per month, the spouse can get $10, and those children under 16 years of age can get $5 each, subject to a maximum of $60 per month per family. We know that these rates were formulated in 1961. Ten years have passed. Following urban renewal and social development, many people have moved to Housing Board flats. The cost of living has also risen as a result. This meagre sum of money is not enough to pay for food and rental. It can pay for only one item. So I hope the Government can review the present scheme of public assistance in order that our economic growth may benefit all our people.

Sir, I support the motion of thanks by the Member for Ulu Pandan.

2.51 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Affairs (Mr Chan Chee Seng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I consider it a great privilege to be able to take this opportunity to express our sincere appreciation and thanks to the President for his most timely statement touching on the work of the Ministry of Social Affairs. We heartily welcome and endorse His Excellency's statement.

I will now elaborate on the points raised by the Member for Toa Payoh.

My Ministry has maintained an ongoing review of existing social welfare facilities and programmes to ensure that their development is in keeping with national needs and aspirations. Towards this end, the Minister for Social Affairs and I have personally visited the various governmental and voluntary welfare organisations and have held a series of meetings and discussions with the officials concerned. While we are generally satisfied that existing welfare services do reflect the preventive, remedial and developmental functions in social welfare, there appear to be still a few areas of need which may justify the intensification of efforts or the introduction of new services, as, for example, the welfare of the very young and the very old.

I should stress, however, that the material and manpower resources at present available do not permit a rapid expansion of existing social welfare programmes; rather the aim should be an ordered transformation of existing welfare services into well-organised operations involving a maximum of community participation. This clearly calls for a social development plan with well-defined objectives. It is proposed to set up a Training and Research Section within the Social Welfare Department which will concentrate on the production of a long-term plan for social welfare development. Apart from working out the strategies for timely social intervention and provision of services consonant with demonstrated needs, it is also intended to examine the desirability and feasibility of decentralising some of the existing welfare services for the convenience of those living in major residential areas.

In the meantime, where the situation warrants it, existing services will be expanded or new services introduced. Already the number of creches operated by the Social Welfare Department has been increased to 11 - the latest being the Jurong Town Creche which was officially opened on 19th June, 1971. Another new creche in the shopping complex of Toa Payoh New Town is expected to be ready by early 1972. The Government is also considering the need for new creches in other townships such as Queenstown, Woodlands and Telok Blangah.

Construction of the new Junior Approved School and Remand Home for the training and rehabilitation of young offenders is expected to be completed in September 1971.

Two new dormitories in Woodlands Home with accommodation for 136 elderly female persons were officially opened On 2nd August, 1971, and two other similar dormitories will be built shortly to complete the extension project in this Home. With these extensions, the Woodlands Home for the Aged will have accommodation for 840 elderly persons.

More realistic training facilities are also being introduced in all the Welfare Homes with a view to enabling the residents of these Homes to fit themselves appropriately into the world of work on their discharge from the Homes. As far as possible, residents will be provided with vocational training commensurate with their interests and aptitudes so as to equip them with the necessary skills to meet the needs of industries. Aftercare work is also being strengthened by the introduction of an employment placement service for the discharged residents.

A rehabilitation service, including employment placement, has recently been introduced for handicapped persons. Consideration is also being given to extending the existing Fostering Scheme to provide for more foster homes for neglected children. Improvements are also being made in respect of adoption and family counselling work in the Social Welfare Department.

The question of providing institutional facilities for non-destitute senior citizens on payment has been carefully studied by officials of my Ministry and the Social Welfare Department. As priority has to be given for the care of the needy aged, our present thinking is that the provision of homes to cater for the elderly citizens who belong to the average middle class and who can pay for such accommodation and services should best be left to the private sector.

2.56 p.m.

Inche Abdul Aziz Karim (Kallang): Mr Speaker, Sir, we came to be independent in a strange way. Firstly, independence came by merger with the Federation of Malaysia and later, on 9th August, 1965, with our separation from the Federation, we experienced our second independence. I read the President's opening words in his speech to Parliament to mean just this. Mr Speaker, Sir, whilst it is common for nations to extend their domains outwards, it is not quite understood why it should happen the other way round as far as Singapore was concerned on that fateful day, 9th August, 1965. The other new states of the Federation were warned of dire consequences if they thought fit to go the Singapore way. In the case of Singapore, it faced awesome troubles if it did not separate. Was the action against Singapore meant to squeeze the life out of it, or was it simple statesmanship? Whatever were the considerations, Singapore was jettisoned to fight for its own survival. Was economic ruin inevitable, and social discontent and political upheavals to be a commonplace affair? Was political independence expected to last six months, 0 six years for that matter?

It should give us great pleasure to know that the President has forthrightly and confidently stated that our viability, our ability to progress, and our determination to remain independent is in good state. The President's words reflect the heartfelt aspirations of the people of our Republic and the motivations for our patriotic actions.

Mr Speaker, Sir, whilst it is important to engage ourselves in economic development, it is nevertheless imperative and vital that we also concentrate our resources and energies on building up our defence capability. Independence is futile if a nation has no resolve and capacity to fight to protect its national sovereignty and integrity. Our Republic with its population of two million should have its entire people ready to serve the country in its hour of need. I therefore wholeheartedly and fervently support the Government's policy of making use of all the precious time available until the withdrawal of the British forces to intensify the building up of a reliable defence capability which can be reckoned with both by friend and foe. In particular, our ground forces should possess the greatest striking capability to occupy strategic ground to ensure the flow of the life-blood of our island, should circumstances demand this action. To achieve this objective, sufficient support of our ground forces with armoured vehicles and air elements should be readily available. However, it must not be forgotten that our 70-mile coastline needs constant vigilance against infiltration in the form of illegal immigration and piracy. I must express my concern over the gap in our security and would urge the Government to take all measures necessary to overcome occurrences of this nature.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I note the Government is paying due attention to increasing our water resources. This is an area of strategic importance that should be taken care of. Should we be made anxious by the vagaries of nature and the whims and fancies of man? Arising from this point, I think it is important for every citizen to realize that water is precious and that things should never be taken for granted. I would consider it just as important to prevent the pollution of our water resources. Mr Speaker, Sir, you may recollect that I have somewhat strenuously called on the Government to take all possible measures to keep our water resources pollution free. I am happy my appeals have not fallen on deaf ears. Therefore, the Government's intention to sewer the whole of Singapore, so that all the dirty polluted household water will go into sewers, is a good proposition. The pre-treatment of industrial water to reduce pollution is similarly good practice for industrial countries to adopt. Therefore, it is an opportune time for the Government to launch a campaign to bring about a realisation amongst the people of the strategic importance of water.

Next I wish to deal with the interests of our second line of defence - our citizen workers. It must not be forgotten that it was on the backs of the workers that the Government came to power time and time again, and for that matter the People's Action Party had been the most appropriate vehicle for the workers to achieve a fair and square deal.

I am happy to note that it will be the Government's future policy to take all possible measures necessary to prevent the loss of valuable skilled hands through work accidents by ensuring that basic safety and health standards are provided and maintained in factories and other places of work. In view of the fact that education and training are time-consuming and costly, it is imperative and necessary to prevent further losses of valuable skills.

I think the Government's interest in this direction, although overdue by a couple of years, is not too late. To achieve this, we should have a `supremo' of some seniority governing this field. The Government's intention to strengthen the Factories Inspectorate with suitably qualified officers to supervise and enforce industrial safety is welcomed. I recall in March this year the then Minister for Labour announced that 30-odd officers would be added to the Factories Inspectorate. In this regard, it might be recalled that I had earlier in December 1969 urged the Government to reinforce the Factories Inspectorate to fully enforce the law. To my regret, my request was turned down. I think I have been proven right that the Factories Inspectorate should be strengthened and that it should be reorganised to be a more effective enforcement arm.

The other proposal that I made was that the Factories Act, which was introduced in 1958 before industrialization was thought of, should undergo major overhauling. The reply was that the Factories Act was sufficiently comprehensive for safeguarding the health and lives of workers.

However, it is now realised how far short are the powers of the Chief Inspector of Factories, so much so that measures have been taken to strengthen his hands soon. It is my humble opinion that he should be a very senior man, comparable, say, to the Director of Public Works, in the civil service hierarchy. He should be properly guided by a policy to eliminate those establishments which are health and safety hazards to those working in them. He should have wide discretionary powers to call for the punishment of employers who callously and criminally endanger the lives of their workers. Is this not an economic offence of the worst kind?

A case in point is that of the Soon Seng Battery Plates Manufacturing Company (Private) Limited which refused to comply with the requests of the Chief Inspector of Factories to prevent lead pollution and thus directly led to a young factory girl of fifteen years of age to suffer from lead poisoning. It was found that the factory had a lead atmospheric content 745 times above the safe standard.

Before this girl's case came to the knowledge of the competent authority, another worker, a male of 36 years of age, was admitted to hospital in December 1969 from lead poisoning. The Head of the Industrial Health Unit visited the factory. He then carried out blood and urine tests on 29 workers, the results of which showed that seven had severe signs of lead absorption bordering on lead poisoning.

The manager was then advised to carry out certain preventive measures to overcome the possibility of cases of lead poisoning. The Head of the Industrial Health Unit reported the case to the Chief Inspector of Factories and an inspector visited the factory. The latter confirmed the conditions as reported. About one year after the discovery of the first case, another visit was made and it was found that preventive measures had still not been implemented. Seventeen days after that visit, the 15 year-old girl was hospitalised. She had worked there for only one month and had been poisoned. Blood and urine tests were carried out on 22 workers and four more showed signs of severe lead absorption bordering on lead poisoning.

I have taken the opportunity to cite this recent case because I wish to question the Government whether it would feel inhibited in taking the logical action of punishing employers who flagrantly flout the law. In the case cited the prosecution asked for no punishment. The manager, who appeared on his company's behalf, admitted all the facts read out in Court. The Court ordered him to comply with all measures listed in the Factories Act within a month or face prosecution again. At the very least, I thought the factory should have been closed down temporarily for the owner to comply with the licensing and registration of the factory, and the compliance of some health and safety provisions laid down by the Court. The factory was not registered and licensed.

The next day, 9th July, 1971, the manager's photograph appeared in the Straits Times with a terribly happy grin.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that this factory is not the only unlicensed and unregistered factory. I have just received information that there is another factory in the same neighbourhood which is unlicensed and unregistered. Why is it that so lenient a view and posture is taken by the competent authority? Is the Ministry of Labour working under a constrained policy of protecting investment at all costs?

In Japan, which we are sometimes asked to emulate, a girl suffering from cadmium poisoning plunged herself under a moving train to relieve herself of bodily pains which she could stand no more. The Japanese Prime Minister tendered his sympathies and apologised tearfully in Parliament and announced the payment of compensation to the bereaved family. I hope we will not have a similar occurrence and performance in our Parliament. Compensation removes some financial hardship for the bereaved family, but it is no compensation for the loss of a dear one.

However, it is gratifying that our Prime Minister has taken a personal interest to combat pollution of our air and waterways. Under his direction we hope the Anti-Pollution Unit will eliminate, if not all, then most of the health hazards of pollutants. I am happy that the Government is wasting no precious time after early warning was given in Parliament in 1969. As the problem of pollution is of so vital importance to the general public, I think the Government should report to Parliament from time to time on the matter. The importance which the Government attaches to this problem is evident from the recent appointment of the Head of the Anti-Pollution Unit as Head of the Public Health Division at the Ministry of Health.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the addendum to the President's speech indicated that air pollution in our industrial estates is increasing. If we fail to take urgent preventive and corrective measures fn Jurong Town and others, I feel we could suffer the same fate as Los Angeles or Tokyo. The first sufferers and victims would be our poor workers who stay in these estates.

Industrialization and urbanization also take their toll of human lives. In the construction field the number of industrial accidents has risen to such serious proportions as to make it necessary for the Government to introduce the Building Operations and Works of Engineering Construction Regulations which Parliament approved on 30th July, 1971. These regulations, if implemented firmly, could go a long way to remove all possible known hazards in the industry. In regard to these safety regulations, the competent authority is the Chief Building Surveyor. In regard to safety regulations at sand and granite quarries the safety regulations applicable are embodied in the Sand and Quarries Act which is the jurisdiction of the Director of Public Works. In regard to safety regulations in factories, shipyards and other places of work, the competent authority is the Chief Inspector of Factories. The control of silicosis among granite quarry workers is a matter for the Chief Inspector of Factories. Mr Speaker, Sir, it can be seen that if the competent authorities in the various departments are guided by different policies, it is possible that safety regulations may be enforced with different emphasis. It is my sincere view that a consolidation of the various laws mentioned and unmentioned could be a more convenient means of administering safety regulations. A case in point is that any member of the public could walk into a building under construction, or a construction site, without permission if he is willing to take the risk. This should never be allowed to happen. Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand that when the Government published the Building Operations and Works of Engineering Construction Regulations in March this year, the competent authority, in this case the Chief Building Surveyor himself, was not aware that he was the authority to administer these regulations. He could deny it anyway.

However, as Chairman of the N.T.U.C. Occupational Health and Safety Committee, I must say the Government has shown great interest in the health and safety of the workers. The Government's concern in this respect is demonstrated by the introduction of work safety laws and an increase in the staff of the Factories Inspectorate. The Government's concern is clearly expressed by the President in his opening speech. It is one of the most dominating features of the policy of the Ministry of Labour.

The Workmen's Compensation Act will be amended to provide for three times the present compensation rate to meet the contingencies in the case of death and total physical incapacity. There will be provision for the payment of compensation to those who are afflicted by occupational diseases. However, compensation should not be 4 desired thing. The purpose of compensation rates should be a deterrent to employers not to be negligent. As it is. $7,200 awarded in the case of death, and $9,600 for permanent incapacity, is chicken feed. This will make the worst employers disregard safety rules and regulations as they feel that it does not matter when labour is cheap and workmen's compensation is cheaper still.

Mr Speaker, Sir, on 30th July. 1971. I had occasion to cite the cases of accidents at the Mandarin Hotel Construction site and at Chartered Industries, where workers downed tools after their co-workers died in industrial accidents. These were unorganised workers. The conditions under which they labour are seldom favourable and conducive for them to take retaliatory action against unscrupulous employers. Nevertheless, they vented their anger on the employer by militantly stopping work unless their safety was ensured. I salute them again and would urge all workers to work safely and to care for the enforcement of safety regulations.

I think there should be provisions to make it mandatory to the establishment of safety committees in factories and other places of work. The Government should also consider the establishment of a council of industrial safety and health to advise the Government on matters pertaining to industrial safety, and also act as a watchdog to see that the relevant safety laws are implemented by the various Government departments.

I am pleased to hear the statement from the Government that it is conscious of the sacrifices and contributions made by labour towards rapid economic growth, and has urged employers who have been making exceptional profits to pay better bonuses in recognition of the workers' contribution to the present economic prosperity. There is an economic boom and the employers have made profits. All too often, few employers pay anything more than what the law requires them to do so. It is still my opinion now, just as it was at the time Parliament debated the Employment Act in 1968, that the question of bonus must not be a restricted negotiable item. The denial of the negotiation rights of workers to share the fruits of their labour is a back-kick in the teeth on the democratic rights of labour to free collective bargaining.

I would like to thank the President for his speech and look forward to the day when our defence build-up will reach its optimum and a greater share of our revenue will be used for education, health and social services.

I support the motion of the Member for Ulu Pandan.

3.21 p.m.

The Minister for Culture (Mr Jek Yeun Thong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to associate myself with the motion standing in the name of the Member for Ulu Pandan. It is gratifying to note that almost every Member has in his speech, in this debate, touched on the need to adapt to changes occurring around us. This shows that we are still politically alert and that our senses are not numbed by the comparative comfort and affluence that we have achieved in the past years. History is nothing but a record of changing circumstances. It is important that we should not only try to bring about changes in our society for the greatest benefit of our people, but we must also be constantly aware of the changes around us and be prepared to take action to adapt to them. To do the former, that is, to bring about changes in our society, it is necessary for us to convince the people that whatever changes we seek to introduce are for the ultimate good of our people. It is in their interest that we have so acted. In this respect, there is nothing more convincing than the past record of the P.A.P. We have been in power for exactly twelve years now and throughout that twelve-year period, in the ups and downs of our fortunes, one thing is very clear. We have not done anything which is not for the interest of the people, To us, everything is for the people. There has been no consideration for our own self-interest. And to correct the expression used by the Member for Kallang just now, we did not come into office on the backs of the workers. We never sat on their backs. We came to power with the support of the workers.

Inche Abdul Aziz Karim: Figuratively speaking!

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: As to the latter, the need to be aware of the changes occurring around us, there is one thing we should always bear in mind, that is, in the midst of the turbulent changes in this region, one thing must never be allowed to change, and that is the independent identity of our country and our people. This is the objective which keeps us going in our fight for survival and for a better material life. Once it is gone, our will to survive will be rapidly eroded, and Singapore will revert back to a fishing `village and this time the fishing village will be poorer than the one Stamford Raffles found 150 years ago, because the sea water around us is much more polluted than before and there is less fish ip the water. It is therefore necessary that we should pool all our resources and stiffen our will to fight the under-current forces which are trying to pull our people apart. So far, we have been able to achieve certain successes on the economic front, because we have been acting as one people. But the moment the divisive forces take over, all our efforts will come to a standstill. Our people will be embroiled in endless tights and quarrels, with very little time for work. This is not what we want. And we should use all the powers that we have to stop certain persons from trying to push us towards that direction.

Sometimes it may be good to be an ally of a great power, to have a big brother behind you. But there is always the phenomenon called the gravitational pull in the world of physics. The closer a smaller object moves towards a bigger mass, the greater the gravitational pull exerted on the smaller object by the bigger mass, until eventually the smaller object crashes into the bigger mass and the two become one, and there is no more of the smaller one. We should therefore resist the temptation of moving too close to any great power, whether it is for prestigious, protect ional or sentimental reasons. A balance must be maintained in our efforts to remain a free agent in the international arena.

Between now and May next year, we will be able to witness a period of great changes in this region. The President of the United States is going to Peking to meet Chou En-lai. They will be playing a game of chess on the huge chessboard which is Asia. The nations in the Asian continent, big and small, are the pieces on this chess-board. Whatever we do, we must try to avoid becoming a pawn in other people's game of chess. It is true that we have no means to influence the great powers when they make decisions, and whatever they decide concerning other countries may have far-reaching effects on us. But the fact still remains that if we are to get the greatest benefit out of this unprecedented change in the international climate, we should not commit ourselves too early to any side, and, best of all, should not commit ourselves at all.

There is no doubt that the international scene is changing as a result of China's new policy, and if we must respond to these changes, we should do so in a dignified manner and in the best interest of our country, not just because it is the fashion of the day and that other people are doing the same thing. We should not allow ourselves to be rushed onto the band-wagon. It is important that we should have friendly relations with all the countries in the world, and having friendly relations with China has always been one of our aims. But it is unrealistic, and even foolish, to expect that having good relations with China will solve all our problems. When a great power acts, it does so in its own interest. All considerations for the interest of other countries or parties are just coincidental and are part of its moves to improve its international standing. Our immediate problem is and has always been the Communist threat in our midst. From the long-term point of view, the armed struggle of the M.C.P, in the jungles of northern Malaysia will have a very serious bearing on the security of our country. It is foolish to believe that having friendly relations with China will cause the M.C.P, to abandon their fight in the jungles, or our local Communists to give up their so-called "outside Parliament" struggle. We must therefore watch very carefully the developments both inside and immediately outside Singapore. Right now, the mouth-piece of the M.C.P., the Voice of Malayan Revolution Radio, has increased its power, output and frequencies. It can only do this with the help of a great power sympathetic to its cause. So I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions as to whether or not having close relations with China, or any great power, will help us to solve our immediate problems. What is important here is that we should not allow our wish to have closer and friendlier relations with China to jeopardise our efforts to curb the local Communists in their mischievous deeds to turn our society into a lawless one.

The pace must be set by the elected government of the day. If there is going to be a change of policy, that policy, whether foreign or domestic, must be decided by us here, the representatives of the people. However, there are some people who believe very foolishly that they also have that right to decide for the people. They think that because they are controlling the mass media, the newspapers, they should have the right to influence the people, who will in turn influence the policy of the Government. We must state here very emphatically that they do not have that right. They represent only themselves and they speak only with their own voices, whereas we speak here with the voices of the people and with the authority of the electorate behind us. These men are fond of saying, "We, the people." But we must ask, who are the people? Are they the people who elected us, or do they just consist of newspaper owners and editorial writers? it is one thing to reflect the views of the people in a paper and to report truthfully what is going on in Singapore and in the world. But it is definitely another thing trying to mount a campaign by omitting certain things and exaggerating others in order to force the Government to change its course to suit the taste or the purpose of the owner of the paper. The Government is the one to decide which way the country should be heading and it is then for the press to assist in explaining why that course has to be taken. The dissenting voice should be heard, but it must he in proportion to the views of other people and it should not be exaggerated. This is the kind of relationship we would like to see between the Government and the press.

There has been a lot of talk about the freedom of the press. But we must be frank and realistic. Singapore has never had freedom of the press as it is understood in the Western world. Making comparisons with the so-called freedom of the press in other countries, particularly the West, is misleading. The circumstances of the press in these countries are very much different from those in Singapore. For instance, no one is allowed to run a Communist newspaper here. The last one was closed down 20 years ago during the emergency. A few persons who now write for newspapers here are very fond of reminding the readers of the turbulent years in the fifties. But in spite of all this, the restriction against Communist newspapers still stands. The organ of the Barisan Sosialis, the Chen Sien Pau, is a different matter. It is deliberately allowed to carry on because we want the people to see for themselves how foolish the lines of the Barisan Sosialis can be. It also serves as a constant reminder of the Communist threat in our midst. In this case, we also have to be frank. We are tolerating it because its circulation is small, reaching only a small section of the people, particularly the die-hards of the Barisan Sosialis who are dwindling in number. But the moment it becomes a mass circulation daily, it would be a different thing. We will then have to deal with it as a security problem.

It is, therefore, futile to try to draw a comparison between the case of the New York Times and the case of the newspapers in Singapore. There is no similarity between the two. It is a waste of time writing endless editorials here harping on the freedom of the press with the model of the New York Times in mind. In the first place, we do not have such traditions. In the second place, in the United States riots can happen every day and everywhere, and yet the country remains stable and prosperous. But in Singapore, one bloody riot will wreck the whole country. We have been responsible for bringing about the present good order in society and the modest prosperity for the people. We are definitely not going to sit idle and watch our achievements being cancelled out by poisonous writings in the papers.

After all, how many countries in the world can afford the luxury of unlimited freedom of the press? Or is it a myth that there is such a thing called freedom of the press? In Russia, in China, and in other Communist countries, the press is part of the propaganda machinery of the state. The press serves the interest of the Communist regime. It may be argued here that since the Communist party is the owner of the press and the party has the greatest freedom to do whatever it wants, including the use of the press to achieve its political purposes, therefore, freedom of the press in its truest sense exists in Communist countries. But, I do not think this is the kind of freedom that the press wants in Singapore.

In the case of the older countries with established social orders, or, as the Communists would like to call them, the capitalist countries such as Britain, France, the United States and so on, the case is slightly different, but the fact still remains that even in these countries there is no unlimited freedom of the press in terms of a blank cheque where journalists can say what they like. In these countries, the newspapers and other mass media are controlled by big financial groups. In almost every one of these countries there exists a hard core of people who form the establishment, or, to use a Communist terminology, the ruling class. The people working in the press share the views of the establishment. They have the same social values, tastes and outlook on life. The members of the establishment do not belong to just one political party. They have no party lines. They can be found in all the major political parties and in all walks of life and invariably hold very high positions. So political parties may come and go in these countries, but the establishment ensures that its views and social values prevail. These are reflected in their press. All newspapers must toe the line of the establishment and those which do not are subtly dealt with, not by the withdrawal of the printing licence, as we have done so in the case of the Singapore Herald, but by the quiet and effective withdrawal of advertisement and financial support. There may exist one or two small newspapers, Communist or otherwise, which contain drastically opposing views. But they are merely tolerated there, just as we are tolerating the Barisan newspaper here. They also serve as trappings to the make-belief that there is such a thing called freedom of the press.

In Singapore, we have had too short a time for any establishment to evolve. We have only just come to the sixth anniversary of our independence. In these circumstances, the P.A.P, assumes the leadership of the country and it represents the interest of the people. There may be extreme and conflicting views existing among the people, but we always take the middle course and represent the majority of them. We therefore must have the right to lay down the lines for the people, because we are for the time being charged with the responsibility of looking after their welfare. We must have the right to say that it is our views that should prevail and not those of the Communist party or those belonging to the establishment group of a foreign country. There may be a group of people who think that they can ignore this rule. I think it is time that they should open their eyes to realities and not allow themselves to be overwhelmed by the myths and fictions belonging to a different society. If they do not do so, then it is going to be very difficult for us and very troublesome for them.

Perhaps all this talk about taking over the Government and pulling the P.A.P, down arises out of an innocent belief perpetuated by some quarters that we are getting old and that we are about to give up. It may be beneficial for all parties if we are to state here that we are not getting old. Older maybe in age, but not in mind and spirit. The good knife is not blunted yet, as a Chinese saying goes, "Pau tau wei lau." We have our ears and eyes always on the ground listening to the voice of the people and always catering for their needs. It is also necessary for us to state here that we are not likely to give up our task so easily. There might have been a time in the very remote past when we considered giving up. Immediately after the defeat in the Hong Lim by-election, which I can still remember, for instance, there was a passing thought, and it was even discussed among some of us, that perhaps it might be a good idea if we were to give up for the time being. But then we were aware that the British were in active control. There was a safety net at the bottom of everything and we knew that things could not go too far wrong.

But things are different today. We cannot afford to give up and we do not intend to do so. There is nothing at the bottom to save us now. If we go down, we will go right down and this time it will be worse than the confrontation days, the days when we were in Malaysia, the days of the Emergency and the days of the Japanese occupation. The lives of two million people would be endangered if we were to fail in our task. History will judge us as the greatest cowards and criminals if we were to abdicate our duties now at this crucial moment of Singapore's development as an independent country.

So, to those who have the ambition to succeed us, I have this advice to offer. They must stop talking about taking over the Government. This only serves to demonstrate their greed and their ambition. That is no good for them. They must first show to the people of Singapore how they can be worthy of their support. They must first tell the people of Singapore how they can do things better than the P.A.P. The people of Singapore want as their leaders persons who are serious and with a sense of responsibility towards the ultimate well-being of the country. They want persons who can withstand the toughest trials and tribulations in time. They do not want clowns and entertainers in the political arena. They do not want people who start scrambling for spoils immediately after they have formed a party and who resign as soon as a so-called crisis occurs in their midst.

3.45 p.m.

Mr P. Selvadurai (Bukit Panjang): Mr Speaker, Sir, let me also add my voice to those of the honourable Members in thanking the President for his speech to Parliament made on the 21st July, 1971.

We are once again approaching a critical point in the history of this nation and state when it becomes incumbent upon every thoughtful citizen to reflect and decide upon the character of the social order that we are consciously building for ourselves. In the 1940s and 1950s, the great question was the problem of colonialism. Thereafter until 1963, the principal enemy of the people were the local Communists and the question at issue was whether we established for ourselves a political system that ensured a periodically and freely elected government or succumbed to the Communist system of government by terror; whether we had a government that was centred in Singapore and ruled in the best interest of the people of Singapore, or one that took its orders from foreign centres of political power. From 1963 to 1965, the critical question was whether the character of our politics was to be a function of race and language. The birth of the nation in 1965 symbolised the rejection of racism and its attendant linguistic barbarities as the criteria of political policy and behaviour. The decisive question in the I 970s would be whether we are able to forge a secular political community in which economic and social questions determine our politics out of the disparate linguistic and cultural groups of human beings that form Singapore society.

Rational policies formulated by Government and disciplined effort on the part of the people have resulted in the ostensible wealth that today glitters around us. The indications are that we have achieved the enviable target of near full employment which, paradoxically, has created new problems relating to manpower which, unsolved, would stunt the further growth of our economy.

The time is fast approaching for us also to initiate, side by side with policies designed to develop to the full the nature and quality of our economic forces of production, measures aimed at humanising society and state. Despite opportunities for employment, there are dark areas of human hardship and suffering that must he overcome if we are to retain our self-respect. The criteria used by the Ministry of Social Affairs should be carefully re-examined to see if the levels of public assistance allowances meted out are sufficient to enable a destitute to maintain body and soul together. This, however, is not to decry the hitherto good work done by the Social Welfare Department. The enormity of the problem was acute enough to entice an honourable Member, himself a noted economist, to suggest in this House a wealth tax to soak the rich, despite the stern imperatives of quick economic development and the industrial transformation of our society.

If the only aim of soaking the rich is to display our socialist credentials, it would be an exercise in futility and bring in its wake growing frustration and disenchantment. If the objective is one of fairly and equitably distributing the new wealth produced, it cannot be beyond our wits to evolve a self-adjusting mechanism with proper legal sanctions through our collective bargaining machinery that would effectuate such distribution of wealth. The fundamental problem, however, would be to evolve a system of ethical and cultural values that would provide the solvent to dissolve the many contradictions that currently operate in society. While bilingualism and multi-cultural tolerance provide the lowest common denominators for cultural integration, there is much more that could be done in the way of providing the organisational and physical framework for the interaction of the highest classical traditions in art, literature, music and culture of the many traditions of civilisation that have moulded this nation. Human minds belonging to the different traditions must meet to discover one another's wealth and diversity.

There has been a tendency of late on the part of some to define human beings and human society in mechanistic terms in an effort to categorise the human digit in purely physical, measurable terms. This type of quantitative analysis may or may not provide the ultimate answers, but it would be well to remember that the human being possesses within himself the factor of indeterminacy which provides the creative impulse for great works of art, literature and music. It is precisely this factor that is killed in totalitarian states and it is this factor that our social order should carefully nurture. As our society evolves into higher forms of endeavour, cohesion and excellence, we should consciously seek to transform force into law, fear into respect, coercion into consent, necessity into liberty and superstition into rational consciousness.

If we are able to achieve the many things we have set ourselves, it is imperative that there be peace and order both internal and regional. We already have indications that the exigencies of power politics would militate against this regional peace and order that every power pays homage.

Mr Speaker, Sir, from time immemorial, big powers have interfered in the internal affairs of small states; and being a small state ourselves, we must gird ourselves to meet this situation. In the name of building an anti-imperialist front, one great power would seek to penetrate our trade unions and, in the name of fundamental democratic freedoms, another great power would seek to influence our intelligentsia and religious organisations. The net result of these activities would be the erosion of the power of the government and state to stand up to the pressures and behests of these great powers. We can end up as puppets. In combating the effects of this game, we must, from time to time, take the people into our confidence in order that maximum vigilance and cohesion are maintained at all times. Human corruptibility would always be a weakening factor in any polity. The Herald and Nanyang affairs are reminders of unsolved problems within ourselves.

Finally, Sir, a word must be said about the new Woodlands satellite town now being constructed, and about our water problem. In scope and dimension it is to be the biggest town yet, and we must expect that past errors in planning would not be repeated here. We understand that the new town would have the most up-to-date amenities for social and cultural life. We welcome this, as also the new compensation terms recently announced. The problem of compensating absentee owners, however, remains unsolved; but this is not something that cannot be solved by quiet diplomacy.

The Public Utilities Board's call to the people to conserve water and the magnificent response from the people has once again highlighted the water problem. A cursory look at the figures reveal a curious but interesting picture.

The average rainfall for the whole island is about 750 million gallons per day. As our maximum consumption is around 130 million gallons per day, we should have at our disposal about 620 million gallons per day provided that we are able to collect our total daily rainfall.

There are a number of ways in which this could be done. The obvious thing to do would be to increase the capacity of the impounding reservoirs by building new reservoirs or expanding the capacities of the old ones. The capacity of Seletar Reservoir has been increased considerably. Extension works are being done at Pierce. The same thing should be done to MacRitchie. Two new reservoirs are being built at Bedok and at Ulu Pandan/Kranji. Side by side with this development, the water filtration capacity of the filtration plants should also be increased.

There are two reservoirs in Sentosa. Pulau Tekong and Pulau Ubin have primitive water conservation schemes, and Pulau Brani receives water from Singapore. The total water resources of all our smaller islands should also be developed.

There are other exciting possibilities. We could build breakwaters at the mouths of our many small rivers, drain out the sea-water, prevent its seepage and let in fresh river water into the reservoirs so constructed.

Further, some of our islands could be joined to Singapore in such a way as to provide us with reservoirs fitted in between these small islands and Singapore. Once again the sea-water could be drained out and fresh water collected in its place. This method could be pursued with advantage with regard to the islands off Jurong.

Industries should be encouraged to use industrial water in place of P.U.B, potable water for their processes. At present, we have two sewage plants, one at Jurong and another next to Paya Lebar Airport. Every gallon o industrial water used is a gallon of potable water saved and, on present calculations, it would appear that 40 million gallons of industrial water per day go to waste. The recent decision of the Minister for Finance to withdraw the 50 cents sewer tax on industrial water is a welcome move. This tax has been a needless burden on the woodworking and textile industries in Jurong. With the establishment of petro-chemical industries in Jurong, the water needs of the petro-chemical industries, together with the woodworking and textile industries alone, would be in the region of three to four million gallons per day. This demand should be met entirely out of our industrial water capacity.

As a concomitant to the plan to use industrial water, a double distribution system for the distribution of industrial and even sea water should be experimented with, preferably in new housing and industrial estates that are being built near the sea. The Woodlands New Town and the East Coast Reclamation Scheme come to mind in this regard. We could try the double reticulation system and use coloured taps (red, green, etc.) to distinguish the potable water from the industrial or sea water. Sea water could he used to flush our toilets. There may be technical problems involved in conducting sea water. But modern technology should provide us with new materials so fabricated as to be able to withstand the corrosive effects of sea water.

A more expensive though exciting project that could be put in hand immediately is the nuclear de-salination of sea water. This process is becoming a commercial reality in other parts of the world with water scarcity problems. It also has the added advantage of providing us with a new source of electrical power for industrial and other purposes. The scheme would enable us to train our people in the uses of this new technology. De-salination has a great future. It could solve our water problem radically. De-salinated water would probably cost $3 to $4 per 1,000 gallons as against the $1 per 1,000 gallons now charged by the P.U.B. I would suggest that this differential is not prohibitive and a small plant to produce, say, five million gallons per day should be started. Posterity would commend the wisdom of the move.

Lastly, we must once again thank the people of Singapore for having responded magnificently to the P.U.B.'s call to discipline their use of water. We now know that in any future emergency of whatever form or nature, the proper response would be forthcoming from our people.

4.00 p.m.

Mr Speaker: Order. The time for adjournment pursuant to the resolution has arrived. Debate to be resumed on what day?

Mr Barker: Tomorrow, Sir.