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

2.47 p.m.

Mr Chai Chong Yii (Bukit Batok): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

`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 First Session of this Parliament.".'.

It is indeed a great honour for me, as a new Member of this House, to propose this motion. It is also a golden opportunity for me to say a few words in support of the speech of the President.

We all know very well that our island Republic with more than two million mouths to feed has done extremely well in the past few years. We have solved most of our social and economic problems which only a few years ago appeared almost unsolvable to a lot of people both inside and outside Singapore. In fact, we have done much more than just solving the problems. We have created the spirit to succeed in overcoming problems, the spirit to sacrifice individual rights for the well-being o our country. We may proudly call this spirit "the Spirit of Singapore".

As a result of our successes, Singapore is now sometimes classified as a "developed nation", though we are still in a developing stage. All these are the fruits of the hard work of an honest, imaginative and intelligent leadership, to which I am proud to associate myself now. But proud though we all are, these are not all we have in mind. We want to do more, much more, for our people, for our beloved country, no matter how small is its size.

I am confident that all Members in this House will fully agree with me that in this electronic age sheer size means nothing. It is the quality that counts it is the quality of the people that decides the destiny of a country. If all we have were big pieces of waste land with millions of illiterate and poor quality people, not even supermen could lead them to prosperity. But we are fortunate to have hardworking and intelligent people living on this island at the cross-roads of the world. We have inherited the best cultures of both the East and the West, but we have yet to melt them down completely, drain out the harmful and the useless, and to mould the rest into a new progressive culture which we may call it the Singapore culture. This is a difficult task. Because it is not easy, it is therefore more challenging and interesting to excel ourselves to try and achieve this goal.

Before we can create a unique Singapore culture which would be the envy of the world, we must first of all further raise the quality of our people. Although we are successful, economically and socially, there is still ample room for improvement. We are a metropolitan state with virtually no countryside, not to mention any hinterland. We are relying on the patronage of other countries for our living. We must therefore be able to do better than their own people. We have already had some success in this respect but there is a lot more that we should do, or we will soon be caught up by them. If this happens, our importance as the brain services centre of this region will be lost. In order to maintain this lead, we must not allow ourselves to indulge in the usual bad social habits of big cities, such as being individualistic, selfish, extravagant, hedonistic, indifferent, impatient and physically weak. These are some of the destructive elements that would ruin any people, no matter how successful they are now. We should, wherever possible, encourage our people to lead a simple but meaningful life.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the President said in his speech that "We can become a centre for excellence in all fields important to our economic and cultural life". To make our city state worthy of such a description, all our people, both old and young, whether educated in Chinese, Malay, Tamil or English, are required to work harder, to be better disciplined, to know better of any skill, be it technical or managerial know-how, be it professional skill or languages. Touching on languages, we have four official languages. Any one of them may be used in this House. Though it is always easier for a person to express himself in his mother tongue, there are many occasions when it would be more convenient and economical to use a common language to speak to our countrymen of other ethnic groups. In this competitive world, time means money. If all our people know two or more languages, one of which is common to all, no one can dispute that a better understanding among our people can be fostered more easily and whatever business to be discussed can be resolved faster. Our progress would then be faster too.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore has now become the most important business centre in this part of the world. English, being the accepted international business language, has become a necessary lingual skill which any Singaporean, who does not wish to be left behind, must know. I call it a lingual skill because we need it to make a living. It is a foreign tongue to all of us, except a few. It is more a tool than a language to us. Though it is not possible to learn a language thoroughly without learning its content, it is, however, possible to know the content but not to imitate and practise it. To be able to do this, we must all be exposed sufficiently long to our own traditions and cultures when we were young. The knowledge so acquired would then be the foundation of our education which would guide us through life.

Mr Speaker, Sir, if all our people are to be bi-lingual or even multi-lingual, our school teachers will have to work harder. Those who are mono-lingual should start now to learn another language. Learning is never too late. The learned teacher, Confucius, once said that among any three men there must be one worthy to be his teacher. Though his saying does not specify the teaching of a language, it is equally applicable to any one of our school teachers. I am pleased to note that the Singapore Chinese Middle School Teachers' Union is very interested and concerned in raising the standard of the teaching of English as a second language in Chinese schools. I hope that their members will set an example by learning English if they are still mono-lingual. This will serve as an effective encouragement to their students.

Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank you and Members of this House for the opportunity to address you.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.00 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour (Mr Fong Sip Chee): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, this First Session of the Third Parliament, as the President has pointed out in his speech, is convened under a situation quite different from that of the previous Parliament, especially when compared to the political situation in 1963. It goes to show all the more the distinctive quality of our people, the perseverance and the unrelenting spirit of the Government leadership.

The recent PAP victory in all the 65 constituencies proved that the political consciousness of our people has generally increased and they have given, most appropriately, their verdict on the false pretences of the opposition parties. The myth of the opposition parties -that the people must have opposition parties so that their interests can be safeguarded, and that it is only with the presence of opposition parties in Parliament can there be democracy -has been exposed. The fact is that it is not the people who wanted opposition parties, but ambitious foreign elements who wanted to plant their agents in our Parliament by infiltrating into our political infra-structure.

The Constitutional amendments-to prevent Singapore from being swallowed up by others, and the investigation into the financial sources of the various political parties to ensure that Singapore will not be bought over by others, are the basic rights of our people. The opposition parties are fearful of these two Constitutional amendments. This is quite natural. As a Chinese saying goes, "If one does not commit anything against his conscience during the day, one need not be alarmed by the knocks at one's door in the night." If the opposition parties have nothing to hide, then these two Constitutional amendments will provide them with an excellent opportunity to exonerate themselves. They should therefore fully support these amendments; why are they in such a scurry instead in opposing them?

This is not the first time, however, that, foreign elements have tried to set foot on the political activities in Singapore, and it certainly will not be the last. These foreign manipulators of our opposition parties will not rest at this. They have in the past attempted to sway the thinking of our people through the mass media. When we had to take certain pre-emptive measures against some newspapers in the interest of our people and our sovereignty, a handful of individuals in the International Press Institute expressed their extreme dislike and dissatisfaction. This is particularly the case with one gentleman who came from a country which claimed to be "a full-fledged Western democratic prototype". He expressed his profound shock and disgust, and promptly burst forth with nonsensical utterances. But, in point of fact, his own country had already a precedent in taking even stricter and more severe measures against the press. Recently, this government even proclaimed martial law. The first volley was, ironically, aimed at the press. Newspapers were closed down, and many journalists were arrested. According to information, this particular gentleman himself has been imprisoned. The so-called freedom of the press which he so proudly cherished has proved to be unworkable. He himself has dismantled the facade of democracy, when freedom of speech has fallen through. But the curious thing is that the International Press Institute has not uttered the slightest complaint or disgust, yet only not so long ago they launched an all-out attack against Singapore. There is a Chinese saying which goes: "If one is on the payroll, it is his duty to obviate disasters befalling his master." If this is not manipulation by others, what is'?

Mr Speaker, Sir, our country is situated at the centre of Southeast Asia-a militarily, economically, politically and geographically strategic location. Whatever we do will have widespread effect on the rest of the region. That foreigners are interested in our country is therefore quite simple and natural. "Befriend distant countries, subjugate nearer ones" is a most important strategy in the relationship between countries. This historical saying should provide a lesson for us. We must be vigilant. Whilst we have no intention to harm others, we must nevertheless possess the capability to protect ourselves.

Sir, we are more than adequate in dealing with these opposition fragments. But the greatest challenge that faces us comes from the Communist party and its agents. From my long years of experience, I respect their organisational ability. The relationship between China and the United States, similarly between China and Japan, have developed very rapidly. Especially in the case with Japan, China would rather establish diplomatic relations with Japan first, setting aside other minor problems temporarily. This is an indicator that it is a matter of time before China will establish direct relations with countries in Southeast Asia. The table tennis teams from Singapore and Malaysia, representing two independent countries, visited Peking recently. Undoubtedly this is an unofficial recognition on the part of China. The Barisan Sosialis, however, are still shouting that they are striving to establish a Malaya (including Singapore). A reality which even China has decided to accept but the Barisan Sosialis are still reluctant to acknowledge. Their policy will not then be accepted by the people of Singapore. It is merely a matter of time, therefore, before the Barisan Sosialis will have to revise their policy - between now and the time China formally recognises Singapore and Malaysia. Or perhaps they may even form a new political party, transfer their ground support, adopt a new strategy of first recognising our independence and then to exploit chauvinistic sentiments, hoping to capture political power. We must guard ourselves against this move. Our people are of course not that naive, because we know that if we have a government which sets out to work mainly for the Chinese, then our neighbouring countries will not tolerate us that easily. Remember, what we want is to set our own destiny, and, most important, that we will be able to continue to survive as an independent nation.

National service has been accepted by everyone. This is the most important aspect which will ensure that our country will continue to maintain its stability and economic growth. It should not be overlooked that the military is the most important criterion in a country's survival. The opposition parties advocate disarming ourselves. This is a fatal thing to do. Instead of being dependent on others, we should rather be self-reliant. The second World War has taught us a very good lesson. At that time, if Britain wanted to defend the Malay Peninsula, it was within their means to do so. But if that was to be so, it would mean that they had to reduce the defence capability of their Motherland. What was the use of winning the battles in the Malay Peninsula and had London been occupied by the Germans? And hence, both Malaya and Singapore were abandoned. I have read some history of the war in Singapore. There was one author who, after examining in detail the war documents of both Britain and Japan, discovered that before the war, military colleges in both countries had carried out intensive studies of the various attack and defence strategies in regard to the Malay Peninsula. What is surprising is that both sides had come to almost identical conclusions. The only difference was that Britain merely shelved their battle plans for record purposes, while Japan implemented theirs. The result was another British military disaster.

I discovered that some of our own military officers have not even read the war history of Singapore, let alone the war history of other countries. In the Addendum to the President's speech on the Ministry of Defence, mention is made of raising the efficiency of our armed forces in all elements. Recently, when another batch of our Armed Forces scholars were sent abroad on military scholarships, it was announced that a new subject had been introduced in their course of study, i.e. the study of the history of wars. This is a move in the right direction.

Education is the foundation of nation-building. If the educational standard of our people is low, all these are mere empty talks. In the last few years, the Ministry of Education has continuously reviewed and revised its education policies, putting more emphasis on science and technological education, in order to lay a sound foundation for nation-building. But, perhaps owing to the changes taking place too quickly, there has been, quite understandably, some unavoidable dislocation in the administration. The Member for Bukit Batok has said before that he is an administrator and not a politician. I believe that after December this year when he has assumed the office of the Minister of State for Education, all these will be changed, and there will be no administrative sluggishness in the Ministry of Education.

According to my working experience in the Ministry of Labour, I have discovered an anomaly. There are many graduates of vocational and technical schools who have been trained in subjects like metal work, woodwork, welding, etc., but have not been taken in by the factories and not even absorbed as apprentices. Instead, they have become car park attendants or office boys. These jobs are completely irrelevant to their training. This is a waste of their training and a loss of our trained personnel. The Ministry of Labour will study methods in which we can strengthen the training in this respect, so that young workers, who intend to join the industrial production forces, will get the sort of training of a better standard and so achieve a greater level of efficiency.

Industrial development in our country has been very rapid. The number of industrial accidents also increases in direct proportion to the number of workers. Although the Government has tried its best to promote industrial safety and hygiene, the success of this depends largely on the full co-operation between management and labour. In some of the factories I visited, I found that safety precautions are not up to the standard. The facilities for personal hygiene are far from being acceptable; in fact, some are even makeshift. Some factories do not even have modern sanitation. Surprisingly, they have been allowed to carry on production. From now on, the Ministry of Labour will enforce stricter compliance with Labour laws and measures, especially against those who do not take seriously the Labour legislations. We shall not allow our workers to work under an adverse working environment. If need be, the Ministry will adopt more stringent measures in dealing with those who violate our Labour laws. Some foreign industrialists have come to invest in Singapore in the posture of saviours of Singapore, and they treat our local workers in the same manner as they would treat workers in their own countries. This attitude must be rectified as early as possible, for otherwise, we would find ourselves difficult to maintain the industrial harmony so vital to our economy.

Since 1959, we have achieved outstanding progress in many fields, such as education, social health, and housing construction. Our neighbouring countries, of course, have their own views about our achievements. Our success has somewhat conspicuously reflected the relative ineffectiveness of others. This is not our fault. We cannot sit back and do nothing just to please other people. Our efforts are aimed at the interest of our people. Campaigns such as health and family planning have been held. Some hon. Members may not be in total agreement with these campaigns: but all these measures are necessary to ensure that Singapore will have a better future. Unfortunately, however, while on the one hand, we have provided solutions to our problems, we have not realised that some of the solutions themselves have brought about new difficulties and new problems. For example, in the field of public housing many countries around us, even those of the more advanced countries in the world, have expressed their admiration for our success in this respect. Of course, we do not simply demolish the old buildings, resettle residents in new housing estates and just stop there with self-satisfaction. We are aware of some inconvenience caused but we have good reasons in doing so. We have done all this in order to re-vitalise the older part of the city.

Whilst we have solved the problem of housing, this solution has nevertheless brought along with it other social problems, some of which have not apparently been considered. For example, social amenities appear to he lacking in some housing estates. Although there are community centres, shops, clinics and other establishments, we have overlooked some other needs. The younger people's needs are catered for by community centres, and those who are in the age group for national service join the Armed Forces. But we have unconsciously overlooked the interests of some of the middle-aged people, who are already parents and who are the mainstay of our country. Some of them having no other places to spend their leisure hours, find their way to the bars. I had lived in a Housing Board flat and I have discovered that for many years, I searched in vain for a neighbour for a game of chess. We have neglected, so to speak, the social needs of people in the age group of 30-50 years. Whilst we concentrate on moulding our younger population, we should not at the same time ignore the interests of the head of the household. Remember, he has a vote. He can influence the thinking of his whole family. He is already socially established. Whether he be a teacher, taxi driver, ordinary factory worker, or hawker, he has an established status. His thinking is more stable. Unfortunately, and unconsciously, we have not been able to provide recreational facilities for this middle-aged group.

In some of the open spaces of Housing Board estates, plants and shrubs have been planted to enhance the environment. These shrubs and trees no doubt add colour to and break the monotony of the open spaces, but the children who live in these estates do not make sufficient use of these facilities. In fact, it is argued, would it then be better for them to live in China town, because they could then play in the shaded alleys? A family of seven or eight would, in any case, be too congested in their confined home environment. But when these families shift to their new homes in the estates, their new neighbours arc complete strangers. One would find his neighbours are Hokien, Cantonese, Teochew, or Hainanese who come from the various corners of Singapore. There is, therefore, a certain feeling of isolation and a barrier among them. So each one of' them adopts a secluded attitude by keeping to his own family and cares not for others. There is no social intermixing among the neighbours. The parents would prefer their children to remain at home during the day as it is too hot outside, or it is too dark in the night. [Interruption] My colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications, may have an extraordinary experience of exposure to the moon or gallivanting at night. He may be quite an expert on this. His experience may not be beneficial to the House. I think he should await a more appropriate occasion for its disclosure!

The result of all this is that children in Housing Board flats have not much of an opportunity to stretch their muscles, quite contrary to the intention of the Board in providing such recreational amenities. This is by no means a criticism against the Government. In pointing out all this, I am merely attempting to show an example that sometimes satisfactory plans or solutions to a problem very often neglect to cater for the ramifications which may be brought about by the very solution or plan. Over the years our experience tells us that once a problem is solved, it does not necessarily mean that that is the end. New problems keep cropping up.

While we move forward and progress, we must at all times maintain our vigil and understanding of our own position in relation to, the degree and level of development of our neighbouring countries. As the Chinese saying goes, "Know yourself, know your enemy, and in a hundred battles you will have a hundred victories." Some people only understand themselves but do not understand others. So half the battle is lost.

My point is this: Our success can be provocative to others. This is what I mean by the residual problems arising out of the solution to the major problem.

Sir, I beg to support the motion.

3.30 p.m.

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the people of my constituency, I thank the President for delivering his Address on the 12th of this month. It is doubtless that the policies outlined in the Address signify a new era in the history of our nation building. It has set out many important tasks for us to perform so that in future we will strive for a more just, more reasonable and richer society. The President also pointed to certain unhealthy trends existing in Western countries. For example, a section of the population would be enjoying the fruits of the hard labour of others. In other words, their attitude is not to do any work hut to reap the benefits of the labour of their fellowmen. Such wrong mentalities have brought great harm to these countries.

Mr Speaker, Sir, if there are people in Singapore who harbour this thinking, we should correct them by criticising their faults. Otherwise they will be a hindrance to our task of nation building. However, we are glad that the majority of our people have the good quality to work hard. They realise that they must work hard to improve themselves. They do not believe in luck. We have been able to solve most of our problems because of these excellent qualities. We have overcome the difficulties in our programme of construction and nation building, and we have been able to steer our nation from rough and troubled waters to calm seas. We have progressed all round and our economy is booming. All this is due to the hard work and the spirit of self-reliance of our people. In order to further advance the work of nation building and to reap more fruits of our labour, we should set higher ideals and urge our youths to he more self-reliant, so that they can make a greater contribution to the task of nation building.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the President also touched on the possibility of spreading prosperity from the urban to the rural areas. As a Member of Parliament representing a rural area, I firmly support this wise policy. I feel that with the adoption of this policy, the people in the rural areas, like the people in the urban areas, will enjoy the fruits of prosperity engendered by the buoyant economy. It cannot be denied that since the PAP came to power, we have spent millions of dollars in construction work, and on the various projects to provide better roads, drains, street lamps, and electricity for the rural people. Their living conditions have thus improved. However, this does not mean that all the problems in the rural areas have been solved. As a matter of fact, many M.P.s, including myself, who represent the rural areas, still feel that there are many problems yet to be solved. For example, the problem of better roads, street lights, and water supply still exists in many areas. In view of this. I would like to suggest that for our next Budget, more funds should be allocated for the development of rural areas, so that the rural people can enjoy a higher standard of living arising from our developing economy. Since our economy is booming, it is not difficult for the Government to allocate more funds for the rural areas.

I would like to bring up another matter, i.e, the price of pigs in the rural areas. We, the rural M.P.s, have met members of the Livestock Association, and have discussed this problem with them. We then adopted certain measures to solve some of the problems of the livestock farmers. At one time, the farmers were allowed to slaughter their pigs on Mondays. However, this practice has now been stopped by the Primary Production Department, thus causing a drop in the price of pigs. I would like to appeal to the Minister concerned to look into this matter.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in the Addendum to the President's Speech on the Ministry of Defence, it was mentioned that "the urgency over our defence build-up has lessened as we now have some defence capability." This is indeed gratifying because it shows that we now have a firm foundation in our task of nation building and defence build-up. This means that we can review our policy on national service. The aim of this review is to economise on the use of our manpower. I refer to two aspects. The first is that we should enforce stricter para military training in our secondary schools. Under this arrangement, the training could be done after school hours or during school holidays. Instructors should be drawn from the regular armed forces. If we can do this, we can then shorten the time for national service. At the present moment, physical education teachers also give instruction in military training. It is not possible to get good results if we use physical education teachers for this purpose. The second point relates to part-time national service. We should relax our policy in this regard to exempt those who are physically weak or those who have to solve their financial difficulties, and this will also help to reduce the shortage of labour.

Now, I would like to touch on the quality of our people. We know that we have to raise the quality of our people. We would like to see our citizens achieve a higher level of education so that they have the ability to earn a better living for themselves. This is a fundamental problem. But what do we understand by "good quality" of our people? We have to study this in detail. From my point of view, I think "good quality" should include the following: diligence, honesty, knowledge, sense of responsibility, social discipline, a sense of fair play, helpfulness, and a willingness to help others. In addition, we must not forget that we must be well-behaved and be polite and courteous when dealing with people. In this connection, I think the Government is aware that some people keep long hair and grow a beard. They put on such fantastic attire that it is difficult to distinguish whether they are men or women. The Government should, through the process of education and other measures, put a stop to this.

In the President's Address to Parliament, mention is made of the necessity of keeping our families small so that the next generation will be well looked after. Our apprenticeship schemes will meet the needs of our industries. There is also a need to promote cultural activities and to build more parks and recreation grounds, so that our people will enjoy a more pleasant and richer life. Our workers are encouraged to raise their productivity so that their wages can go up in stages and so achieve a higher standard of living. Undoubtedly all these measures are correct and constructive. For the benefit of our future and for the benefit of the people, we must support all these wise policies with all our strength. All in all, the President's Address ushers in a more constructive era. In the next five years, we are going to have a greater number of satellite towns, with more modern industrial and business centres, a greater number of more sophisticated and progressive industries, a better communications system, and a cleaner and greener environment. All these deserve the utmost consideration by our people because they are worthy causes. Irrespective of race or religion, we should unite and march forward in our common aim to build a more prosperous and a better Singapore so that our people can have a better life.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to support the motion.

Mr Speaker: May I draw the attention of hon. Members to Standing Order 47 (6), which states:

`No Member shall impute improper motives to any other Member.'

I am not referring to you, Mr Teong. Mr Barker.

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek your permission to move the Adjournment.

Mr Speaker: Yes. Debate to be resumed on what day?

Mr Barker: Tomorrow, Sir.