MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1976 TO 31ST MARCH, 1977

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [1st Allotted Day]

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

The Chairman: Main and Development Estimates of Singapore for the financial year 1st April, 1976 to 31st March, 1977. contained in Paper Cmd. 3 of 1976. For convenience, I shall take the totals for each head of expenditure in the Main Estimates and the Development Estimates as they appear in the fifth and sixth columns respectively of the Summary of Estimated Expenditure on page 43 of the Paper.

I shall deal first with the heads of expenditure in respect of which amendments stand on the Order Paper Supplement.

Head D -

Mr N. Govindasamy (Telok Blangah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head D in respect of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100.

Sir, this amendment is moved to seek some clarification and information in respect of our Judiciary and the appointment of High Court Judges.

It is common knowledge in Singapore that the waiting period for a case to be heard in the High Court is lengthening. One of the reasons for this sorry state of affairs is the shortage of judges. From the Estimates, it is noted that provisions have been made for one Chief Justice, six High Court Judges, three Registrars/Senior District Judges, one Deputy District Judge and seven District Judges/Deputy Registrars. The total provision this year is an addition of only one District Judge. Can the Minister let us know the number of vacancies there are at the moment among the ranks of our District Judges and High Court Judges? How many High Court Judges are re-employed after retirement?

It is commonly said that justice delayed is justice denied. It is important that our cases are heard expeditiously and justice meted out swiftly. If, as a result of shortage of judges, cases are long delayed, then remedial measures must be taken to put right this position.

It would appear that in the High Court, in respect of capital punishment cases where two Judges sit on the Bench, when a case goes up for appeal and the Appeal Court decides to send the case down for a retrial, the case could not be retried as the result of a shortage of Judges. If this is so, then immediate remedial measures must be taken.

Can the Minister tell us what he proposes to do in respect of filling up the vacancies?

The Minister for Law and the Environment (Mr E. W. Barker): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid the Minister cannot tell him much because he is not in charge of appointments of High Court Judges or even Judges in the Lower Courts. But the Member may well be aware that Judges of the High Court are appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister, and it is incumbent on the Prime Minister to consult the Chief Justice before appointments are made. If I may say so, one must be very careful when appointing judges. They must be men of experience, ability and integrity, and have had several years of legal experience at the Bar or in the legal department of the civil service.

The position in the High Court is that Mr Justice Tan Ah Tah retired in November last year. So there is one seat vacant. Mr Justice D'Cotta retired at the end of February this year but he has been re-appointed for another six months. Mr Justice Choor Singh is due to retire in July, and whether or not his employment will be extended depends on the Prime Minister after consultation with the Chief Justice.

As for delays in the High Court, this is not just because there is one judge short. Cases take some months or even years, at least for civil cases, to go to trial after pleadings, interrogatories, discovery of documents and a convenient date to counsel for both sides and the litigants.

There does not seem to be a shortage of judges in the District Courts or the Subordinate Courts. There again the appointments are made by the Legal Service Commission headed by the Hon, the Chief Justice. I am in no position in this House to make comments on the appointments. Beyond that, the Member may rest assured that the appointments and state of the cases in the High. Court, or even the District Courts, are in the hands of capable persons.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, in view of the assurance from the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $4,884,550 for Head D ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $3.1 00.000 for Head D ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head J -

Mr J. F. Conceicao (Katong): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead ABA 1107*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs N. Govindasamy and P. Govindaswamy).

Sir, throughout the whole of this debate on the Budget I would like to emphasise, wherever I may, the theme of how necessary it is for Singaporeans to show regard for one another. With this particular amendment. I would like to refer to the problem of the attitude of civil servants to the public. Complaints in this House have been regular as almost to be ritualistic regarding discourtesy shown to the general public when they have approached various offices. or service centres, for example, the Immigration Department, the Registry of Vehicles, the Hawkers Department; or the hospitals or clinics arid so on. Yet the problem still remains.

To be fair to senior Government officials, there have been attempts to bring to the attention of officers the need for courtesy when dealing with the public. Circulars on courtesy in the civil service and relations with the public have been dutifully sent around to Permanent Secretaries and various officers on distribution lists. And these circulars have even attempted to analyse what has contributed to the problem. The Central Complaints Bureau has. I am told, been asked to investigate more effectively complaints of discourtesy and petty bureaucracy and yet right up to the moment the problem still remains.

I need not exemplify. Every Member in this House can come up with instances of thoughtlessness and officiousness. What is wrong? Is it that something fundamental has been overlooked in the attempts to tackle this problem? It cannot be that the public are just cussed, that they insist on having indelibly imprinted in their minds a poor image of Government departments.

It seems to me that just as the bad impression of Government can become ingrained in the minds of people, so the principal way to ensure that this does not happen is to have the commitment to courtesy ingrained in the minds of the civil servant, not merely at the level of contact with the public but right up the line to the top-most administrator. The concern of the civil servant that should be his constant preoccupation is not merely the accomplishment of a job and closing of a file, but the citizens' welfare.

I am afraid the civil servant has frequently become so task-oriented that he alt too often forgets whom he is serving - what he is doing the job for - namely, the people's well-being. And every now and then he just wants to get on with the job, ignoring the sensitivities and needs of the very people he is supposed to be doing the job for. I hope when we are inducting our new administrative cadres into what should be their vocations, this point of commitment to concern for the individual will be stressed from the beginning. I imagine that it is because of the absence of this concern that there has again and again been complaints about discourtesy and bureaucratic indifference in the civil service.

Now how can this commitment be demonstrated? Perhaps we can ask some pertinent questions. Do our leaders in the civil service, our super civil servants as they have been described (although I do not quite understand this term), do our top bureaucrats show their concern for the conditions in which people meet the civil servants, the conditions in which the civil servants themselves have to work the whole day long? Is an office environment conducive to a good relationship between the civil servant and those he has to serve? Are the public served in surroundings of cleanliness and reasonable comfort, or do we find light and ventilation deficient and the organisation of space uneconomic, long queues, long waiting periods, and so on.

2.45 p.m.

Are toilet facilities adequate, canteens offering reasonable service, or is it perhaps that no such amenities exist at all? Are signboards properly displayed, or are they tatty-looking, bent or frayed at the edges, and have unofficial doodlings all over them? Are those who handle the public properly trained to feel sensitive, to put themselves in the place of the petitioner, the client? If there is a possibility that members of the public may not understand rules and procedures, are these adequately explained?

Now such concerns, I think. Mr Speaker, Sir, should be the subject of attention at the very centre of management in the bureaucracy. Senior civil servants can be expected to set the standard and the example of demonstrating such interest and commitment, not through circulars only, but by action.

I would like to point that one line of example also is to show human and personal concern for one's very own subordinates. I would like to hear more often of a subordinate being frank, straightforward, firm and forthright with his superior, albeit maintaining due respect for him. And superiors should show courtesy and consideration towards their subordinates, and patience in the face of difficulties encountered. Intelligent attention to the human element in the work situation is in keeping with the best modern administrative practice everywhere. Moreover, if there are good manners and human respect within the civil service family contributing to an esprit de corps, this will show in the attitude towards the public.

Lastly, while senior officers have decided that inductees into the administrative service should have the experience of sitting with MPs in their meet-the-people sessions, let me invite senior officers themselves - those near or at the top - to come and see for themselves how people at the grass-roots feel. The experience would be salutary.

I have brought up this matter because the closest the public come to an appreciation of Government is at the point of contact with civil servants. If the impression they gather at this point of contact is unfavourable, then I am afraid their attitude towards Government will be affected by this unfavourable experience.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, when I first filed this amendment. I had the intention of enquiring into the need for the setting up of this Establishment Unit with 102 Division I officers, headed by a Deputy Secretary, Grade E. But since then, the Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement has clarified the functions of the Establishment Unit in the Prime Minister's Office. There has also been a press write-up on the Establishment Unit. presumably based on a release from the Prime Minister's Office.

My question is this, Sir. Where is the Prime Minister's Office going to find the 102 high calibre officers, especially in the 25-40 age group? If you look at Appendix A of Cmd. Paper No. 4/76, you will notice that every Ministry is dismally understaffed, especially in respect of Division I officers. There are 2.455 Division I vacancies in the Government service alone. However, I do welcome the establishment of such a unit to spot outstanding talent among our administrative officers, and that it would also be responsible for career development and training, postings, transfers, secondments, and administration of the merit increment ~c he me.

Sir, as the Member for Katong has said, perhaps another area that this Unit can look into is the frequency of complaints we hear in this House as well as outside, about the rudeness and arrogance of our civil servants. especially those who man the counters and come in contact with the public. Perhaps this Unit must be armed with not only the carrot but together with the carrot, the stick as well.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): Mr Speaker. Sir, it is noted that an Establishment Unit has been set up in the Prime Minister's Office to coordinate the career development of all Division I officers in the whole Civil Service. This Unit has, as its main function, to look and fill the void left by promising officers in the 30-45 age group. In addition to this, the Unit has also to look into the career development and training, postings, transfers and secondments, and administration of the merit increment scheme.

Sir, I wonder why this Unit is only interested in Division I officers. What about the promising, able and experienced officers in the other Divisions? They too should also be taken care of by this Unit. Some of them may not have university degrees, but then they may be excellent innovators.

I also believe that the merit increment scheme is only meant for Division I officers. Here again, what about officers in the other Divisions who have performed well in their duties? Will they also not be considered for this merit increment?

The Prime Minister: Sir, I do not want to stand as a defender of rude, arrogant, unfeeling and discourteous civil servants. Where they exist, where they can be pin pointed, action will be taken. There is for senior civil servants a Civil Service Staff Development Institute which, amongst its other duties, tries to involve the civil servants in the wider aims of Government and the duties of the Administration. The Civil Service, with the help of the Public Service Commission, have tried to define those areas where the public comes into contact with the officials, whether it is the Immigration Department, the Registry of Vehicles, the hospitals, clinics, post offices, wherever there is a counter, and attempts will constantly' be made to improve the way in which the public at large is being served.

Having said that, let me pick up the point made by the Minister for Katong. He invited senior civil servants or super civil servants, as he has superciliously referred to them, to sit with him at his meet-the-people sessions.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: On a point of clarification. He is a Member and not a Minister.

The Prime Minister: The Member for Katong. Thank you. Sir, let me explain to him that if we pick out the really outstanding civil servants to sit with him or to sit with the other MPs in the meet-the-people sessions, he ought to look out and make sure that he is not displaced in some future election. We are professional in our relations with the public. That is part of the business of the MP. If he is not good at it, then he would probably not be here. A civil servant who can both do his job as an administrator and be good at the public relations side of it, who is able to say `No" to an obstreperous, vehement and insistent constituent who wants the answer to be "yes" and wants his MP to bend the rules in order that the answer is "yes", would have learnt the secret of politics and will comprise the Government. So I think it is not an invitation to be made lightly and in jest. Perhaps if the Member for Katong knows how to keep his constituents happy whilst having to say "No" to them in the politest of terms, he should patent the secret, hide it away in a file, and never show it to a good civil servant.

But let me place this against the broader context. First, I am glad that this is the maximum of criticism. There is no charge of dishonourable, corrupt or other practices. If M Ps come here and complain of discourtesy, inadequate toilet or canteen facilities, tatty signboards, all this is in part a reflection of our relatively healthy state of affairs. In fact, we should have a conducted tour for MPs and some of their constituents, who complain of the bureaucratic practices, of parts of the Third World, and when they come back they would be extremely grateful that they have Singapore and the Singapore Civil Service.

That having been said and done, I think we have to take this in the context of our total society. Consideration for each other, courtesy or the lack thereof, comes out of a long cultivation of good habits. It is extremely difficult to be polite and courteous to a crude, obstreperous and ill-mannered person. It is a two-way process, whether it is the SBS bus drivers and conductors against passengers, whether it is motorists versus lorry drivers, or motorists versus motorists, or motorcyclists versus motorists, whether it is jostling at the National Stadium or in the schools, it is the general tenor of behaviour, the accepted standards of conduct of a society as a whole. In the last 1 7 years, or perhaps I should go back to 1955 when we had the first elected Government and the pressures of elected representatives wanting less high- handed treatment for their illiterate, ill educated constituents, things have improved. But they can improve only so far as the general level of conduct and courtesy between our citizens can improve. I have known of communities where people are elaborately courteous to each other because of the nature of long years of cultivated breeding, cultivated nurturing of good public behaviour. Words like "I am sorry" or "please" are not something one hears over the telephone. They are "What?". "Who are you?" And if you say. "Sorry, it is the wrong number", they say. "Oh!", not "I am sorry". But what an absolute waste of time that you should be the person answering. If you are wrong, you should not be there.

3.00 p.m.

I have picked up the telephone and have had to deal with telephone operators who did not know who I was and treated me just like a member of the public. So I have a fair idea of the general level of public conduct. But they pick it up first at home, then the neighbourhood, their friends, then in the school reinforced by fellow students and teachers, then out where they work, their friends, their bosses and the people they meet and frequent and are together with. This is a slow and painful process.

Of course, you can have the very converse where you have all the manifestations of good behaviour but actually a crude vicious inner self. I have known of capitals in this world where, having nudged you out of the bus queue - this was 20 or 30 years ago when I was a student - they say. "Pardon me." They give you a sharp nudge and they are on, and you are off, the bus. They say. "I am sorry". They have all the external manifestations of a cultured well-bred person. Which would you have? An honest straightforward Singaporean who says. "No", "What". "Who is there?" or a hypocritical one who says. "I am terribly sorry," when he is not. The Member for Katong should think these things over.

As to the Unit in my office, it is a difficult business identifying talent. Why Division I? Because that is more than I want to handle. The PSC, together with the Establishment Branch of the Ministry of Finance, will look after everything. But an urgent situation has arisen to spot talent at the top. I do not agree with the Member for Telok Blangah that the Ministries are understaffed. They say that they are understaffed because this is Parkinson's law. Every Permanent Secretary says that there should be so many Deputy Secretaries, so many heads of departments. - and so on. A manpower survey conducted by the Development Unit shows that the public sector is taking too many engineers and other professionals as against the private sector, and that we should do with less. And if there are efficient men, the right people to do the right jobs, then we will not only do with less but we will do better with less.

If I may read an extract from the circular which was signed by the Head of the Civil Service. It says:

`This Unit will be responsible for:

(i) career development and training;

(ii) postings, transfers and secondments;

(iii) merit increment scheme.

Officers likely to make the top superscale grades will have postings to broaden their experience and test their mettle. There will be accelerated promotions whenever performance matches the promise. This need to discover outstanding ability and administrative talent has become pressing because of the void in numbers of able officers in the 30 to 45 age group caused by many promising officers leaving to join the private sector in the years of rapid economic growth.'

It is a very painstaking business, trying to spot the difference between ordinary pebbles and a gem on the beach. A gem before it is polished is often indistinguishable. But if one looks closely and long enough, picks up the right one even if it is one in five and the wastage in testing is four out of five -putting a person to trials to see whether he comes up with the right answer, whether he is imaginative, he is creative, he has got the right approach, he has got the decisiveness; once he has made up his mind, he has got the stamina to pursue his recommendations to fruition - then even if it is the right one out of 10, I think we are lucky. Whether it is in the civil service or whether it is in the political side of Government, the problem has always been that the more able the person is, the more the workload is put on him in order that the job gets done. Perhaps the Member for Katong was giving unwitting praise to the few. They carry an enormously disproportionate burden of the load because they have been found to be reliable and able to get things done.

I agree with the Member for Anson. I am not interested in whether an officer has got a BA.. MA.. Ph.D., or D.Sc. Can he get a job done? Can he get a team to work with him? Is he a talker or a thinker, or a talker and a doer? The best, of course, is the man who thinks before he expounds and having expounded he then acts. But at the end of it all are the results. It has got nothing to do with whether he has got a Ph.D, or a School Certificate or even a Std. VI qualification. In the old days, Std. VI would have taken you very far. It is whether you have got this up here and whether you have got that drive. But the chances are, with our methods of universal education and selection all along the way, race after race, year after year, if you cannot make a simple BA., then it is hardly likely that you will be able to last the marathon. And that is what we are looking for - people who can last the pace, not just one test but having passed it he will have three or four more quickly passed on to him. Every Minister can testify that when you discover such a person, then a large section of your Ministry and its problems are taken off your shoulders and you get happy reports every month; and after a while every three months, and after a longer while you begin to take reports only once in six months.

I hope I have made my position clear. We are the political side of the Service. I do not defend rudeness. I do not defend arrogance. I do not defend mediocrity. I do not defend the desire to do the minimum and get by. But this is what we have got. This is after 17 years of PAP government. I think it could have been better, but it may have been a lot worse. In fact, let us start off in the knowledge that it is better and let us make it better. But to make it better, let us not come here with any scales over our eyes. True MPs must make some noise for querulous constituents. But it is extremely difficult. when the answer is "No", to make a member of the public go away happy.

And as MPs know and even as Ministers know, some fellow Ministers have the habit of passing on the buck. So the MP comes here and passes on the buck to the Minister. I have got a lot of experience with that. I get Ministers passing on the buck to each other and they land up on my plate. Finally, the answer is still "No", because if you say "Yes" then you have changed the rules for everybody and an unworkable situation is created. So the man who knows how to say "No" and keep his constituents happy and have them voting for him at the next elections should quietly congratulate himself either at his innate good nature that God has endowed him with or for his cultivated sense of self-discipline that keeps the face in relaxed and happy countenance, while he is really fed up to the teeth with troublesome constituents. Whichever way it is. I hope all MPs will look after their constituents, keep them happy even when the answer is "No" because, as you know, if the answer is "Yes" he would not be looking for the MP,

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, may I just point out to the Hon. Prime Minister that the figure I have quoted in respect of the shortage of staff is not mine. It is the Government's figure found in Cmd. Paper 4 of 1976.

The Prime Minister: I was fully aware of that. I am questioning whether that figure represents the actual required vacancy that should be filled. I do not doubt that it represents vacancies in Establishment posts which have been approved by the Establishment Branch of the Finance Ministry. I do not doubt that. But if you go right back to 1955 when I was sitting opposite, you find that there were always vacancies. If you want to be a General and everybody wants to be a General, you cannot be a General unless you have got lots of troops - and I think all M Ps are familiar with this. If you want to be a Brigadier, you must have a brigade. If you want to have a brigade you must have three battalions and that means you must have three CoIonels. But there is only one Colonel and, in fact, one Colonel alone can do the job well. So he says. "All right, we will have one and two vacancies", i.e, the Brigadier. If he has only got one person, then he ought to be a Colonel. This has been going on a long time. I am not at all convinced that that represents the actual needs in the Government Service.

Mr Conceicao: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Hon. Prime Minister has certainly given me plenty of things to think over and I am very grateful for the very forthright way that he has dealt with the questions.

I am very sorry, Sir, that the Hon. Prime Minister has thought that I was supercilious. It was not my intention at all. I may sound supercilious right now. If one were to ask: is the "Minister for Katong" supercilious? I do not think he will find a consensus among my colleagues. I am very sorry that he has carried that opinion away.

At the same time, I would like to assure the Hon. Prime Minister that, in the midst of all the stresses, I shall follow his advice and maintain a very calm, polite, courteous attitude to all those who may place a strain on my patience, as I hope I have not placed too much of a strain on the Prime Minister's patience.

With that. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: I am sorry to say that the guillotine time for this Head is 3.20 p.m.

3.15 p.m.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 1109.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I wish to seek clarification from the Honourable Prime Minister with regard to my observation on anti-pollution measures. In the first instance, the $10 provision for Head of the Anti-Pollution Unit needs explanation. I am sure Members will not disagree with me when I say that this is an important Unit. Assurance has already been given by the Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office in reply to my remarks as contained in Hansard, Vol. 31, column 708. I quote:

`This Unit is taking every effort to ensure that the air around us is pollution free, so that our people can lead a healthy life wherever they may live.'

I notice that two years have passed with a token provision of $10 for each year. I was just wondering whether there is anybody suitable to take charge of this particular Unit. In my last question to the Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office, I notice that three officers were sent overseas. It therefore certainly looks strange to me that this Unit is still without a Head to direct and coordinate anti-pollution measures, although there are already so many officers around.

The second point I wish to draw the attention of the Prime Minister to is the question of pollution caused by the Ministry of the Environment itself. I refer to the Tampines Refuse Dumping ground which is situated near the estuary of the Serangoon River. The area around the swamp is being dumped with trade refuse from the city and garbage from the many residential estates. During spring tides, the water comes right up to the mouth of the river, and when it recedes, rubbish and refuse are simply washed into the straits.

The next point is the question of lorries of the Ministry of the Environment. They carry stinking watery wastes which drip along the road, whilst lorries carrying sand are usually parked by the road side to make sure that they conform with the law.

The Minister for Law and the Environment (Mr E. W. Barker): Sir, I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Prime Minister.

Sir, as for the Member's first point, the post of Head of the Anti-Pollution Unit has been filled since 1971. The incumbent is presently the Acting Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of the Environment, but his salary is paid out of the Ministry's vote.

As for pollution by the Ministry itself, it is the practice now to build a bund on the side of the Serangoon River, so that as little rubbish as possible goes into the river. But I agree with the Member that when there is high tide there is some pollution in the river. The Member will be happy to know that the construction of the new incinerator at Ulu Pandan will reduce the pollution in Punggol. This incinerator is scheduled to be completed in 1979 or 1980. It will have electrostatic precipitators to minimise air pollution.

As to lorries which carry rubbish. I agree that sometimes water trickles down. Most of the lorries are new ones. They are compact and no water flows out. We have about 70 old lorries which are still in use, and on rainy days when the rubbish is wet it trickles from the back and produces a terrible stench. But we are in the process of getting rid of these lorries. I do not want to blame the Minister for Finance, but with more money we can get rid of the old lorries. However, there are priorities.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: I am grateful to the Minister for his reply, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The time allotted for Head J having expired, the following amendment, standing in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy, was not proceeded with:

(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 8201.

The sum of $7,878,390 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $58,017,200 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head K -

Mr Lee Yiok Seng (Bukit Panjang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1002*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, since the implementation of national service we are happy to see the good results it has achieved. Through national service we have been able to improve our security and enhance defence capability and social stability. We can talk of the many advantages of national service in relation to our defence. There are hardly any shortcomings.

In recalling the day when national service was first implemented, many of us were worried because most parents at that time did not quite understand the significance of national service. Because of their traditional belief, the parents tried to prevent their children from joining the combat units of the national service. During that period the Ministry of Defence was beset with difficulties and the Minister himself had to crack his head to solve such problems, and his hair turned gray because of it. However, after some time parents gradually came round to accept the principles and need for a full-time national service for our young people. Some parents would not like to see their children being drafted into full-time national service.

However, there has been a change now. Many parents would offer all sorts of excuses to get their children transferred to part-time national service when they are put into full-time national service. If their application is not approved they will be dissatisfied and disappointed. I think we must do something to stamp out such tendency, because this will affect the young people in the national service. Most of these parents are from the lower strata and are not well educated. They are farmers, fishermen, workers and widows. The youngsters who come from such families should join the full-time national service because such experience will be useful to them in future. However, they cannot recognize the usefulness of full-time national service. I do not understand what is the reason for this. Perhaps something has gone wrong in the Ministry of Defence, or perhaps the parents are prejudiced. I would ask the Minister whether he is aware that more and more parents are applying for a transfer of their children to do part-time national service. Is there any measure to stop such a tendency or will these parents be allowed to apply for a transfer of their children to do part-time national service?

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, in regard to the Ministry of Defence I would like to raise three questions. Firstly, the high accident rate incurred by drivers and mobile riders was a matter of great concern in the SAF sometime ago. Every possible step was taken to raise driving standards. To promote offence-free driving, an outright bonus of $50 was given to drivers/riders in full-time service who completed at least 2.500 miles of offence-free driving within a three-month period. May I know how this incentive has improved the standard at driving in the Army? To-date how many instructors have qualified for this bonus?

Secondly. Sir, some students who come from not-so-well-off families have been granted scholarships by foreign countries. These scholarships are not easily obtained. But then after getting it, their parents find it difficult to send them abroad because of the minimum $30,000 deposit required as a guarantee that the student will return to do national service. How are these poor people going to raise such a big sum of money? It is not easy to raise it, and because of this some of these students have to forgo their scholarships. I know of one instance where the number of scholarships granted per year by a foreign country to local students has been reduced because of this requirement. May I suggest to the Minister to relax this requirement for the poor students.

Thirdly, Sir, the Government has put emphasis on rules about long hair and pinched-up caps among our recruits. Yet it seems to be a common practice among some national servicemen particularly those attached to the Police Force, to keep long hair and even put on tiny caps over their big heads. Even some of the senior officers are sporting long hair, both in the Army and the Police Force. How are they going to control their subordinates? It is time a check was made on all these recruits.

3.30 p.m.

Mr Ivan Baptist (Potong Pasir): Mr Speaker. Sir, I would like to touch on a similar subject of safe driving by Mindef drivers. I am interested to know what programmes are afoot to improve the driving standards of these Mindef drivers.

The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence (Dr Goh Keng Swee): Sir, I am in sympathy with what the Member for Bukit Panjang has said. As far as possible, the policy is moving in the direction he recommends, that is, enlist everybody. In the past, of course, it was not possible to do so because there was limited requirement for manpower. But lately Government has decided that national servicemen can be enlisted to do full-time national service in the Police, the Fire Brigade, as well as the Vigilante Corps. I do not expect that in future there should be much difficulty over this. But it is not possible to insist that every youth does full-time national service because there are cases where genuine hardship will be caused by doing so. That is the only ground on which we can allow deferment from national service. Parents who feel that economic hardship will be caused by national service call-up can make an appeal to the Appeals Board where cases are fully investigated, and in a fair number of instances appeals are allowed, something like 30% of applications.

Regarding national service drivers, in my view they are a much maligned group. We have been keeping records of accident rates over the years and the figures show that in the last few years there have been 2.5 accidents per 100,000 kilometres travelled. Accident is defined to include cases where the fault is not with the Army drivers alone but with the civilian drivers also. A study of Police reports shows that in all accidents involving Army and civilian drivers, the blame lies equally with the civilian drivers as with Army drivers so that, in effect, as far as accidents due to Army drivers are concerned, the accident rate is something like just over one per 100.000 kilometres. This is not a very high rate of accident considering that Army drivers on the average have just one year's driving experience. We recruit more than 2.000 national service drivers each year. and since they do two years' national service the average experience is one year.

In order to reduce the rate of accidents we have introduced this bonus payment referred to by the Member for Anson, whereby a driver gets $50 bonus if he has an accident-free record over three or four months. The matter is being reviewed because, although many drivers have qualified for this bonus and quite a large sum has been paid on this account, the accident rate remains about the same as it was before the bonus was paid. I am afraid this privilege may have to be withdrawn and other means found to improve their driving standards. Perhaps stiffer penalties may be more effective than the bonus payment.

On scholarships, the position is this. Where the scholarship is a genuine one granted under the auspices of the Public Service Commission, then of course there is no question of paying any bond to ensure that the scholar comes back to do his national service. Where it is a private scholarship, then the matter is referred to the Public Service Commission to see whether it is really a meritorious award or whether it is some kind of a fiddle, or whether in fact it is a minor kind of academic institution. If the PSC says. "Yes, this is a good award". then of course no problem arises. However, if the PSC says. "This kind of scholarship is humbug", then the scholar is not allowed to leave the country. He has to do his national service first.

On long hair, I cannot speak for the Police. But so far as the Army goes, nearly all battalion camps have a camp barber and recruits are taken there on the first day and are charged 60 cents a hair cut. So far as the active battalions are concerned, there are regular muster parades and I do not think there is a problem with national servicemen. However, once a soldier leaves the Army and goes back to civilian life, he acquires all the bad habits of the civilian, including long hair.

In the early days when reservists were called back for their annual in-camp training, the officers were of course quite taken aback by a number of long hair styles, and they had to borrow barbers from several camps. But this did not work too well because camp barbers gave them a 4 x 2 Army-style haircut and there were howls of anguish from the reservists, some of whom claimed probably with justification that they needed long hair because they were fashion designers or this and that. So morale in that battalion camp dropped very low and we had to consider what options were available. One, of course, was to treat every case on its own merits. That was not possible in the Army. Either they all wore the same kind of hair style, or sent to the camp barber, or not at all. So in the end we decided that so long as a reservist has a decent haircut, in accordance with the photograph put up by RTS, he is allowed to carry on. Longer than that, he goes to the camp barber and he has to pay 60 cents for his haircut.

The problem is, however, in between the annual in-camp training what do they do? They have to report once a month to their Reserve battalion headquarters and, of course, their hair could be quite long on those occasions. If they turn up in uniform, they give the Army a bad impression. So the way out is to allow them to come in civies and thereby avoiding some of the criticisms.

So far as long hair is concerned, we are trying to control it as best as we can, and we have been successful in the active battalions. But for the reservists there must be some give-and-take and within that situation we are doing as well as we can,

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I have here a cutting from yesterday's Straits Times which says. "Runaway truck crashes into garden, hits car".

Regarding the hair cut. I think most probably they wear wigs. Otherwise, after a haircut, how could they still have long hair?

Mr Ivan Baptist: Mr Speaker. Sir, what is more worrying is not so much the accident frequency rate. It is the accident severity rate. I believe the size of the vehicle is such that accident severity rates are pretty high indeed. So I feel more emphasis should be put on inculcating safe driving habits among Army truck drivers.

I hope the Minister will consider this seriously because if this is not done then it can be quite terrifying for people to drive along Upper Changi Road. Tampines Road and other roads that are heavily used by Army vehicles.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker. Sir, on a point of clarification. If my memory serves me right. I think the Minister's announced policy on deferment from full-time national service is that only the sole breadwinner of the family will be exempted. I believe he made that statement in this particular House. But what he said earlier on does seem to suggest that there could be some change in the consideration of application for exemption from full-time national service. Would the Minister please clarify that point?

In addition, I would also like to ask the Minister whether he would consider exempting construction workers from full-time national service. We are still not getting enough of this type of workers, and the majority of them are work permit holders. For those who work in high-rise buildings, I think the hazards that they are exposed to are surely much greater than in the national service. So if they are prepared to take a more hazardous job. I feel that we should give them the deferment.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: I do not think there is a contradiction between what I say now and what I said the last time. The sole breadwinner would be exempted naturally because if he is called up for national service then there is economic hardship. But it does not work Out as simple as that. For instance, if the sole wage earner in the family cannot prove that he earns much more than what he will earn in the Army, then there is no hardship in calling him up for national service.

On the other point about construction workers, they do not qualify for exemption. We, however, do run a special scheme whereby apprenticeship training schemes requiring two to four years of indentured apprenticeship come under special arrangements where industries have a need for skilled workers and these skills can only be acquired by long training over two to four years. What we do is when the Industrial Training Board recommends a case we send him off for three months basic military training with SAFTI. After that he does his apprenticeship training for two years or four years, at the end of which he comes back for his reservist training in the PDF battalion where he does the more simple military chores. But I do not think it is feasible to disrupt national service on grounds of working in the construction industry. Once you allow that, the question is: just where do we stop? Apart from that, it is a very rare Singaporean who wants to work in the construction industry. Most of these tough jobs are now, I believe filled by work permit holders.

3.45 p.m.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: If it is such a rarity, surely they should all be allowed deferment.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng: (In Mandarin): Since the Minister has been very sympathetic in his answer, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

"That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1105.

Sir, I notice that the vote for the Ministry of Defence this year is $650 million, an increase of $10 million over that for last year. Defence takes up the second largest share of expenditure of the whole Government Budget. There is no doubt that it is necessary to allocate a large sum of money for our defence, because we must build up our defence on a sounder and more secure footing. All the basic facilities should be adequate and sophisticated enough to ensure that our defence credibility is satisfactory.

In view of this I would like to put forward certain complaints about certain defects which exist in the daily administration in the Singapore Armed Forces so that the Minister could take measures to rectify the shortcomings. Before I do so. I would like to congratulate the Minister on the fact that. over the past year from my contacts with members of the public. I have found that national servicemen and their parents are generally quite satisfied with life in the SAF camps. The bad behaviour of some members of the SAF, for example, whistling at girls on the roadside, has lessened. There were very few such complaints against national servicemen. There is a marked improvement in their discipline. However. I have some questions to ask:

The first question relates to what has been done to promote and strengthen the national consciousness and patriotism of our national servicemen. This is an important aspect of our objective because Singapore is a newly independent country. After a decade of independence we have to see that such patriotism and national consciousness are inculcated in our national servicemen. In addition to military training and learning of discipline, I do not know whether such patriotism and national consciousness form part of their training. Are these values being consistently taught to our national servicemen as part of their training or as a kind of indoctrination? However, from what I have understood up till now, the only two activities are recreation and sports which are popular in the military camps. With regard to subjects like ideological training, I wonder whether such relevant topics are taught to our national servicemen. This is important because it will nurture their patriotism and boost their morale.

I have heard criticisms levelled against our national servicemen that they are reluctant to undergo military training and that they are eager to be discharged from the national service. If that is the case, it means that the SAF has not done well in the field of education and that our national servicemen have not realised the significance of national service. I, therefore, hope that the SAF will give due regard to this aspect of their work.

The second question is that some national servicemen have been indulging in undesirable habits. I have received such complaints from parents and I have also knowledge of certain cases. It appears that certain boys who had good clean habits before their enlistment quickly took to drinking and smoking as soon as they were drafted into the national service, to the great disappointment of their parents. I hope the Minister would order the SAF to ban drinking and smoking among the national servicemen in the barracks so that they would keep their good and clean habits in and out of the cam PS,

Thirdly. I wish to refer to the possible reduction of the period of training for the reservists. I have received complaints from some parents that the requirement of reservists to undergo one month's training every year has caused great inconvenience to those who are employed or in business, because they had to leave their job or business as there were no adequate substitutes to fill their posts. In order to help these reservists to solve their problems, I would urge the Minister to consider reducing the period of re-training, say, from one month to one week. I do not know what the Minister would think of this suggestion.

Fourthly. I would like to touch on the question of raising the leadership qualities of the officers. At the beginning of this year at an Officers' seminar the Minister emphasised that the officers should take on more responsibilities. This was reported in page 3 of the S/n Chew Jit Poh of 23rd January, 1976. The Minister pointed out that as officers they should adopt practical methods to solve various problems and should not pass the buck. The Minister also disclosed that a system is being set up in the Ministry of Defence to evaluate as well as promote the leadership capabilities of the officers and their ability to carry out duties. I fully agree with the Minister in this constructive measure. Only in this way can we be assured that the leadership qualities of the officers will constantly be raised. The officers should exert their authority in leadership and show off an image to be looked upon with respect by the rank and file. In order to achieve this objective the officers should not be capable only of giving orders to their subordinates but should try to be looked upon with esteem by their subordinates.

However, a tragic incident occurred in the past in which a soldier killed his superior officer. Whoever was to be blamed, the fact remains that this incident took place and it must have been due to some serious cause. What was the cause? Was it because of the incompetent leadership of the officer, or because of his abuse of power, or was it because of the ferocity or viciousness of the soldier concerned? I do not know. I believe all officers should learn something from this incident.

I have also heard the reservists talking about life in the camp. They talked about certain officers who impressed them very much, and they have learned something useful from such officers. At the same time, they also talked about the bad behaviour of some officers who used to lose their temper and find fault without any rhyme or reason, and accused them for not polishing their shoes well and dressing properly. The soldiers had to put up with the bossiness of such officers. The leadership of such officers is comparatively less effective. We should not only inculcate patriotism and national consciousness among the rank and file but we should also see that the leadership qualities of the officers are raised so that our national servicemen may be moulded into a good army.

Fifthly, many of my colleagues have touched on the numerous traffic accidents involving SAF drivers. There was an accident the day before yesterday. A military truck first knocked down a car and then a lamp post, before it finally crashed into a garden and rammed into another car in the garden. Such an accident is more thrilling and exciting than what we have seen in the films. I would like the Minister to inquire into the cause for the frequent occurrence of such accidents. More care should be taken in selecting the drivers and training them properly. If the drivers are not good or not careful, many people could be killed.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I reply very briefly to the Member for Sembawang? If a lad at the age of 18 has no feelings of patriotism when he joins the Army. then it is quite impossible within two years to instil in him any such decent feelings. Therefore, we make no attempt to do so. I think the Member for Sembawang should remember what Lenin said, because he is the master in transforming man's mind. He said if you want to make him a good Communist, you must start on him at the age of six years.

As for young men being reluctant to become national service soldiers and not realising the importance of that. I am afraid there is very little choice. If they do not turn up when they are called for national service, then they go to gaol. As for national servicemen having clean living before they join the Army and developing bad habits after that, well, maybe that might have happened. But it is more likely that the parents are not aware what children they have. Reservists are given make-up pay. If there is any inconvenience to the employers, then they can make an application for a deferment of reservist training. As I have said previously in this House, this was fully considered and applications are allowed when a case is made.

Now, about good officers and bad officers. The Member for Sembawang has said that an officer who insists that his men are clean and tidy and shine their boots, and so on, is a bad officer. In my view, he is a good officer. Good officers are seldom liked by soldiers. But they are respected and they are obeyed, and you therefore get a good fighting unit.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy -

(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 1201.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: I am not moving. Sir.

The sum of $652,748,100 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $65,100,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

4.00 p.m.

Head L -

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1003.

Sir, I notice that in the Budget Estimates, provision has been made for certain improvements in nearly every hospital. May I know what improvements are going to be carried out in these hospitals, and how could these improvements be felt when there is an acute shortage of medical personnel at the moment?

Sir, there is a shortage of doctors in many hospitals, and as a result doctors are overworked. At times this affects the necessary attention of many emergency cases, resulting in poor treatment of patients. If I may just quote a recent case. A school van carrying children from the Serangoon Kindergarten was sending the children home in Paya Lebar. It skidded along Bartley Road and the children were badly hurt. Two ambulances arrived around noon and sent the children to the Toa Payoh Hospital. At Toa Payoh Hospital the children were not given immediate attention. The badly injured children were given first aid treatment only, while the other children with bad facial cuts. bruises, and one with a torn lip were not given attention. They were left to be attended by an anaesthetist from the Singapore General Hospital. This medical officer did not arrive till late in the evening. Finally at 6.30 p.m, one of the parents became worried and went to look for a surgeon at a nearby hospital, namely, the Mount Alvernia Hospital. The child was rushed to the hospital and an emergency operation was conducted to stitch the torn lip. By that time it was too late as the tissues of the torn lip had dried up and stitching was difficult. This clearly shows that experienced personnel and equipment are not readily available for emergency cases. Something must be done to make our General Hospital more efficient.

Next, outpatient charges had been raised from $2 to $3. and now it is $4. I wonder whether this is reasonable? There are times when medicines bought from private dispensaries or sin seh shops which cost less seem to be more effective than those given in the hospitals. Why is this so? I suggest that treatment in the hospitals should at least be worth the cost the people have to pay. Nobody wants to be sick. Sickness may befall on a person at any moment. $4 may be a nominal charge to those who are earning a very high income, But $4 can go a long way to those in the lower income group. Furthermore, after the first visit in which a patient has to pay $4 he may be required to return for a further check-up. Each time he returns for a check-up, he has to pay $4 and it goes on until he is completely cured.

No doubt there is such a thing as a waiver of charges. But how often is this given? How willing are the hospital authorities to grant a waiver of charges to certain patients? It is quite pathetic to see people suffering because they are unable to pay their hospital charges. For instance, recently an old lady who fractured her leg had to go for an X-ray and was warded. She had to pay for medical treatment, ward charges and a few other charges. The bill came to quite an amount, so much so her children withdrew her from the hospital and did not send her back, simply because they could not afford to pay for the treatment any further. Moreover, the poor old lady had to be transferred from one daughter's house to another, never given a proper treatment, because her children could not afford to pay it. Can the Minister reduce the medical charges for the poor?

The Minister for Health (Dr Toh Chin Chye): Mr Speaker. Sir, I am not aware of the accident, which the Member for Anson mentioned just now, involving school children who were travelling in a bus. If he could give me particulars of the date and the time when they were taken to Toa Payoh Hospital, I would be able to find out more about the treatment that was given to the accident victims. However, I can assure the Member for Anson that it is not true that the Outpatients Unit at Toa Payoh Hospital is manned by an Anaesthetist. I must confess that the Accident and Emergency units in the hospitals are not up to the standard that I would want them to be, and currently my Ministry is undertaking an exercise to reform them. We have, in fact, sent three persons abroad recently to study how emergency operations are carried out in other hospitals.

With reference to the cost of ward charges. I can assure the Member for Anson that there is always a social worker in the hospitals who looks into the home background of the patient. If the social worker finds that such a person is unable to pay for the ward charges or medical treatment charges, then it is quite possible for a petition to be made to the Medical

Superintendent who will refer it to the Ministry which will, in turn, examine the application and, if necessary, charge at a lower rate or even waive the charges.

Nonetheless, I think it ought to be made quite clear that the hospitals do cost the Ministry a very substantial sum of money and our job really is to teach the people of Singapore not to get into hospitals. In fact, I am thinking of a scheme whereby patients could be treated as outpatients at home rather than in hospitals, partly because of the increasing cost of hospital charges and partly because it has been shown in other countries that more deaths occur through cross-infection at hospitals than if the patients had been treated as outpatients. Nonetheless, I like to assure the Member for Anson that the Ministry of Health is not that inhumane as to impose a heavy penalty on very sick patients who deserve a waiver of fees. If he can put up the case to me, we can always look into the matter.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, in view of the Minister's explanation. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1105*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Dr Ong Leong Boon.)

Sir, quite often we hear of reports that some nurses in hospitals have been rude to patients. There are also allegations that some of them seem to order patients around, especially those in `C' class wards. On the other hand, what makes the nurses behave in this manner? Well, to some extent, it could be that they themselves are not treated in a proper manner by their superiors. So, under provocation, with no peace of mind but with pressure of work, the poor nurses may at times show their frustration towards the patients.

I have also received complaints from nurses in the General Hospitals that some of the Hospital Sisters and Matrons do not show any tact. They scold, shout or even ill-treat the nurses in the presence of visitors. As there is a drastic shortage of staff, the nurses are overworked. They have to do more than their daily assignments, and their meal-times are very irregular. At times, the nurses have to work longer than their normal working hours because the handing over of duties to the next shift is not efficient.

There have been occasions when the duty roster was changed, causing inconvenience. A nurse turned up for the early shift according to the roster. After working for a few hours a last-minute change was made and she was told to go back and to report again for the late shift for that day. In other words, the nurse reported for the 7 am, to 2 p.m, shift but was told to go back at 10 am, and to come back again for the night shift beginning at 9 p.m. She was not compensated for the extra hours that she had put in, although she was promised. Some of them are told to do odd jobs in the presence of visitors, thus degrading them or embarrassing them.

Sir, these are some of the complaints. There are many other complaints but I do not want to mention them here. However, I trust the Minister will see that the nurses in the hospitals are treated well by their superiors and not bullied, so that the patients will not suffer because of their frustration.

Sir, I believe a survey of all registered nurses and midwives will be carried out by the Ministry very soon. The information is collected for the future planning of nursing manpower in hospitals and outpatient clinics in Singapore. I wonder what will be the outcome of this survey but let us hope, that we can have better terms of service for our nursing staff.

Dr Ong Leong Boon (Kim Song): Mr Speaker. Sir, this House will recall that in the 1973 and 1974 Budget. I voiced strong reservations about the pathetic state of health of the Health Ministry and its hospitals.' The then Minister, and subsequently his rather short-lived Minister of State, had chosen mischievously to avoid the debate squarely and instead performed cosmetic surgery to facelift a badly scarred Ministry. Now that the Ministry changes leadership after eight lean years, doctors and patients are eagerly waiting for the rain after the humid long hot summer. A new Minister brings new hope and expectation, and I have chosen to speak today confident that a new spirit of dynamism and enquiry is in motion. Rest assured that, doctors and nurses are amongst the most agreeable lot of homo sapiens, and our patients exemplarily patient and tolerant. We shall give the new Minister plenty of time to settle down to his unenviable job of salvage and acute resuscitation.

4.15 p.m.

It is true that we in Singapore have the best doctor population ratio of 1: 1200 in South-east Asia. This measures creditably even against the advanced countries in the West. Our patient-care is fairly good, though it is admittedly a long way from ideal. It is also true that increasing numbers of Malaysians. Indonesians and even Westerners have come here for medical care making Singapore, in the words of a certain Minister. "the centre of medical excellence in South-east Asia". We have never ceased to publicise Singapore's pre-eminence in medical standards in this part of the world and the medical profession will continue to promote and organise international conferences, seminars, and meetings for the advancement of medical knowledge and expertise. Singapore is generally well regarded for the quality and standard of its doctors, specialists and medical services. Unlike doctors from India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, our doctors are accorded instantaneous full registration in the United Kingdom and other parts of the Commonwealth. Patients going to China in the past few years with blind faith seeking cure with the acupuncturists were sadly disappointed and referred back to us for medical attention. Chinese medicine is no magic formula. We take great pride in our medical school which is 71 years of age today.

Unfortunately, in the entire medical set-up in Singapore today there is an all-pervading mood of disaffection, and restlessness among the doctors, dental surgeons, nurses and even ancillary Division IV staff. The attitude has regrettably become one of "if-you-can't-stick-it, hang it." Institutional practice has today become a stepping stone to private practice. Worse still, and this demands urgent attention, increasing numbers of doctors and specialists emigrate to Australia, New Zealand. Canada. United States and the U.K, seeking greener pastures. It is not enough for us in the political leadership to say "good luck, bon voyage and May God Bless You". It is neither correct for us to just throw stones at these professional people and label them as "quitters". Why should this sorry state be so? Surely Hippocrates oath, which every medical student takes on admission to the University, is not entirely lost. Has the medical profession shunned the lofty heights of a sacrifice and selflessness and the noble profession of all virtue and-no vice? I believe. Sir, many factors contributed to this sick malaise. I am confident that our leaders are generally aware of the problems facing the medical service. I feel, however, that notwithstanding the above, the Ministry's prescriptions to tackle the issues will remain haphazard and ineffective as long as the medical service remains a low priority on the Cabinet's abacus.

Singapore was re-zoned into four catchment areas to alleviate pressure on the Singapore General Hospital. After almost a year in operation, demand on the Singapore General Hospital remains high. It is hoped that with time the peripheral hospitals will assume a greater load of patient-care. A new Singapore General Hospital costing, in all. some $200 million is under construction to replace the old Outram Road General Hospital. A new Teaching Hospital at Kent Ridge is on the planning board, costing, many millions more. I would like to ask the Hon. Minister what his plans are to staff these large hospitals. No doubt more doctors. specialists, dental surgeons, pharmacists, nurses and ancillary staff are needed. Otherwise we shall be spending hundreds of millions of dollars to erect gigantic white elephants. The Teaching Hospital in a neighbouring country is a constant reminder that impressive, expensive hospitals can be built given the money, but finding the required number of doctors and other staff to run them is to me an entirely different proposition. To me a happy doctor in a cow-shed is more productive than a grumbling stethoscope behind four great walls, and a smiling nurse who calls her patients first names in a small unassuming hospital is more therapeutic than that pompous touch-me-not impersonal creature on two legs that patrol the corridors of imposing institutions - all morning glory.

Last year the then Minister proudly proclaimed that only 90-plus doctors resigned from the service while 110 joined making a net gain of doctors in the Ministry of Health. To me this is a very naughty reply from a clever politician. He omitted the breakdown analysis of these figures in terms of experience, qualification and training. May I humbly submit that 90 captains leaving and 110 captains joining the SAF is quite different from 90 captains leaving and 110 recruits joining the SAF. What are the figures for doctor resignations this year? How many doctors and specialists have emigrated to other countries?

I drew the attention of this House to the high proportion of non-citizens in the medical school two years ago. In a graduating class of about 120 last year some 50% were non-citizens and today in our hospitals we have an acute shortage of housemen. This situation will continue unless measures are taken with haste to encourage more Singaporeans to study medicine, I shall be most grateful if the Hon. Minister could provide figures to show that corrective measures have been taken to ensure a continuing supply of new doctors to run our hospitals. As I have mentioned before, non-citizen graduates of our medical school are birds of passage: they have amply proven to be so: and they cannot be relied upon to man our hospitals. Are we then to recruit doctors from, say, the Indian sub-continent?

The situation with dental officers is even more pathetic and appalling. Because few Singaporeans chose dentistry for a profession, the Government instead of encouraging students to study dentistry opted to spend some $5 million ~to train a corps of dental therapists. Each dental therapist-in-training receives an allowance of about $300 per month. I am amazed at this scheme. If only the same money were made available in the form of scholarship to students to take dentistry, I am confident there shall be in a few years increasing numbers of fully qualified dental surgeons who are best trained to care for our nation's dental health. In the meantime Division II registered dentists and quacks are having a field day. I wonder how many Members of this august Chamber can claim to have a family dental surgeon. Equally I wonder how many Members present here this afternoon have lost salvageable teeth so necessary for mastication, if not cosmesis by an inadvertent visit to a dental quack!

Why are so many doctors and dental surgeons unhappy? Doctors work long and irregular hours, frequently exceeding 100 hours a week. Their work is exacting, seven days a week. A wrong diagnosis, an inadequate resuscitation, an incomplete surgical exploration, otherwise termed surgical misadventure in the wee hours of the morning when this Chamber and all Singapore are fast asleep, may end up in the never-never territory of the inquisitive pathologist at the mortuary. Patients and relatives rightly demand courtesy, good manners and care even during odd hours.

I have asked for a salary revision for doctors and dental surgeons, and I am not satisfied with the mini-adjustments that were made. The vast majority of medical officers have seen no change in terms of employment for more than 10 years. Of course, they receive NWC recommendations - who has not in Singapore? The case of the housemen is a unique exercise in salary revision. The housemen got a salary adjustment from $750 to $850 per month last year after an unfortunate though abortive exercise of not reporting for work on the first day. They thought initially they had won. Instead they discovered later that, in fact, they lost. The Ministry of Health assisted by its clever lieutenants, the Director of Medical Services and his Deputy Director, won. How? Annual vacation for housemen was slashed from four weeks to two weeks. I am sure this House needs a lot of persuasion that the housemen got a pay rise. May I plead with the Hon. Minister for fair play and fair reward for a good day's work. Let us not play games. Let us not resort to Change Alley tactics.

If doctors cannot be given a fair basic salary commensurate with their work, then may I suggest they be paid overtime pay so that the civil service salary structure need not be disturbed. This is a reasonable request and details can always be worked out.

In the U.K. last year there was tremendous dislocation of the medical service when the National Health Service doctors and hospital consultants went on strike or worked to rule in their fight for fair pay and service conditions, and I am sure our doctors here do not wish to resort to silly industrial action in pursuit of fair play.

Two years ago the then Health Minister reported to this House that 200 units of flats will be built for doctors working in public hospitals. Today no further development is heard. I am reliably informed that the Ministry is still thinking about it -- one of several thoughts that hopefully one day will see the light of dawn. Housing is a very serious problem not just for our doctors but for our young professionals and our middle income wage earners. It is one area that the Government can help and must help immediately.

Institutional practice has definite and certain advantages and opportunities such as training facilities. experience and work satisfaction that private practice cannot offer. Few doctors would leave the serviie if they can be kept reasonably happy at work. If they leave for private practice, it is more often than not, in pursuit of money. If this is so, then it is indeed a sad reflection on the medical profession but sadder still it is a reflection on the moneytheistic society that we have nurtured over the last decade.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Sir, I think it is most unfair for me not to take this opportunity to congratulate the Ministry of Health for its heart, led by the biggest heart of all. the Hon. Minister for Health, especially after the Member for Kim Seng's delivery. I heard tell that through the Hon. Minister's intervention the breast-feeding mothers' group was able to set up their third milk bank at the Kandang Kerbau Hospital to save sick and dying babies at the hospital who, without mother's milk, would have otherwise died.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, if we say that all our nurses are discourteous, it is not fair. Nevertheless I have also received complaints about the incorrect attitude of some nurses. They are impatient and would not listen to complaints made by the patients. But, generally speaking. most of our nurses are well-mannered. Our medical standards are very high because some foreigners who were treated in our hospitals got well very soon. And comparing the facilities in their hospitals, they say that our medical standards are very high.

Just now the Member for Anson mentioned that some nurses who were not treated well by their superiors would vent their grievances on the patients. I think this is possible, especially those elderly nurses who have to allocate work to the other nurses. For -instance, on a Sunday the wards do not need as many nurses, but they would nevertheless send a great number of nurses to man the wards. If the Minister were to visit such wards, particularly in the Maternity Hospital, he would find such instances there. I think this is one case that the Minister should give his attention to.

There are certain spinster nurses attached to the Family Planning Unit. These nurses do not have their own families. So if the Minister wants to promote family planning, I do not think that it is proper to post spinster nurses to that Unit. They should not be asked to work in the Family Planning and Population Board.

4.30 p.m.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Mr Speaker. Sir, I am not quite sure what questions are being asked of me. However, to come to what the Member for Anson has said with regard to the behaviour of nurses in our hospitals, I would like to say that, by and large, I believe the nurses are doing their best. I would like to ask any Member of this House whether he would like to take on the job as a nurse and work on a night shift and, probably with a wife waiting for him in the house, to see whether he would be able to withstand all the stresses and strains that are demanded of him without losing perhaps his composure. That settles the complaint that nurses are rude.

We have initiated a scheme in the Ministry whereby nurses are being encouraged to regard patients as human beings and not just objects to be treated. Somebody has given us a sum of $10,000 and this has been deposited in the POSB. The interest accrued will be used for merit awards to nurses commended by the Medical Superintendent or the Heads of Units. It will not be granted on the basis of patients voting for the best nurse, because it is not possible to ask a pediatric patient or a geriatric patient or a mentally unsound patient at Woodbridge Hospital to vote which nurse is the best nurse. Hence, we have to have a scheme which will allow some Unit Heads leeway to judge which nurses are performing their duty and more than that.

Far from receiving complaints that nurses are rude, I have on the other hand received letters, and there have been letters written in the Chinese papers, commending on the good behaviour of nurses. I have been very pleased and I have transmitted these letters to the Medical Superintendent of the hospital concerned.

I do not believe we are facing a situation where it is impossible or difficult to recruit nurses. On the contrary, the demand to enter the nursing profession is there and I can assure the House that we will be able to tap the best of applicants.

Whether or not the younger nurses are bullied by their superiors, that is a matter which I am not aware of. All I know is that I visited a private hospital recently and when it was known that I was going to visit this private hospital, everything was made spick and span. The attendants and the nurses were alerted. Patients were given new pyjamas and the Administration told me to come along again another time.

It is true that sometimes the administration of a hospital can be slack. Because a hospital operates 24 hours a day for 365 days a year, many of those working in the hospital - doctors, nurses and paramedical staff - sometimes, do take things for granted and that many of the routine matters appear to them to be unimportant whereas they are important to patients. I have emphasised to the Medical Superintendents that this point must be looked into and I hope to see a distinct improvement. The Member for Kim Seng himself incidentally works in the General Hospital and so he should be in a position to know whether there is any improvement or not., If he does come across rude nurses, please do let me know and if he comes across affectionate nurses, please also inform me.

With regard to emigration of doctors. I am afraid this is a problem which is of concern to the Government. As such. we did do a survey on doctors who were in Government service, asking them the reasons for leaving the Ministry of Health. The first results which have been evaluated have come in. The reasons given for leaving Government service are as follows: Higher income - 48.1% More job satisfaction - 25.5% Better working conditions - 5.2% More freedom - 6.7% Completion of contract or termination of temporary appointment - 4.5% Other reasons - 10.0%

So there are at least 48.1% of doctors who were honest enough to admit that they were leaving the Government service because they could earn a higher income. I am just asking myself: how long is the Member for Kim Seng going to stay with the University too' I hope he does not let me down.

It is a fact of life that doctors are mobile. At one dinner function I had occasion to meet the President of a Royal College of Surgeons from the United Kingdom. I asked him why did he study medicine instead of engineering, since his country was in the forefront of the industrial revolution and that engineers performed a dominant role in promoting economic growth in his country. His answer was very simple: medicine is the most secure job. It means that doctors can move about, particularly doctors in the English speaking world. Singapore doctors are brought up in the English language and so they are welcome to migrate to Australia. Canada, the United Kingdom. New Zealand and the United States. It is a fact of life that many of our young graduates, while preparing for the final year for M,B.B.S., do go up to Bangkok or Kuala Lumpur to take the external examination conducted oy the American Council for Foreign Medical Graduates, so that after they have graduated they could put after their names "M.B.B.S., E.C.F.M.G.". I am not sure whether the Member for Kim Seng has done that, but he should know as he has lived in a hospital among the medical undergraduates, most of whom have done this. This applies not just to the Malaysian undergraduates but also the Singapore graduates as well.

Assuming that we are critically short of doctors, I have no hesitation to impose compulsory national service .for women doctors, just as of this moment male doctors are obliged to undergo 2� years' national service. Some of these national service doctors come under the control of the Ministry of Health. Others are under the Singapore Armed Forces. There is indeed a complaint about discrepancy between the treatment accorded to male graduates and female graduates and I give due notice that (it may be at some future date) I will make it compulsory for all those who have undergone an expensive medical education to return in kind by performing similarly 2� years' service in the Ministry of Health.

With regard to the recruitment, loss and establishment strength of doctors. I can provide figures for four years as follows: Number of Doctors Resigned Recruited or Retired Net Gain 1972 61 59 2 1973 144 61 83 1974 119 87 32 1975 90 74 16

It is fair to say that those whom we recruited were of medical officer grade and many of them did not have a higher or postgraduate medical qualification. Some of those whom we lost did have seniority and specialist qualifications. In 1975. 13 Singapore citizen doctors with a higher qualification and 42 without a higher qualification, had resigned. Among Malaysian citizen doctors, no one with a higher qualification had resigned, but nine without a higher qualification had resigned. One doctor from India with a higher qualification had also resigned and there were others too - one with a higher qualification and two without a higher qualification - who had resigned. I must confess that it is not a good trade-off -losing an experienced doctor and gaining inexperienced medical officers. But we have to face the fact of life that many doctors do make use of our hospitals and the University as a stepping stone whereby they can acquire experience at public expense and after some time they resign.

When I was at the University it was very marked indeed that the moment someone was promoted to an Associate Professor, he was called "Professor" by his students and patients. In less than three years, most of them would resign. So knowing that this is the way doctors behave, I think the remarks of the Member for Kim Seng should be directed at his own colleagues and not to the Minister for Health who, after all, is trying his hardest to keep the doctors. It is not in my position to go along and give them more money. This is a prerogative of the Treasury which ties salaries up to other professions. But if taxpayers are willing to pay a special sum of money for better health service, then we can suitably reward doctors, nurses and other para-medical staff.

If the Member for Kim Seng were to go round and propagate his idea that there should be a special health service tax. then I think it is quite possible for us to retain our more senior doctors so that they do not go into private practice or migrate.

I live to regret what I said in a speech when I was at the University - that Orchard Road was the Harley Street of Singapore. The end result was that "specialist centres" popped up all over the place. Orchard Road is bigger than Harley Street now. Anybody who has got a little cubicle in the complex called the Specialist's Centre becomes a specialist. Whether or not this helps the migration of doctors from the public sector to the private sector is debatable. I thought I was boosting the morale of the doctors, but it turned out to the disadvantage of the Ministry of Health and the University.

It is also true that doctors are not stupid. They do read their newspapers. They follow political events in the region and they know what has happened in Indo-China. When a three-star General buzzes off to the United States, he becomes either a taxi-driver or a waiter in a restaurant. On the other hand, ri you are a doctor and you migrate to the United States you are wanted. I have my own forebodings that a good number of our doctors in Singapore are registered not only in Singapore but also registered overseas, because Australia. New Zealand and the United Kingdom permit the registration of doctors even though their physical presence is not required in those countries.

4.45 p.m.

I remember it was last year, just before the Australian Government announced the closure of its registry for medical doctors, when I was told the story that SIA was carrying Singapore doctors to Perth or Sydney and Qantas was bringing them back, These are human failings and doctors are not without their failings. I would be the last person to say that doctors are "Gods". Although they are healers, they do look after their own welfare as well. Let us be honest.

The Member for Kim Seng would be a good Political Secretary to me if he is willing to serve in my Ministry at a salary of $1,750 per month. He can resign from his present post in the University where he is probably getting more than I can give. He can be my Political Secretary and do a little campaigning on how to keep our doctors in the Ministry and in Singapore. It will not be a great loss as long as these doctors stay and practise in Singapore. But it will be a loss when they migrate. It is a fact of life that even Colombo Plan scholars who were sent abroad to study medicine, had paid up their bonds at substantial rates, $40,000 each, and just buzzed off.

I was responsible for trying to bring the establishment of the Medical Department in the University of Singapore to full strength by changing the scheme of service in the University, hoping to get better and brighter young doctors willing to teach. But unfortunately not all of them have lived up to my expectation. Worse still, the seniors have set the bad example in that after promotion either to the professorship, associate professorship or even to senior lecturership, they would pack off within three years or so. This is the answer to the Member for Kim Seng.

As for the nurses, my sympathies are always with them. Mind you, if you are a patient in a hospital, you see the doctor only once in the morning. But the nurses see you for 24 hours a day. If I were the Member for Anson, I would be very careful when talking about the behaviour of the nurses, because they are going to look after me for 24 hours a day. The doctor diagnoses the ailment and puts the stethoscope to your chest. The technician takes your electrocardiogram. The doctor then prescribes the medicine and that is that. It is the nurses who give you the medicine and the injection. It can be very painful sometimes if they inject you at the wrong place. Mr Speaker. Sir, I really do not know how to put my finger on the particular problem that the Member for Anson or the Member for Kim Seng has raised,

But one point raised by the Member for Kim Seng is about dental therapists. In China they have what they call "bare-foot" doctors. It is a very simple philosophy which is being practised in many developing countries, viz., make the most use of whatever manpower resources you have. It is impossible for a country with 800 million people to provide medical services of the standard that we see in Western countries. I do not see how China will ever have such large numbers of Western-trained doctors to serve every commune in the countryside. Therefore, they have a short course of three years for "barefoot" doctors after which they can provide primary health care.

The same situation applies to Singapore, particularly to dentistry. I do not say that Division II dentists are quacks. By gosh! I have not yet been to a Division II dentist but my old amah used to go to a Division II dentist and she paid only $3 for a tooth extraction, If she had gone to a Division I dentist she would have to pay $30 There is an enormous difference in fees between going to a Division I dentist and a Division II dentist. The dental therapists that we are recruiting will come from the dental nurses who would have to have a minimum of five years' experience after three years' training. Dental students who graduate from the University of Singapore undergo a mere four-year course of training, immediately after which, even without housemanship, they are allowed to treat patients by themselves. On the other hand, dental therapists are not permitted to do so. Even after training for four years, they need to have ten years' supervision by professionally qualified dentists before they are allowed to go on their own. Therefore, if a patient has to decide whether he wishes to be treated by an experienced person or by an inexperienced one, he would rather be treated by a person who has the requisite experience. Much of the bread-and-butter of dentistry involves simple filling and extraction, Dental therapists are not allowed to perform an operation on the soft tissues. They are not allowed to do orthodontics whereas the professional dentists are allowed to do so.The difference is that dental therapists do not have the two year-course of Higher School Certificate that the University dentists have. All in all. I think it is very unfair for the Member for Kim Seng, who has just returned from London and who was not here when the Dentists Registration (Amendment) Bill was passed, to give the poor dental therapists a bashing. We have got the first batch of dental therapists in the first year of training. They will not pass out until after 1978. Even so, they would have to have another 10 years' supervised experience before they can be out on their own.

It was a mistake of the Ministry of Health to have allowed the Division II dentists' registry to run down. The end result is that dental assistants who had been hired by these dentists are finding themselves out of job because their bosses have retired and they have not been replaced. I know it because they have written to me. We have got to understand what exactly it is that we are prepared to pay for. If the taxpayer in Singapore is prepared to pay a special levy for medical and dental services, then I would be fully in favour of charging the taxpayer accordingly and give the service that he is asking for. But the Member for Anson earlier on complained about the increase in hospital fees. Here, we have a contradiction. On the one hand he wants a service and on the other hand he refuses to pay. You cannot have your cake and eat it. Either you pay for what you consume or you do not consume because you cannot pay. Again, this is a problem which is being examined very closely in my Ministry apart from the other programmes which we hope to implement within the Ministry.

Over and above all this. I would like to emphasise that the Ministry of Health's primary function is probably less curative and more on preventive medicine. The way to do it is to activate medical education for the man-in-the-street, so that he learns how not to fall sick and, therefore, how not to go to the hospital. It is not necessary for a sick person to be referred immediately to a hospital. There are outpatient dispensaries where doctors are well qualified to examine the patients and the charge is only $3, including medicine.

The Member for Anson has also said that the medicine dispensed by the hospitals is not effective whereas the medicine dispensed by the Chinese sin sehs is effective. He rather shook me. If that is true, then I think we ought to close down our hospitals and advise all patients to seek whatever treatment is available in town. But I do not believe it is as simple as that.

The Chairman: Order. I have allowed the Minister to go on longer than what he is allowed. Unless he really gets on, we can never deal with the other amendments on the Ministry of Health.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: I will stop now to give Members a chance to ask me other questions.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I am very sympathetic towards nurses.

The Chairman: Are you withdrawing your amendment?

Mr P. Govindaswamy: If the Minister were to go to a hospital without prior notice, he will then find out what is actually happening there. But if he were to ring up the Director of Medical Services and say that he would be coming to see the hospitals, then everything will be put right. He must make a surprise check in order to find out what is going on in the hospitals.

However, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: At this stage I propose to have a break.

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.25 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.57 p.m. until 5.25 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.25 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head L - (cont.) -

Mr N. Govindasamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, I have another amendment under subhead BAA 1 107*. (*The amendment reads as follows:- (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 1107.) My comments on both these subheads are related and, as such. could I have your permission to range my comments on both subheads?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Thank you. Sir. The Minister for Health has tried to explain away the shortage of doctors in the Ministry of Health. But I am sure that not only myself but other Members of the House are still not too happy with his explanation.

Sir, there is a reduction of 55 Division I posts in subhead AAA 1111. I can reasonably assume that in the Ministry of Health most of the Division I posts would be held by doctors. If my presumption is correct, then the reduction in the posts of doctors is, to say the least, a little disturbing. Is the reduction provided for because the Ministry is unable to fill the present establishment vacancies of 398 Division I officers? There have always been complaints of a shortage of doctors in Government hospitals. What is the position now? Why is there this reduction of 55 posts in subhead AAA 1111?

Sir, there is a shortage of doctors in the Government service. It is, therefore, disturbing to note that so many qualified doctors are performing administrative ,functions in the Ministry of Health. Some of these doctors have been trained at high cost, and many of them are specialists who are in short supply. It would be more appropriate to utilise these trained specialists and doctors in treating the poor than to make them fill up forms, statistics, ordering hospital equipment and other supervisory functions which could very well be performed by non-professional administrative officers. I am told that in advanced countries there are special courses for hospital administrators who need not be qualified doctors. Could we also not look forward to the day when our doctors will be employed only to cure the sick and not for filling up forms?

One of the complaints of doctors in the Government service is that there are insufficient promotion prospects in our medical service. That is one of the `easons why many doctors have resigned. Of course, the other main reason is that they could hope to make more money in private practice. Although the Minister for Health mentioned that 48.1% of our doctors have resigned because there is more money outside than in the public service, I believe the figure could be much more than 48.1%. If money is the only reason for their leaving, it is deplorable to find that dedication to curing the sick is associated with the amount of money that can be made. Perhaps, there must be something wrong with our teachings in schools, or, more in the case of doctors, our teachings in the medical faculty of our University. There have also been cases of our professional people, doctors included, emigrating from Singapore. This was accepted by the Minister just now. One begins to wonder if, in the University, whilst teaching medicine proper ethics are also being taught with regard to saving I yes as well as the social obligation to the people of Singapore who foot the bulk of the bill of the School of Medicine.

5.30 p.m.

Complaints of lack of promotion prospects are genuine and yet under BAA 1106, the Senior Physician, Grade D post, has been abolished. Under BAA 1107, three posts of Deputy Medical Superintendents. Grade E, positions have also been abolished. Similar reductions of senior posts are `also to be found in the Toa Payoh Hospital. This is not conducive to our retaining senior doctors who aspire to be promoted.

I am told that in the Physiotherapy Department, with an establishment complement of 32 physiotherapists, we only have 22. This is a shortage of 31%. For the

32 physiotherapists on the establishment, there is only one promotion post of a senior physiotherapist. Some physiotherapists have worked for 13-14 years without any promotions or any prospects for promotions in the near future. Turnover is very high I am told. In recent years. industrial accident cases have been referred to the Physiotherapy Department more frequently than ever, so that the department is unable to cope with and to give sufficient help to the victims. Rehabilitation of industrial accident cases has been neglected.

Many of our specialists and Heads of Medical Units resigned without training other officials under them to take over, creating a vacuum. Sometimes one begins to wonder if they are deliberately creating a scarcity. thereby making themselves indispensable.

We must be grateful that not all Heads of Units and specialists are in this category. I was therefore very pleased to note that the President found it fit to bestow the Meritorious Service Medals on Professors Wong Hock Boon and Seah Cheng Siang for their devoted service in establishing and training specialists in their School of Post-Graduate Medical Studies, Together with these two professors, we must also be grateful to the team of other lecturers and staff who assist them in their training of specialists in this School of Post-Graduate Medical Studies.

Another complaint of doctors who have resigned is about the poor working conditions in our hospitals. In the case of the Singapore General Hospital, the complaint is generally true. I know because I have been there. In some wards, no private rooms are available for doctors to do their work or rest when they are on call or on a long stretch of duty. There is a vote in the Development Estimates for improvement and redevelopment of the Singapore General Hospital. I hope this complaint will be taken care of from this vote

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Mr Speaker. Sir, the reduction of 55 Division I posts, as mentioned by the Member for Telok Blangah, is due to the fact that there is now available local post-graduate training facilities. These are supernumerary posts which were held against doctors who once upon a time were sent abroad for training. But as we now have these facilities, it is considered not necessary to have that large number of supernumerary posts. However, that does not mean that we do not want to recruit an equivalent number of doctors. I must confess that the Establishment List presented by the Ministry of Finance is more mystifying than clarifying. I myself had to do a little piece of research to answer the question which has been raised by the Member for Telok Blangah. May I refer him to this little booklet called the Establishment List of Singapore for the Financial Year 1st April, 1976 (031st March, 1977 (Paper Cmd. 4 of 1976). I was very puzzled indeed why there was a reduction of three posts at Grade E level in the Singapore General Hospital. Let me do a little explanation. I wonder whether the Member for Telok Blangah has got a copy of this book.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Yes. I have.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: If he were to turn to page 39, under subhead BAA 1109, Radiologist. Grade G, he will see down there Note (iii) which says. "Includes one prf Senior Radiologist. Grade E. One ms (107)." So I had to go and find out what is the meaning of "prf" and "ms". If he turns to page 5, he will find out what is the meaning of "prf". It says. "Post(s) regraded from ..." and "ms" means "Present holder promoted on merit to scale . That is one. If he looks under "Surgeon. Grade G, there is a footnote (iv) which says. "Two prf Senior Surgeon. Grade E and two prt Senior Registrar/Registrar/Medical Officer (111/116/124). Two ms (107)." All that it adds up to is that these are three physical bodies who have been promoted to Grade E although they were holding a post in Grade G. They have recently undergone a promotion exercise and so they are in Grade E. So there is no loss at all in the total number of Grade E posts. If he were to go through the pages for the Ministry of Health, he will find similar explanations as given in the footnotes. I am afraid this is a sort of Alice in Wonderland puzzle for me. It is like a Cheshire cat. Sometimes it eats and sometimes it does not eat.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, as I said, I am just wondering whether this is all done deliberately to confuse the people into believing that we have got sufficient Surgeons and sufficient senior officers. However, since I have got some more amendments later on. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, I wonder how Changi Hospital is being managed. Recently a motorcyclist who was travelling along Upper Changi Road met with a serious accident. It is believed that a motor car which was coming from the opposite direction overtook a moving bus and collided head-on into this poor motorcyclist. The motorcyclist was very badly injured in the left leg and lost a right knee cap. After the accident, the driver of the car abandoned his vehicle and fled. A number of people gathered to see the injured boy who appealed for help, but none gave him a helping hand. Fortunately a few off-duty workers who were travelling along that road saw the plight of this poor boy. They took the initiative to take the boy up to the Changi Hospital. This is where the comedy begins.

The hospital authorities at Changi did not treat the injured boy simply because the hospital did not have the necessary facilities and expertise to treat his injuries. He was then taken back by the off-duty workers to the scene of the accident and left to lie there. In the meantime, an ambulance had gone to the scene of the accident and left, Another ambulance had to be summoned by some people to come and fetch the injured boy to the Singapore General Hospital for immediate attention, Three hours had elapsed before a major operation was performed. What is important is that the authorities at Changi Hospital should have taken immediate steps to send the boy in their own ambulance to the nearest hospital that has got the facilities to treat the boy, instead of leaving him to the off-duty workers who then decided to take him back to the scene of the accident.

Sir, I wonder why the Changi Hospital cannot manage with such emergency cases. I hope the Minister will see that ample facilities and expertise are made available at this hospital as many housing estates are coming up in the outskirts of this locality. Therefore, a fully equipped hospital is necessary to serve the people living in that area.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Sir, the Changi military hospital is under the administration of the Ministry of Defence, and I am afraid I am unable to answer the Member's question.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, the Changi military hospital has been taken over by the Government, and the Alexandra Hospital has also been taken over by the Government.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Mr Speaker, Sir, the fact is that the Changi military hospital is under the administration of the Ministry of Defence and not under the Ministry of Health, although it is true that the Ministry of Health has got a few of its professional staff there to assist the soldier-doctors in the Changi Hospital. I am in no position at all to explain away the negligence which the Member for Anson has mentioned just now.

However, I would like to inform the House that currently there is correspondence going on between my Ministry and the Ministry of Defence as to who is going to take over the administration and responsibility of running the Changi military hospital, If it is going to accept civilian patients, then of course the Ministry of Health will have to have a hand in its administration and running thereof. But I must inform the House that as of this moment, national servicemen are in charge of the Changi military hospital. A statement has been issued to say that it is prepared to accept civilian patients. I think the statement came out two weeks ago. We should correctly make the fullest use of the hospital. But if we were to run the military hospital as a civilian hospital, then the cost of running it is going to be very high indeed, because we have to pay the hospital staff civilian rates of pay whereas national servicemen are being paid national service rates of pay. And there is an enormous difference as far as the Ministry of Finance is concerned. Hence, the correspondence that is going on between my Ministry and the Ministry of Defence. But I am quite sure that in the end the Finance Ministry will have the last say. However. I would like to point out that civilians are now being accepted by the Changi military hospital.

5.45 p.m.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, in view of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of item Ii) of subhead AAA 3020.

Sir, having thrown so many brickbats at the Ministry of Health, I now move this amendment to congratulate the Family Planning and Population Board on their excellent performance. If our population growth has been checked and if we have achieved some success in population control, it is due in no small measure to the work of the Family Planning and Population Board. Credit must go to them. Our average annual birth rate was 1.7% for the period 1971-74 and the present birth rate of less than 1 .4% is an achievement better than expected.

We in the trade unions have found the officers of the Board most cooperative and helpful in organising educational programmes for our workers as well as in the organisation of regional seminars on family planning and population growth. The Board should also be congratulated for conducting family planning education programmes in community centres and other youth organisations. The two-child norm has its required impact on our society. But I am afraid that all this good work will come to nothing if, in our hospitals, those mothers who go for ligation are not treated with care, consideration and understanding. Let me not say anything more about the hospitals.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Sir, I would like to thank the Member for Telok Blangah for giving a bouquet to the Family Planning and Population Board. I was expecting a brickbat.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendments stood in the name of Mr N. Govindasamy -

(7) That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BCA 2532.

(8) That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of item (a) of subhead CDA 3011.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I am not moving my next two amendments, in deference to the Member for Kim Seng who has got an amendment to move.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 8103.

Sir, this is in regard to the redevelopment of the Singapore General Hospital. The new Singapore General Hospital is going to cost the Government something like $200 million in total. With a provision of about 1 .900 beds as compared to 1 .400 beds at present, this new hospital will therefore require more staff.

In reference to the statements made by previous speakers, I would like in brief, firstly, to ask the Minister responsible if he would try to encourage more people to join the staff of the new General Hospital, and if he has made any move to ensure that the 200 units of housing promised for medical officers in this House two years ago would be implemented? Secondly, in order to encourage more people to take up the medical profession. would he reconsider the slashing of the two weeks vacation leave of the house officers? Will the two weeks' leave be restored? Thirdly, would he consider overtime pay for the medical staff? Fourthly, with the redevelopment of the Singapore General Hospital on the same campus as the University Faculty of Medicine, would he encourage more Singaporeans to go into the Faculty of Medicine, thereby cutting down the number of non-citizens who are at present taking up places which could very well be given to our own citizens?

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Mr Speaker. Sir, to answer the last question first. It will be ideal indeed if more Singapore citizens were to opt for medicine or dentistry. If there was a reduction in the number of Singapore students wishing to do this discipline. I put the blame fully and squarely upon the professional associations themselves, the Singapore Medical Association and the Singapore Dental Association. At some point of time they did put out statements that Singapore was having a surplus of doctors and that there were no jobs for dentists. The net result of it all was that parents who read that statement in the newspapers believed that there was no future for their children if they did medicine and dentistry. And. therefore, we landed in a situation where we had to scrape the bottom of the barrel for Singapore students doing medicine and dentistry.

When I was in the University, I remembered very clearly that we had to lower the number of points to admit Singapore citizens into the Medical school. I do not think that was a very good idea because the result is that we are going to have third-class doctors. If someone is prepared to be trained or treated by third-class doctors, that is all right with him. But I am not going to be treated by a third-class doctor. I think it will do the Medical school every harm if it was said that our students are less than mediocre.

Likewise, in the field of dentistry, we are taking in students who opted for dentistry not as their second choice but their third or fourth choice. And so we ended up with having three or four Singapore citizens opting to do dentistry for a few years. It was only last year that we got a good number of Singapore citizens opting to do dentistry, even so not all of them chose dentistry as their first choice. What I have said for dentistry also applies to medicine.

The Chairman: Dr Toh, you have only three more minutes to reply.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: To answer the other question of housing for doctors, I have looked into this problem. I am given to understand that HUDC flats are now available for sale to doctors, and therefore the urgency to provide housing no longer exists.

As regards the two weeks' leave and overtime pay for medical officers are concerned, I would suggest to the Member for Kim Seng that he writes to me and I will take it up. I am quite curious about the two weeks' leave for medical officers. I did not know that the two weeks' leave was cancelled. I do not have any idea about the overtime pay. I have to be very careful about overtime pay because I am in no position to guarantee overtime pay. There will be other civil servants who will also demand overtime pay. I think Ministers deserve some overtime pay too!

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I am not terribly impressed with the reply, but it is much better to have a short reply rather than a verbose one. In any case I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $182,257,480 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $52,576,100 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head M -

Mr L. P. Rodrigo (Serangoon Gardens): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1003*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Ho See Beng and P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, this amendment gives me the opportunity to ask of the Minister for his overview of the development of post-Vietnam politics in relation to the neutrality of South-east Asia and to super power assertions in the region.

What may be the realistic expectations of ASEAN countries of adequately meeting the difficulties likely to confront them in the years ahead?

Mr Ho See Beng (Bras Basah): Mr Speaker, Sir, the ideal foreign relation situation for Singapore is to be a friend of all and enemy of none. I am referring to our foreign relation situation towards the super powers. It has been acknowledged that the best way of maintaining good relations with these super powers is to hold them at an equal distance. We all know that our Foreign Minister is an able diplomat. Could he tell us the position of our relationship with these super powers, and whether it has been maintained at an equal distance?

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker. Sir, during the past few weeks much has been said about ASEAN. I must congratulate our officials in leaving a very good impression of Singapore at the recent ASEAN Summit Conference at Bali. With this important meeting we seem to have developed closer ties in many respects with our neighbours.

It is noticed in the Estimates that provisions of $231,500 and $2,500,000 have been allocated for contributions to the ASEAN Central Secretariat in Jakarta and the ASEAN Fund respectively. May I know what role Singapore will play in this ASEAN Secretariat? Sir. provision has also been made for ASEAN training awards. I wonder how many Singaporeans so far have benefitted from these ASEAN training awards. Under this item, what courses are being made available for this year for ASEAN people?

Next, I would like to know what is the basis of posting our civil servants to our embassies abroad. How long after being attached to the Ministry are they posted to our embassies? To-date how many of them are still waiting to be posted overseas? I raise this question because I gather that a number of our civil servants have resigned from this Ministry because of delays in their postings abroad.

From the Budget Statement I gather that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is also one of the Ministries that is short of Division I officers. How does this shortage affect our attempt to open missions or embassies in foreign countries. Does this shortage in any way affect our overseas missions for purposes of trade? May I also ask how successful have we been in all our delegations that have gone overseas?

I note that our trade with Japan, the USA and the European countries has declined during the past few years. What are our embassies in these countries doing to make sure that there is an improvement in trade?

Sir, sometime ago our Foreign Minister led a successful delegation to China. May I know what is the outcome of this particular mission? Have we in any way developed a two-way trade with China? Or has it been one way most of the time? We have created special port facilities for ships from China. Obviously we are importing a lot of Chinese goods either for local consumption or for re-export. What has been China's response towards Singapore-made goods, and have we been successful in selling our products to them?

6.00 p.m.

The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr Lee Khoon Choy): Mr Speaker. Sir, I would like to answer the questions raised by the Members for Serangoon Gardens and Bras Basah at one go. I am also very glad to find that some of our hon. Members are also concerned with the external situation, especially after the ASEAN Summit.

The situation regarding the super-powers or the great powers in this region has reached a new kind of power relations. After the Vietnam war all Members are aware that American troops have been withdrawn from Vietnam and there is also a scaling down of American presence in Thailand. In fact, with the present mood of the US Congress, the Americans are not in favour of putting a high stake in South-east Asia. They do not want to be the policeman in South-east Asia any more. If the United States show any more interest in this region, it will be purely in accordance with their global strategy.

I am sure all Members are aware of the Sino-Soviet feud in this region. We, being a very small nation and as a member of ASEAN, must, as the non-communist bloc in this region, try to solve our own problems. Of course, we welcome the great powers in the region. We welcome them if they are able to contribute towards our economic development and in investments and other constructive fields. If this helps us to raise our standard of living it is to our mutual benefit. But we must also be careful not to become pawns in this great power struggle of international politics. We should not be involved in their struggle. I think that is what the hon. Members for Bras Basah and Serangoon Gardens have in mind.

We do not want to become a battle field or proxies of the great powers in the region. If they want to have any conflict, please leave us alone, although we welcome their presence here for constructive purposes. I think it is also in the interest of the great powers to avert the danger of turning small wars into major conflicts. We have seen this in other parts of the world when the great powers inevitably got involved in bigger struggles. Therefore, it is in their interest not to do the same in South-east Asia. If they sincerely want world peace, then it is to their own benefit not to get the small countries in this region involved in their own conflict.

I agree wholeheartedly with the Member for Bras Basah that we should be friends to all and enemy to none. The cornerstone of our foreign policy is to make as many friends as possible. But sometimes I do not think it is possible to avoid making enemies. If we extend the hand of friendship, we expect a reciprocal response to the hand of friendship.

I think not one of the ASEAN leaders has ever criticised any of the Communist states in Indo-China either before. during or after the Bali Summit. In fact, if anything was mentioned, it was always a gesture of friendship to the newly emerged states in Indo-China, particularly in sympathy with the long years of suffering they had had.

Unfortunately, after the Bali Summit, a Hanoi newspaper openly encouraged Communist elements in ASEAN countries to overthrow the legitimate governments of ASEAN. This. I must say, is quite disappointing because we have extended the hand of friendship. We hope the newspaper statement does not really represent the real feelings of all the people in lndo-China. If that is the attitude, then it is against the spirit of Bandung or even in the spirit of the nonaligned group, the basic fundamental principle of which is non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. We hope that all countries in South-east Asia, whether communist or non-communist, will abide by this principle, call it what you will, the Bandung spirit or the spirit of the non-aligned group. It is only in that spirit can we have peace and prosperity in the region and all the peoples in the region will benefit.

Of course, this might have been just a misunderstanding of the real nature of ASEAN, because we have been separated for so long. We have been under different colonial regimes and they have just gone through a long revolution. It takes time and we hope that with the passage of time this misunderstanding will be cleared. Once this is so, then the extent of cooperation between ASEAN and the Communist states in Indo-China will be unlimited. We hope that together we can cooperate constructively in the economic and social fields so that the people in South-east Asia will not become pawns in the super-power or great power struggle and we can help each other to raise the standard of living of all the peoples of South-east Asia.

Of course, our immediate task, as far as ASEAN is concerned, is to consolidate the unity and spirit of cooperation of the five ASEAN states. That is exactly what we are doing. The Bali Summit was followed by the Kuala Lumpur meeting of finance and economic planners, and I am sure Members have read in the newspapers of the latest developments. These are solid projects which are being taken seriously by each individual ASEAN state, and we are in the process of implementing such projects. We hope that the success of these small projects will bring about the development of bigger projects. According to the agreement, we hope to have some form of trade preferential arrangement for the products of these projects in ASEAN.

In as far as the Member for Anson's question about Singapore's role is concerned, we are a financial centre with better facilities for technology, and we hope that with the cooperation of all our ASEAN partners we can together develop the natural resources of this region for the benefit of all the people of ASEAN.

A point which I like to stress here is that, in order to succeed in the collective effort of economic cooperation. all sections of the community in the ASEAN states must bear in mind the spirit of give-and-take and to do away with the old habit of trying to make a quick buck. There may be some who try to cash in on such projects and we hope that entrepreneurs, particularly in Singapore, do not give the impression that some of them are exploiting the situation. Similarly, we hope that in the other states some of the old habits will also disappear so that there will be real cooperation in a common effort to bring about a successful conclusion of the projects.

6.15 p.m.

With regard to the ASEAN Secretariat, it was agreed last year that the Secretariat should be based in Jakarta. At the last meeting in Bali they have agreed to appoint Lieut.-Gen. Hartono Dharsono, an experienced Senior Indonesian diplomat, to be the first Secretary-General whose term of office will be two years. Subsequently Secretary-Generals will also have a term of two years. Appointment will be rotated among the ASEAN countries in alphabetical order. The senior staff of the Secretariat shall initially comprise three Bureau Directors, one Foreign Trade and Economic Relations Officer, an Administrative Officer, a Public Information Officer and an assistant to the Secretary-General. The Bureau Directors shall be at least of consular rank and each of the other officers shall be at least of First Secretary rank. The principal consideration in all such nominations and appointments shall be the attainment of the highest standards of professional efficiency, integrity and the equitable distribution and rotation of the post among the nationals of the ASEAN countries. Singapore will nominate two officers to fill these posts.

As regards ASEAN training awards, they are offered by Singapore to other ASEAN member countries. Hence, Singaporeans are not eligible for these awards. These training awards comprise on-the-job attachments to the various Ministries and departments. The philosophy underlying the offer of these training awards is to share our experience and skill with other ASEAN member countries so as to promote mutual understanding, and to contribute to our common endeavour to accelerate economic development in the region.

For the year 1976-77 Singapore is offering 112 training awards in 37 courses to ASEAN member countries. The fields of training vary from banking and finance to chemical and microbiological analysis of meat and meat products.

On trade missions, last year we had six, either Government-led or -

Mr Rodrigo: Sir, on a point of clarification. I beg to intervene at this stage. I think the Minister of State is going on to other subheads on which there are amendments to be moved -

The Chairman: Would you like to stop at this stage. Mr Lee? -

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: I was thinking whether or not to jump the gun, because all the matters that have been raised by the other Members have been pre-empted by the far-sightedness of the Member for Anson. If I do not reply now then he will ask me. "What about the answer to this point. or that point?" And if I reply to all the points now, then the other Members may not have a chance to speak. So what do I do?

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister of State can reply to all the questions raised under the Head "Senior Minister".

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Before the Minister of State proceeds to talk about ASEAN, I would like to take him back to Hanoi. He has referred to the relationship or the absence of relationship with Hanoi. Can he please inform this . House whether there is consensus among the ASEAN members as to what steps should be taken to establish a dialogue so that the misunderstanding which he has mentioned could be clarified?

The Chairman: Mr Lee, it appears to me that the other Members would prefer you to go on. You might as well do that.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: If they so wish. We have diplomatic relations with Hanoi. We also have diplomatic relations with Cambodia and Laos. But we do not have a mission in these countries because of the latest developments. The same applies to the members of the other ASEAN states. It is difficult to establish any kind of dialogue when there is no mission in these countries. We can only make gestures of friendship, but these gestures of friendship have been rebuffed with a hostile statement. It is rather difficult to talk about having a dialogue at the moment. As the Member for Bras Basah has said, we want to be friends. I agree entirely with him that we want to be friends. But when the hand of friendship is extended, we expect a similar response.

I hope you will allow me to continue with my answer to the Member for Anson. Otherwise he will protest.

The Chairman: The Minister of State had better carry on.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: I was talking about trade missions just now. Some of the missions are Government-led and some are Government-assisted. We had six trade missions last year. We have visited Indonesia, Iran, China and Eastern Europe. Trade has been generated through orders taken for our local products during such missions. But more important is the fact that these missions have enabled our traders to establish useful contacts with their counterparts in the countries visited. Initial contacts established during these missions have enabled many of our traders and manufacturers to boost their sales.

On the question of trade with Japan, the USA and Europe. the 1975 Economic Survey of Singapore shows that our trade with these countries has grown steadily over the past few years, except in 1975 when there was a general world-wide depression. Prospects for 1976 are, however, better, as there are already signs of economic recovery in these countries.

On the role of embassies in promoting Singapore's overseas trade, our missions maintain surveillance -

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, this is an item on which I intend to speak at a later stage. I would rather have my say now before the Minister of State replies to me.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: I will do that.

The Chairman: I was hoping the Minister of State will deal with the whole lot of questions raised.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: In that case I will come back to the subject of our visit to China because the Member for Anson has raised this question. But to give the Member for Jalan Kayu an opportunity, I will deal with his question later.

I would say that the visit to China was successful. It was the first time that leaders of the two countries had direct discussions on matters of mutual interest. During the visit we had the opportunity to meet the late Premier, Mr Chou En-lai, and we held detailed discussions with the Chinese Foreign Minister, Mr Ch'iao Kuan-hua. The topic of discussion covered international affairs, matters connected with regional politics as well as bilateral relations between the two countries. The discussions were free and frank and the participants were able to exchange views on broad international problems. Other members of the Singapore mission also had discussions on economic matters with their counterparts. Both sides have agreed to promote closer economic cooperation. As a result of the visit. China and Singapore exchanged trade and industrial missions in the latter part of 1975.

The Member for Anson also raised the question of overseas postings. There is a special course of three months' training at the University of Singapore. After two years' training in the various Ministries, including the Ministry of Finance, Trade Division, the EDB and in other matters which a diplomat should know, the officer is then sent overseas. I can assure the Member for Anson that there were actually two resignations. There was no lack of officers. We have enough officers for our missions for the time being. It is not easy to choose a suitable officer to be a diplomat overseas because he represents Singapore and we must be careful that he has the knowledge, qualification and also integrity, mannerism and personality for the job. All these qualities have to be taken into consideration. I think I will give other Members a chance to raise their questions.

Mr Rodrigo: Sir, I am very appreciative of the reply given by the Minister of State, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1105.

Sir, after the lengthy statement by the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, my entire trend of thought has been thrown into disarray. I would, therefore, attempt to throw his trend of thought into disarray by asking a question which he probably would not expect. Under this subhead. I would, first of all, take this opportunity to discuss Singapore's position, on which he has touched earlier on in regard to our relations and postures towards super power politics.

6.30 p.m.

It is well known that the world is so polarised not just into two areas but into three or even more spheres of influence. Whilst on the one hand Singapore propounds a policy of neutrality, friendship with all nations, enemies with none, yet Singapore adopts a posture of establishing full diplomatic relations with some super powers and yet not with China, It is in this context that I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Hon. Minister of State: what are the considerations in the mind of his Ministry before Singapore establishes full diplomatic relations with China?

Singapore is part of ASEAN and three out of five ASEAN states have already, for various reasons which are obviously sound, established diplomatic relations with China over the last two or three years. Singapore has chosen for good reasons not to establish relations with China just yet. I recognise that we have various channels of communication as established in the past and the recent visit of the Minister of State to that nation certainly will lend greater impetus to further relations between Singapore and China. What I really would like to know is: is Singapore's posture essentially one of waiting for the Republic of Indonesia to establish relations with China? And will that posture be adopted even if Indonesia were not to have relations for the next 1 0 years? I would like to know if there are other considerations which the Hon. Minister of State might like to share with us that might make Singapore go ahead with recognition, independent of Indonesia's move.

Coming back to the ASEAN summit at Bali. I would like to take this opportunity to give my wholehearted support to this concept of regional cooperation, this concept of amity and good neighbourliness. I think it is a good thing and a move in the right direction for all five ASEAN states. To me, it is an awareness that had been precipitated in particular by the collapse of the three Indo-Chinese states. It is a kind of a shock therapy. It seems to me that it is a common realisation that the best interest of each ASEAN nation is best served through the collective interest of the group. I am very happy to note that the five nations have moved forward with great caution, with great deliberation, and that positive steps have been taken to ensure that we are not just coming out with another of these international agreements.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am taking this opportunity to ask the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs that whilst ASEAN today is essentially an economic and socio-cultural association of nations, will the Minister of State give some kind of assurance that ASEAN will not in the foreseeable future turn into a military alliance, an alliance that might be regarded by certain outside forces as another South-east Asian Treaty Organisation? I would be most happy if the Minister of State could give this assurance, and further. that Singapore on its part in ASEAN and ASEAN as a whole would collectively make no move that can be construed as inimical to forces that are envious of the establishment of ASEAN. Thirdly, can the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and perhaps jointly with the Ministry of Defence assure us Singaporeans that none of our troops and national servicemen will at any time be sent to combat insurgency movements in foreign territories?

Sir, one of the highlights of the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Concord was the statement of declaration that this region of the world be declared a zone of peace and neutrality. I have to grope in my mind for a well pronounced policy that we used to espouse in the past - that we in Singapore believe in the policy of dynamic equilibrium in this region, that policy being more realistic because no super power would ever stay away from an area that is a vacuum. In other words, if the Americans were to withdraw from South-east Asia, it is very likely that the Russians would move in, and then what? Hanoi? China? Or the Americans back again? In view of this, how is this erstwhile policy of ours reconciled with the declaration of the Zone of Peace and Neutrality as stated in the Treaty of Amity and Concord?

Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister of State for Foreign Affairs to state Singapore's position with regard to the Law of the Sea Conference, in particular to the Straits of Malacca.

The Chairman: Dr Ong, it is very obvious to me that you meant to join with the other Members and speak under subhead AAA 1003 rather than on this particular amendment.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, it so happens that I was pre-empted, particularly by the Member for Anson.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: Mr Speaker. Sir, first, on the establishment of diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China. I think our Foreign Minister as well as the Government have made our stand very clear, not on one occasion but on several occasions. Our stand does not change: we are still waiting. Our stand is that we will be the last ASEAN country to establish diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China. I think this is also understood by the Government of the People's Republic of China.

6.40 p.m.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: As regards the assurance that there will be no military pact, I think everybody knows that after the Bali summit, the ASEAN Heads of States were not in favour of having a military pact. Our main emphasis was on economic and cultural cooperation. Any kind of military pact would only aggravate the tension which already exists, even without the mention of the word "pact". So there is no point in aggravating the tension which we are, in fact, trying to lessen among nations in South-east Asia.

As for the guarantee that we will not send troops and our servicemen out of Singapore. I think the answer should be directed at the Minister of Defence. However, in the absence of a pact, is there any necessity to send our troops when there is no pact or such understanding? As far as I know, at least there is no bilateral arrangement with any country. In fact, in certain circumstances the sending of troops from one country to another may be interpreted as an interference in the internal affairs of that country.

The Member for Kim Seng also mentioned the Treaty of Amity and Zone of Peace. In actual fact, the Treaty tries to ensure that everything will be all right among the five member states of ASEAN. There will be noninterference in internal affairs and, I think, for that matter unless and until a nation requests another nation to send in troops, the act of sending troops from one country to another will be interpreted as contravening this Treaty of Amity. And as far as I am aware, there is no such arrangement.

As regards the Straits of Malacca, our view is that the Straits should be made international waters, open to free navigation. Our delegates will soon be attending the Conference and our main interest is to see that our rights are maintained. We have not gone against the Indonesian concept of "Archipelago" just for the sake of going against the concept. I think our representative will make it clear that our main interest is to preserve our rights in so far as the Law of the Sea is concerned.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I am fully satisfied with the reply given by the Hon. Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 1105.

Sir, quantitatively, I would say that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not done too badly since its establishment. Although we have been independent for slightly more than 10 years, we are physically represented by Ambassadors and High Commissioners in most of the major capitals of the world. However, having overcome the preoccupation of making our physical presence felt, I feel we should now aim to give broader meaning to and redefine the role of our overseas missions.

6.45 p.m.

What do we expect them to do? How best can we make use of their presence abroad so as to benefit the country in more tangible terms? These are, to my mind, some of the rather relevant questions. In saying so, I am not thinking so much of the traditional role of just maintaining good relations with the host countries, which we are already doing quite well. I am thinking more in terms of what these missions abroad can do to serve the needs of our commerce and industry at home. At a time when we are placing so much emphasis on export drive, both in respect of goods and services. I feel that our overseas missions can make a positive contribution towards our efforts in this direction, provided they are suitably orientated. Up to this point of time, I have my doubts as to whether this is the case, notwithstanding some of the pre-emptive statements made by the Minister of State.

Whilst we do have commercial secretaries in some of our embassies abroad, I rather suspect that their presence is no more than an ornament. I also suspect that most of them are probably not suitably qualified or trained as to be able to function meaningfully in serving the needs of a trading nation, which is what we are and have always been. In any event, considering the relatively junior position of such commercial secretaries, how much importance do we attach to their work at present?

The limited usefulness or importance of such appointees can be gauged by the fact that a number of our Government agencies involved in economic affairs also have their own men abroad. Take London, for instance. Although I believe that we have a commercial secretary at the High Commissioner's Office, EDB and MAS have thought fit to have their own men on the spot, not to mention the representatives of other Government-owned enterprises. All this seems to me to be an unnecessary waste of money and manpower. Surely if the post of a commercial secretary is upgraded as to carry sufficient seniority and weight, the person, given the right calibre and training, could quite easily take care of the affairs of both the EDB and MAS. If need be, he could have a highpowered team working under his direction, rather than to have several sets of people doing roughly the same thing at present and, quite rightly, all providing conflicting feed-back to their own respective departments or superiors at home. Once we are assured of a more efficient and centralised system in the collection of commercial and industrial intelligence abroad, the information can be fed back home for use by both Government and the private sector.

When our businessmen travel abroad on business, they can also rely upon our embassies for guidance and assistance which could be invaluable. At present I do not think our business community knows what sort of services or assistance our overseas missions are able to offer them.

The Government has been exhorting the private sector to innovate and to improve, but are we satisfied that the Government is also doing the same? Are we making the best use of available resources and facilities at our disposal?

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: Sir, the suggestions made by the Member for Jalan - Kayu are worth considering and I will do my best to convey them to the Ministry of Finance which is actually responsible for appointing the various commercial attaches, secretaries and also EDB men to the various overseas missions.

However, I would like to inform the Member that apart from the Ambassador, Counsellors and Secretaries, we also have some quite efficient commercial secretaries.

I do not say that all of them are of no use. Some of them are performing the task. An instance of what they have been doing is the promotion of Singapore's trade interest .in the host country, activities which will promote our objective of increasing the export of Singapore manufactured products. They have to issue leaflets informing all the enterprises as to the products available from Singapore. They also collate and disseminate all information relating to trading conditions and regulations and other market factors which affect Singapore's export. They also guide visiting businessmen from Singapore and introducing them to relevant contacts in their respective countries, and continuously bearing in mind that commerce and economics and politics are merely two aspects of one whole. They therefore maintain closer liaison with other officers in the mission performing political and other functions.

Prior to 1976 the commercial and economic functions of our overseas missions were performed by officers who were also responsible for political and other duties. However, early this year since the commercial secretary's service was established some of our overseas missions have been staffed by this special category of officers whose duty is confined to commercial and economic work.

We are a small nation. Having served in many missions abroad. I can say from my own experience that we are really shorthanded. For instance, when I was posted to Cairo I had only one First Secretary who was supposed to help me in political affairs, one Administrative Officer doing administration, and one Personal Assistant. I was supposed to cover five countries, in which I had no office accommodation.

Although trading and economic interest is important we have to bear in mind that we cannot afford to spend too much in sending out officers to a country unless that country is vital to us economically; which we are doing. It is no use sending a commercial attache to a place where we have no business relations or trading arrangements.

In any case the suggestion made by the Member for Jalan Kayu for a central pooling of all the resources is one which I Think can be given some consideration, and I assure the Member that this suggestion will be conveyed.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, before I withdraw my amendment. I feel that I ought to make one or two clarifications. I am appreciative of the very responsive manner I have received, but I do not think that at any time did I suggest that the present commercial secretaries are of no use. I am not suggesting that. All that I am suggesting is that greater importance should be attached to such appointments, and I think we ought to upgrade their position so as to carry sufficient weight. Given the right type of officer and the right measure of training, they could perform more effectively.

Certainly I did not suggest that we should send commercial secretaries round the world. I did not say that. What I was saying is that we should make the best use of the existing facilities. At present I think there is unnecessary duplication. As I have mentioned, DBS got their own men. MAS got their own men, and the missions have them own men. So do SIA and NOL. In London town I think we probably have 10 to 20 people from the different Government agencies. Obviously this is a sheer waste of money. So when the Minister of State talked so much about not getting enough money, he has my sympathy. At the same time, somewhere along the line the thinking is quite wrong. On the one hand we try to stinge but on the other hand we let all this money go down the drain. I feel that this is a very serious matter.

Notwithstanding the limitations that his Ministry is working up against, the Minister of State has done a very good job. To the Minister of State, in particular. I would like to place on record that what he has done on the question of our relationship with Indonesia is. I think, generally known. He has done a first-class job there. Businessmen who have travelled to Indonesia have all said that Mr Lee has given tremendous help. In every case they have expressed them appreciation.

But we are talking of Ministries on the Government, not of individuals. We are talking of the organisation. How we can improve the organisation, and how to institutionalise the arrangement so that there is continuity? We just cannot depend on a few bright officers, those that the Minister of State just quoted, who can use a bit of initiative to go out and give pamphlets and in that way promote the image of Singapore. That is not what I am thinking. What I am thinking is a rather more fundamental issue of institutionalising our system. I think we have got to that stage, and we must think seriously.

The Chairman: Mr Lee, would you like to reply?

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: I would like to thank the Member for Jalan Kayu for his compliments. If the Member were to look deepen into the matter, he may find that it is a question of communication. Whether on not to have all the officers centred in the mission is perhaps a question of communication. Whether it is more efficient for the EDB men to take orders direct from EDB, fearing that if it goes through the machinery of the Foreign Ministry it might get bogged down, I think all this is a question of how to establish this chain of communication. I agree that there is some constructive suggestion in the point made by the Member for Jalan Kayu.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: First of all, may I suggest that proper communication be established between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Finance. On that note. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

7.00 p.m.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of item )b) of subhead AAA 2110.

Sir, Singapore was evicted from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965. Since that day, to my knowledge. Singapore has continued to contribute a sum to the tune of $� million for the maintenance of Malaya Hall in London. To my knowledge too, that Hall is not frequented by any Singapore citizen on by any of our students in London. To my knowledge also, it is only used by a certain sector of people from Malaysia.

I would like to ask the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs why Singapore still continues to contribute $� million a year for the maintenance of Malaya Hall.

At the same time, the Students Department of our High Commission in London is rather poorly maintained. I would have thought that the same amount of money could have been better used for the promotion of activities for students and Singapore citizens who are away in the United Kingdom.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, our contribution towards the upkeep of Malaya Hall, London, ceased from 1st December 1969 Our students are now extended facilities at the Singapore Students Centre which was established in London in 1971.

The provision of $254,220 is budgetted for payment of our share of expenditure for the upkeep of Malaya Hall for the period 1968 to 1969. Payment has been deferred, pending resolution of several bilateral financial issues between Singapore and Malaysia, including Malaysia's contribution in respect of Malaysian students studying at the University of Singapore.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, in view of the reply by the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement -- Mr Yeo Choo Kok: (5) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of item le) of subhead AAA 3030. Dr Ong Leong Boon: (6) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 3030.

The Chairman: Mr Yeo Choo Kok is not moving. Amendment (6). Dr Ong.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: I am not moving, Sir.

Mr Yeo Choo Kok (Delta): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 4001.

Sir, in his reply to questions raised by other Members, the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs has partly answered my original question without my raising it, But the Minister of State has yet to answer the unanswered parts of my original question and some additional questions which have just come to my mind. These questions are:-

1. What is the total number of ASEAN nationals who have participated in the ASEAN training awards in the past five years?

2. Among those students who have undergone training under the scheme during the past five years, which ASEAN country has topped the list?

3. Is his Ministry prepared to let all Members of this House have a copy of the booklet entitled "ASEAN Training Awards 1976-77", so that Members of the House can be informed of the sort of training programmes that Singapore is awarding to other ASEAN countries?

4. Is Singapore the only ASEAN member country that provides such awards?

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the ASEAN training awards scheme commenced in 1972. Between the period 1972 and 1976 a total of 80 awards have been made; 12 were made to Indonesia, eight to Malaysia, one to the Philippines, and 59 to Thailand.

Essentially the courses involve on-the-job training in the various Ministries and departments. They vary from fire-fighting, librarianship, sewerage treatment, to the various aspects of nursing and medical technicians courses.

Of course, we will be too willing to give the booklet on ASEAN awards to those Members of Parliament who are interested. As fan as I am aware. Singapore appears to be the only country that has offered such awards.

Mr Yeo Choo Kok: Sir, I am satisfied with the answer given by the Minister of State. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Yeo Choo Kok: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 4003.

Sir, I wonder if it is in order for the Ministry to pay the Area Licence Fees for diplomatic missions. Our citizens, even our Ministers, have to pay the fees themselves. The Ministry does not own the cars used by the diplomatic missions and these missions do not work for the Ministry.

If a country can afford to have a mission here, it should not have any difficulty in paying the Area Licence Fee. Sir, the Government can exempt these missions from paying the fee if such a payment can be treated as part of the diplomatic immunity. But the provision shown in the Estimates is an indication that the Government does not think so. If the missions are entitled to exemption from such a payment on diplomatic convention, why should the taxpayers' money be used to disburse the missions for such payments?

Sir, I would like the House to be informed whether the amount shown in the Estimates is to pay for the Area Licence Fees for cars used by the heads of missions on all cars with a diplomatic number plate.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: Sir, when the Area Licensing Scheme was introduced in 1975 the Diplomatic and Consular Corps made a strong representation that members of the Corps should be exempted from payment of the Area Licensing Fee. It was pointed Out to their representative that the Licensing fee is a charge for which no additional service is given. Argument was made that, under the Vienna Convention and Diplomatic Relations, fees should only be charged for services rendered. Having consideration to the need to adopt a very restrictive policy in order that minimum traffic enters the Central Business District during the peak hours, the Government could not consider favourably the representation of the Corps.

However, as a gesture, the Government approved the granting of an area licensing disc to one flag-flying car per full mission located within the Central Business District. Presently. 11 missions enjoy such concession.

Mr Yeo Choo Kok: Sir, how come there are only 11 missions?

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: They are full missions.

Mr Yeo Choo Kok: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendrnent by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendments stood in the name of Mr N. Govindasamy -

(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 2521.

(10) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 2522.

(11) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 2591.

(12) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 2592.

The Chairman: Mr N. Govindasamy is not here.

The sum of $28,277,490 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates,

Head N -

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1003*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, retrenchment exercises have been rampant in the Republic from 1974 to 1975. While some sectors of the economy are more directly affected by recessionary trends, such as the manufacturing sector, not all retrenchments carried out are justified. There is always the possibility of a few black sheep employers taking advantage of the present economic situation to indulge in anti-labour practices.

Current legislation under the Industrial Relations Act provides limited scope for unions to check such unfair practices by management. The provisions are restrictive as the rule of "last in, first Out" no longer applies. Trade unions are further hampered in negotiations by the statutory limits on retrenchment benefits to those with less than three years' service. It is perhaps ironical that the three-year period intended to protect infant industries in Singapore should have - such a wide application of the law that trading firms and companies with long established business in Singapore and with less compelling reasons to retrench can now do so as an economic expedient without having to pay any retrenchment benefits to employees with less than three years' service.

With the limited safeguards under the Act, abuses are bound to occur. Employers must be made to realise that the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act are not a carte blanche for management to retrench at will non can they flout the provisions under the coven of management prerogatives. While the Act has been promulgated to preserve industrial harmony so essential to the development of our economy it would certainly not augur well for the economy if workers' rights for job security and union representation are jeopardised by employers who act without any moral conscience or sense of social responsibility towards the employees.

7.15 p.m.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in one particular case, an established trading company retrenched its entire sales force of 12 counter salesgirls under the guise of adverse trading conditions. Within three months the same company recruited another team of salesgirls at lower salaries for its sales counters. Following representation made by the union to the Minister for Labour, the Ministry conducted an investigation. It was found that this company had indeed abused the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act. The company was accordingly warned by the Ministry. There are instances where it is difficult for the unions to obtain sufficient evidence to prove their case. Quite a few established trading houses have resorted to retrenchment of higher paid employees with long service. Workers within the age group of 40-45, with children still in secondary schools, face the difficult task of getting alternative employment at the same last drawn salary, in order to support their families. As theme are no adequate safeguards against the retrenchment of workers, I would like to put forward the following proposals to the Minister for his consideration, with a view to amending the relevant provisions of the Industrial Relations Act.

(1) Provision for unions to seek the intervention of the Ministry of Labour and to hold inquiries in cases which are unwarranted and are suggestive of manipulation by management.

(2) The present limitation of retrenchment benefits for employees with less than three years' service should not apply to established trading companies with more than 10 years' trading in Singapore, taking into account take-overs, mergers and change of business names.

(3) Provision for lay-off and reemployment of retrenched workers, and lastly,

(4) Provision for appeal to the Minister under the same procedure as section 35 (2) of the Industrial Relations Act, if the foregoing proposals are found unacceptable.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: I am not speaking, Sir.

The Minister of State for Labour (Mr Sia Kah Hui): Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, I think I can summarise what the Member for Toa Payoh has said. His first point is his concern about certain unfair practices in retrenchment exercises over the last couple of years. His second point is that he is unhappy about the restrictive provisions in the existing legislation relating to retrenchment.

As to his first point, we fully share his concern. The managements of firms which intend to retrench workers have been advised by the Ministry of Labour, and guidelines have been given by the Ministry for such an exercise. They have been told that efficiency, competence, industry, correct work attitudes, specialised training in key positions are the criteria as to who should be retained or retrenched. They have also been advised to inform the unions of the reasons for the retention of comparatively junior employees over senior employees as a result of the implementation of these criteria.

The Ministry has been monitoring closely the retrenchment situation. We are satisfied that generally there have not been abuses by managements. But unions of workers with genuine grievances of unjust retrenchments could refer the matter to the Ministry, and I assure him that thorough investigations will be conducted.

On his second point, in view of the general effectiveness of the present system of safeguards against abuses of retrenchment, the Ministry does not think that there is a need at this juncture to introduce legislation on the matter. However, let me hasten to add that we are not unsympathetic to the genuine plight of retrenched workers. especially those who have family responsibilities. We will certainly introduce amendments if the situation warrants it.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are no adequate safeguards at all in the Employment Act regarding retrenchment, besides the limitation of three years' service. I must say that most employers do not follow the guidelines set by the Ministry. The Minister of State should know that in a recent retrenchment exercise by some commercial firms, even salesmen with 20 years of service on more have been retrenched while junior salesmen have been retained in the service. Of course, as I have mentioned earlier in my speech, it is very difficult to prove it. That is the reason why I am asking for consideration whether certain measures can be taken. Unless the Ministry can give us an assurance that effective steps, like imposing certain penalties on the management, are taken. there is no point in sending a letter warning them that they should not indulge in these unfair practices. But then nothing further can be done. As I have mentioned in one particular instance involving a trading organisation, the Ministry did send a letter of warning, but that is the end of the story.

Mr Sia Kah Hui: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, by and large, managements do cooperate. But, as in every organisation on establishment, there is usually a black sheep here and there. I do not think we want to bring in new rules just to deal with one or two cases of unfair treatment. But, as I have said, we would certainly investigate into specific complaints and deal with the matter in the interests of affected workers.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, I am afraid I am not very happy with the reply given. However, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement - Mr N. Govindasamy: (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1010. Mr Phey Yew Kok: (3) That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1105.

Mr N. Govindasamy: I am not moving, Sir.

The Chairman: Mr Phey Yew Kok is not here. Mr Teong. amendment (4).

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead ACA 1111*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon.)

Sir, I would like the Minister to consider liberalising the granting of applications for work permits by shop assistants, barbers, cooks and certain categories of factory workers. The complaints I have received from these people are that it is difficult for them to apply for a work permit. According to a storekeeper, he found it difficult to engage local hands and therefore he has applied for a work permit many times but all his applications were turned down. So, it vexed him very much. There was also the complaint of a restaurant owner. He has a son born in Malaysia, and he has passed Secondary IV examination. The father applied for a work permit for his son to work as a captain in his restaurant. But this was turned down. The reason given was that his son had no such experience. I find this reason unjustified because it is not difficult for a Secondary IV boy to become a captain in a restaurant. The work is not difficult. With a certain amount of training, one can be very efficient in this sort of work.

In rejecting the application for work permits for shop assistants, the reason given by the Ministry of Labour was that the salary was too low for this kind of job. But such a reason is no longer applicable now because in his Budget Statement the Minister for Finance has pointed out that there should be restriction in wage increases otherwise our wage rates would be the highest in Southeast. Asia after Japan. Therefore, we should review and liberalise the consideration for applications for work permits by such people. It is a fact that shopowners cannot get local hands. It is not that they do not want to employ local people.

Another complaint is about the difficulty encountered by garment factories and food packaging factories in applying for work permits for the number of workers they require. They have to wait from three weeks to one month before receiving a reply as to whether their applications have been approved. How are these factories, going to proceed during this long wait? I would like to suggest to the Minister that during the period when their applications are being processed whether it is possible for them to engage these factory hands so that they could continue with their productive work. Once their applications have been decided, they can then carry on with their work or they can be told to leave, depending on the outcome of their applications. With this sort of arrangement, it will help the productivity of the factories concerned.

The Chairman: Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon is not here. Would the Minister like to reply?

The Minister for Labour (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, I think the Member for Sembawang had raised the question of shop assistants and barbers during last year's Budget sittings. Members may recall that my reply then was that, with Singapore's continued policy of rapid industrialisation, it was of vital importance that the manpower requirements of the industries should first be met.

7.30 p.m.

In line with this policy, the Ministry has continued to accord priority to applications for work permits from non-citizens seeking employment in factories and other industrial undertakings. As long as our economic objectives and manpower strategy remain unchanged, non-citizens wishing to pursue soft or relatively unproductive jobs, like shop assistants or other white collar jobs like salesman, etc., cannot be given priority.

The prospect immediately ahead for our economy is not expected to be one of high growth rate. In 1975, there was only a real growth rate of 4.1%. At the same time, it has been estimated that the number of students leaving schools each year, without completing their secondary education. would remain around 22.000. Many of these premature school leavens would not be in a position to find meaningful employment on account of their age, low educational qualifications and lack of any marketable skills. Although the Government is looking into various schemes to encourage these youths to take up careers in industries, not all of them will or can be successfully absorbed. Other job opportunities such as shop assistants or restaurant workers and so forth must be found for them. Under these circumstances, it is unlikely that the Ministry would consider relaxing its work permit policy in regard to non-citizens employed in such occupations.

In the case of barbers, the Ministry has not been unduly restrictive in granting work permits to non-citizens engaged in this occupation. The Ministry is aware that few Singaporeans are interested in taking up such employment. However, non-citizens wishing to secure employment as barbers must at least possess the requisite skill for the job. As such, work permits are only granted to those who have passed a practical test conducted by the Adult Education Board.

In respect of female barbers, they must, in addition to passing the trade test, have at least completed six years of primary education.

The Member for Sembawang may wish to note that about 28% of the barbers working in Singapore are work permit holders.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, the Minister has not answered the other point relating to the application for a work permit by garment and food factory workers who have to wait for three weeks to one month for a decision. I made the request just now that we should allow them to work while their applications are under consideration.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, I think the factories can apply for temporary permission to employ non-citizen workers, pending the final decision on their applications. The Work Permits Office is quite flexible on this matter. If the factories concerned are producing goods and services which are given priority by the EDB, temporary permission of one month is normally given to applicants while their applications are being processed.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, there are many teachers who. because of the problem of domestic servants have to resign from their jobs. We are losing teachers, and some of them have high qualifications. But since they do not have domestic servants, they have to resign in order to look after the families. Will the Minister consider issuing work permits to domestic servants, because Singaporeans do not want to become domestic servants? Therefore. I hope the Minister will consider issuing work permits to foreigners who wish to become domestic servants.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, I just like to take the opportunity of asking the Minister whether, in considering all these applications for work permits, he would also take into consideration the situation on the place of work.

Take Jalan Kayu, for instance. I think the residents there quite often find that local citizens do not wish to take up jobs of tailoring and domestic help in that locality because its distance from town is pretty fan. In most cases, people do not stay on the job for very long, especially local people. And as a last resort, they have to go and try to get non-citizens. I have a few cases of tailors who, in fact, have difficulty getting local people to fill the jobs.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Sir, while appreciating the Government's policy on the issuance of work permits for certain classes of jobs, there is this problem that quite a number of non-citizens face. It is their problem of getting simple jobs that do not require skill, like sales assistants and so on, because the policy is not to issue work permits for such workers.

Unfortunately for these people, they have strong family ties in Singapore and if they were to go back to their country of origin they would have no one to depend on. This poses a lot of difficulty for them and whether young or not, they will have to lead rather lonely lives.' They have their family ties in Singapore through no fault of theirs. In addition, this will pose some sort of resentment in Singapore citizens who are close to them.

I am appealing to the Minister to consider these cases on humanitarian grounds, and I hope we can receive a positive reply on that.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, I appreciate the difficulty of getting domestic servants. In fact, I myself am without one at the moment. For the information of Members, we have been very liberal in granting work permits to people who wish to become domestic servants for obvious reasons, because we want to encourage women, especially those who are highly qualified, to work. I do not agree that we have been rather restrictive in issuing work permits to domestic servants.

As for tailors. I think I have mentioned earlier that we are giving priority for the issuance of work permits to those who want to work in industries, particularly those industries that are engaged in production for export. Tailors, unfortunately, do not come within this category. But if it is a textile factory which is producing goods for exports, then they will be given priority.

I think Members have to bear in mind that the interest of our own citizens must come first. In those cases mentioned by the Member for Potong Pasir, if those foreigners are prepared to work in factories on in industrial undertakings. I am sure their applications will be favourably considered. But if they are only interested in soft jobs which do not require much exertion, then I am afraid we have to be rather restrictive.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, my point has still not been answered. The point I made was that the problem arises on account of the distance away from town. No local citizens want to take up jobs in Jalan Kayu. As I see it, it is not a good idea to judge on the basis that if a garment factory is export-orientated it can have the workers. I think that is oven-simplifying.

The way I see it is that we should also think of its effect on the cost of living of the people. If we make it unduly restrictive, then the cost of tailoring goes up. Everybody knows that today if we want to make a pair of trousers, it will cost a lot more and the reason is that there is an acute shortage of skilled tailors. I emphasise the word "skilled". I think the present approach seems to be rather hard-and-fast without proper consideration given to the circumstances. Take tailoring, for instance. There are lots of little tailor shops. They do export. They might not export directly but they sub-contract from bigger shops in town which provide a 24-hour service to tourists. So in a way this is an invisible export.

7.45 p.m.

Their contribution is just as great. The fact that all these little shops are in the rural areas, their overheads are kept low. Because their overheads are low, they are able to sell at a competitive price, lower than that in Hong Kong. I do not think we have looked into this problem in sufficient depth. There seems to be the tendency for civil servants to say. "Well, the rule says this type of work is not on. No. That type of workers is on." As I say, that is not doing our economy and our standard of living any good at all.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, what is the difference between a factory and a tailor? A tailor makes shirts and trousers and sells them. A factory produces goods and sells them. Contractors come to the tailor's shop to get 100 suits for a ship's crew but the tailor cannot make the suits. So why do we not give the tailor work permits? I applied for a work permit for a tailoress, but it was turned down many times. So the tailor shop had to close down because it could not get enough help to run the shop.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I would like the Minister to reconsider my case. I agree with him that we must look after our industrialisation scheme. We have emphasised that our economy is a diversified one. Apart from industries we must also look after the other aspect of our economy, for example, the petty traders. Local Singapore citizens are not interested and they are, therefore, forced to employ non-citizens. If we want to emphasise a diversification of our economy, we should look after the other sectors of the economy too and not just industrialisation alone.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, I want to make one point clear. We are not refusing to allow skilled tailors from coming in. In fact, many work permits have been issued to skilled tailors. It is only the unskilled tailors that we have to consider very carefully. In case of doubt we always send the applicant for a skill evaluation test at the Adult Education Board. And in cases of refusal, the employer can appeal on their behalf, and if there are good reasons why approval should be granted, it would be granted.

Oven the last few years, with industrialisation, the whole economy has changed. In fact, one has to begin to consider whether the traditional type of business, like the provision shop, is desirable when we are faced with a labour shortage. There has been a mushrooming of supermarkets, shopping complexes, self-service shops and so forth, and this is a response to this kind of situation. I do not think we can go on as before. I think We should progress with time.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to clarify one point from the Minister. Does he mean that in the midst of a labour shortage these small provision shops will not be allowed to continue to exist? Is this the wish of the Government to see that these small shops are closed?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: That is not my point. If they can find the workers, they can go ahead. Nobody is going to stop them from carrying on with their business.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: My question still remains unanswered, Sir.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, I thought I have answered the question of the Member for Jalan Kayu. Skilled tailors are not prohibited from coming in. In fact, we do issue work permits to skilled tailors.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: It is not so much the question of tailors or barbers. The point that I was trying to make is the question of distance. Jalan Kayu, or Chua Chu Kang for that matter, is so far away from town that local people are just not keen to work there.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: If the Member for Jalan Kayu could bring those cases to the attention of the Ministry, we will look into it. In fact, there is an Appeals Committee to consider all these cases. If the Committee thinks that the reasons put forward by the applicants are acceptable, we will consider them.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, in view of the Minister's reply, I beg to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Chin Harn Tong (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AGA 1111*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sia Khoon Seong.)

Last year I had occasion to query the Minister for Labour regarding the announcement by his Ministry on the proposed reorganisation of the Ministry and the establishment of an Industrial Relations Division.

This year I am happy to note that the Budget estimates for 1976 in respect of the Ministry of Labour clearly reflect the intention of the Ministry to create a high-powered Industrial Relations Division. For example, there is provision for nine Division I Officers for the year 1976 as compared to the provision for only two Division I Officers in 1975 and the previous year. Such increase is in itself desirable in view of the importance placed by the Government on the question of industrial relations in Singapore.

As Members of this House may recall, the Minister for Labour in his address at the opening ceremony of the SILO-PIEU Triennial Delegates' Conference on 27th February this year at the Singapore Conference Hall has given emphasis to the desirability of promoting harmonious industrial relations in Singapore. Taken in conjunction with the objectives of the 1976 budget, that is, to encourage foreign investors and develop new projects in Singapore. the importance of giving priority to industrial relations in Singapore cannot be overstressed.

As the Minister stated in his speech. "There is therefore a need for more professionally trained managers in industry and better trained branch officials and HQ industrial relations officers". The Minister went on to say. "Industrial Relations Officers and union officials should know among other things more about how the problems of workers and management can best be explained to each side and resolved effectively".

It may well happen that given the best of will and ability on the part of the personnel management of the employer and the Industrial Relations Officers of the union, they still cannot settle a dispute. Here is where the conciliation machinery created under the Industrial Relations Act can help both parties to work out an agreement.

I have no doubt that the officers who are to be recruited for or posted to the Industrial Relations Division of the Ministry are competent and trained civil servants. My only concern is whether such officers are competent and trained in industrial relations matters. I am not aware that the Ministry itself has conducted any training courses or schemes in industrial relations for its officers, nor am I aware that any other Ministry or department of the Government has conducted any training courses or schemes in industrial relations matters for civil servants. I hope I am wrong and that the officers who are to man the Industrial Relations Division will be officers with sufficient experience and expertise in industrial relations matters.

It may also help if the Ministry can ensure that due cane is taken in the manning of the Division to prevent too frequent turnover of staff in the Division. As I understand it, there had been a change of the Head of the Division within one year of its establishment. Even if it is conceded that the change is unavoidable, the need for such changes should be minimised for the proper and effective functioning of the Division.

In that respect it would be of interest to Members of this House if the Minister can indicate whether the Ministry has been able to resolve a higher proportion of the trade dispute under conciliation since the setting up of the Industrial Relations Division.

I am inclined to have my doubts about the effectiveness of the Division. For instance, when I inquired from my trade union colleagues about the "Preventive Mediation Labour Assessment Section", I could not receive any definite reply as to the function of that Section. It would appear that both the officers in that Section and trade unionists have no clear idea as to what the Section is supposed to do. If there is a confusion oven the respective functions or a duplication in the work of this Sectior and the Conciliation Section. I hope the Ministry will quickly look into the matter.

8.00 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Moment of interruption. Mr Chin, you can continue your speech on resumption of the debate tomorrow.

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

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1976 to 31st March. 1977, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.