MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL 1979 TO 31ST MARCH, 1980

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [2nd Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head K -

Dr Ong Leong Boon (Kim Seng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1100 of Subhead Code KA-01 of the Main Estimates.

Mr Speaker, Sir, last year at this same Budget Session, I spoke at some length offering some ways and means of retraining junior staff in the Health Service. I had, in fact, suggested that no special treatment in terms of fulfilling National Service obligations be accorded students who wish to pursue a career in medicine and dentistry. I further suggested that doctors be made to serve in the Government hospitals for 2 - 3 years after housemanship as part of professional requirements for full medical registration to ensure better trained doctors and, at the same time, this will ensure an adequate supply of medical officers to man the various posts in the public health service. The Hon. Health Minister appeared pleased with my views last year. Although he did not agree in toto, he was delighted enough to say "it is not always that the Member for Kim Seng see eye to eye with me on the question of doctors."

Little did I expect a bombshell so soon afterwards when the Government introduced compulsory bonding of medical and dental students to serve a period of 5-8 years after graduation. I would like to say that I give tremendous credit to the medical and dental students who rallied together to oppose compulsory bonding. I must confess my personal objection to the practice of selective bonding of students on the grounds that these students receive the heaviest public subsidy for their education, as compared to students in the other professional courses, the arts and sciences. If the principle of bonding was that they are on public subsidy, then I contend that other students should likewise be bonded to serve the Government for varying periods on a pro rata basis. That was evidently not the case. I must, however, congratulate the Health Minister for finally settling the issue amicably by offering students to sign a pledge or undertaking to serve in the Health Ministry after graduation.

We know, of course, that one really cannot expect the Government to buckle in the face of student opposition. Under the circumstances the "undertaking" was the next best alternative, and all medical and dental students had subsequently and grudgingly signed the undertaking. More disturbing, however, was the way the University reacted to the issue. A clumsy and unthinking declaration was issued to the effect that recalcitrant graduates would not be conferred degrees if they did not sign the bond. I would have thought that the University should know the distinction between the conferment of degrees which is its job and full medical registration to practise in Singapore which is the prerogative of the Health Ministry, and specifically the Singapore Medical Council.

The second bombshell was delivered a few days ago. The Government, alarmed at the uneven spread of talent, announced that too many top students at "A" level were opting to study medicine and dentistry; henceforth only 15% or 19 students, whichever is the lesser, of the top students in the bracket 60-64 points at "A" level will be allowed to pursue University courses in medicine and dentistry. Further, not more than one-third of the total University intake in these two courses can be female students.

I support the Government's concern that talent must be better spread amongst the various disciplines at the University. Indeed, it is timely that measures are taken to ensure a more even share of good students among the disciplines. I feel, however, that there are other means available to ensure the spread of talent without resorting to prohibitive measures, such as public education or incentives in the form of attractive scholarships and bursaries, better job and promotional opportunities could be offered to attract students to move away from medicine and dentistry to study the other professional courses, or the sciences, arts and social sciences. By denying certain top students from pursuing a course of study they elect, the Government cannot be assured that these top students will enrol in courses the Government favours. The introduction of such a ruling must surely come as a rude shock to many students and parents alike. I hate to say that it has come as an unhappy reminder to them that they no longer have an absolute free choice in determining careers for themselves or for their children.

As regards the ruling that fewer ladies be allowed to study medicine and dentistry on the ground that job placement in the Health Ministry is more difficult for them than for men, I wonder if it is not the common experience of other employers in other fields in dealing with female employees.

I am sure that women libbers will have a lot more to say on this matter than I have. For myself, I would like to enquire from the Health Minister if he has facts and figures to show that female doctors locally are indeed a more difficult species of homo sapiens. I know that the Health Minister knows that the British experience has it that 15-20% of lady doctors are lost after graduation. Is this our experience?

The last point which I wish to comment on is the zoning of the hospitals. As we all know, Singapore is now divided into four zones and all general hospitals are treated alike. However, due to population shifts, some hospitals are increasingly getting less patients while others are facing a comparative overload of patients, and the spread of medical personnel is not exactly even. I refer, of course, in particular to the Tan Tock Seng Hospital where in certain departments there is a tremendous overload of patients. I wonder if the Hon. Minister for Health would comment on this, and if he considers it necessary to rezone some of the hospitals to ensure that patients receive equal standard of care and speedy treatment.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi (Kampong Kembangan): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I be given permission to join the hon. Member for Kim Seng to speak under this subhead? I wish to raise two particular points. One concerns a medical and health servant who works in my constituency regarding his duty hours, and the other concerns the night duty cycle of medical and health servants.

In the Ministry of Health there is an agreement for Division IV officers. The agreement stipulates amongst other things the duty hours of Division IV medical and health servants, the minimum and maximum working hours per week, time-off to be granted, the number of rest days granted per week, and also the day off to substitute work done on gazetted public holidays. In the case of this officer, he was first appointed as a medical and health servant but made to perform the duties of a caretaker. The duty hours stipulated for him sound a little unrealistic, if not inhumane: from Mondays to Fridays, the duty hours are from 4.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m., on Saturdays, 12.30 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. and on Sundays and holidays, from 8.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m. the next day. This matter was taken up by the Amalgamated Union of Public Employees (AUPE) and the Ministry gave an assurance to the effect that even though the hours had been so stipulated the officer could still take leave during Sundays or Public Holidays. We are not sure whether this is correct advice because if the caretaker were to take leave during those hours he could be subjected to discipline. I would seek clarification from the Minister on this point.

Concerning the other point, the Ministry of Health has revised the night duty cycle for nurses from the previous seven-night cycle to three-night cycle. There were representations requesting that the same system be applied to medical and health servants. This has been the subject of long correspondence between AUPE and the Ministry of Health. The latest reply from the Ministry was dated 23rd August, 1978, wherein it was stated that the Ministry was appreciative of the need to revise the seven-night duty cycle. The Ministry stated that a study team was examining the proper utilisation of nursing personnel and medical and health servants, including night shifts, etc. and the Ministry of Health would get in touch with the AUPE to consider the matter further. That was in August 1978. No reply was given and, following representations, another interim reply was received from the Permanent Secretary in November 1978 in which he stated that the study team had not completed the study.

I would like to take this opportunity to say that the seven-night duty cycle causes great strain on the staff. It was for this reason that the night-duty system for the nurses was revised. Since there are many medical and health servants who are subject to a work environment similar to that of nurses, I think it would be in the interest of the service and the employees concerned if the Ministry could urgently revise this present cycle. 2.45 p.m.

The Minister for Health (Dr Toh Chin Chye): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I first take the easier question that was asked by the Member for Kampong Kembangan. I presume he is referring to Mr Raja Ashari bin Raja Hamid who, as he has said, is a member of his constituency. From the records that we have got, it would appear that Mr Ashari was keen to be a caretaker because he could then have a caretaker's quarters. In fact, a letter dated 4th January 1972 was written to him by the Medical Officer in charge of Outpatient Services telling him that his duty as a caretaker is to look after the dispensary building and the property after office hours, Mondays to Fridays 4 p.m. to 8 a.m.; Saturdays 12.30 p.m. to 8 a.m.; Sundays and holidays 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: 8 a.m. to 8 a.m.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: 8 a.m. to 8 a.m. That is right - 24 hours. It is also his duty to switch on the steriliser daily at half past seven in the morning. "Please confirm that you agree to the duty hours before accepting the caretaker's quarters." Mr Ashari was given ample time. In fact, he replied very promptly on 5th January, 1972, the very next day. He said:

"Thank you for your letter, reference .... of 4th January, 1972, I wish to inform you that I shall be shifting in on 10th January, 1972, and also to confirm that I understand and I agree to the conditions stated therein in your letter."

So the Member for Kampong Kembangan must know the full story before he listens to a yarn put to him by a member of his constituency. I think he should be experienced by now that, in the meet-the-people sessions, one has got to be a little more careful in listening to grandmother's stories. Otherwise Members of Parliament would be on a futile chase.

The Member mentioned the point that the AUPE approached my Ministry on re-rostering the duty hours of a medical and health servant after the style of nurses. It is true we have got a study team doing this survey. It is trying to find out what it means in terms of costs and in terms of manpower. But while we were doing this survey, as Members are aware, my headquarters in Palmer Road got burnt down. So we are back to square one and we have got to restart the study again. But as soon as the study is completed, we will contact the AUPE.

I hope that satisfies the Member for Kampong Kembangan and that the complaint lodged by the AUPE has been seriously looked into and we will give the AUPE a reply in due course.

The Member for Kim Seng is a paradox. On the one hand, he advocates doctors who have finished their education at the University and the housemanship in the hospitals should serve the Government. On the other hand, he objects to compulsory bonding. How does one go about making doctors serve the Government without bonding or without making them sign an undertaking to serve the Government? So it is natural indeed that those who are in receipt of bursaries and scholarships should be bonded and, in fact, they are always bonded by the Public Service Commission.

I agree with him on the point that "bonding" may not be a very nice word. It takes us back to the film that we saw on television, a series called Roots. "Bond" connotes slavery. Doctors are not slaves in my Ministry. In fact, many of them talk back to me. So we agreed on an undertaking; I gave them very ample time to think it over and finally all private students signed their undertaking.

I cannot speak on behalf of the University as I am no longer its Vice-Chancellor. The new rule about controlling admissions into the medical and dental faculties is related to a trend which has been taking place since 1973. May I take the time in reading out to Members certain figures which I had not really prepared to distribute, I am referring now to pre-university students who have finished their 'A' level and who scored 60-64 points. If a student scores 60-64 points, he is a very good student. I was the Vice-Chancellor for seven years and I know it is pretty hard for students to be in that category.

In 1972, there was not a single student who wanted to do Medicine. No student with 60-64 points wanted to do Medicine in 1972. In 1973, there were eight. In 1974, there were 12. In 1975, there were 11. In 1976, it shot to 21. In 1977, it was 30. Last year, 1978, it was 41. As against students with these points who opted to study in other faculties such as Arts, Social Sciences, Law, Accountancy, Business Administration, Architecture, Building Management, in 1972, there were 9. In 1973, there were 14. In 1974, there were 24. In 1975, there were 26. In 1976, there were 18. In 1977, there were 18. In 1978, there were 16.

There was, therefore, a disproportionate number of top talented students concentrated in the Faculty of Medicine, whereas at least four other faculties were starved of top talent.

The Member for Kim Seng and Members of the House will agree with me that it is necessary that we should try and spread talented people in different fields. If a doctor through negligence kills a patient, he kills one patient. If a politician in power makes a mistake, he cripples a whole nation. It is very necessary, therefore, that we should realise this trend that has been taking place over the last six years. We should not starve the administrative service in the Government nor should we starve those who aspire to take over the reins of Government, nor should we starve those who are in the commercial and banking sectors of talent. This is a problem which we face and which the British also face.

Let me refer to an article in the Lancet on medical education, dated 4th March, 1978. I have been following this. But I must thank a good friend of mine who reminded me of it. I have read the article but forgot all about it. This is what is happening in England. It says:

'it may well be true that we are at present admitting too much high talent for the good of the country and even for the good of some sort of doctoring. But as long as all places can be filled with candidates who by referees' reports and at interviews are judged to have the personal qualities and stamina to make good doctors and have also done well in examinations, it is scarcely possible to prefer those mediocre examination results.'

Just look at the state of Britain today. I do not need to denigrate the state of the economy in the United Kingdom, nor do I have to say anything in detail about the National Health Service, filled with very bright doctors. But when the Minister in charge of the health services in the United Kingdom was hospitalised for a circulatory defect (I suspect cardiac infarct) and he had to deal with strikes by hospital porters, hospital nurses, those who are in charge of auto cleansing linen and operation equipment - the strikers declared that they did not want to serve the Minister. I hope that I will not be placed in the same unfortunate position in Singapore!

The Member for Kim Seng will recollect when, in his maiden speech at a budget sitting, he took up cudgels on behalf of his medical colleagues, I said that if a three-star general went off in a boat or in an aeroplane, he would end up in a foreign country probably as a restaurant waiter, at best a taxi driver. But if he were a doctor, he would be welcomed. Members have read very recently of the many boatmen who landed in Singapore or on the coast of Malaysia. The Australians picked them. First, "Who is the doctor?" They pick him. The Vietnamese refugee who is a doctor will not take too long a time to pick up a few words of English. Then they post him to some bush station which no Australian wants to go to. But the Vietnamese will only be too happy to go down there.

I have just recited to Members the figures of those who opt to do Medicine since 1972. From zero in 1972, it has risen to 41 in 1978. Whether it is coincidence or whether it is by design, 1973 was the year of the Tet offensive, if my memory is correct. 1975 was the year when the Americans packed out from Vietnam and since that time the figures of those who wanted to do Medicine have shot up dramatically. In fact, the cut-off point for Medicine, I was told, has gone up as high as 48. It was astounding. When I was Vice-Chancellor, we were quite happy to have the cut-off point at 40. I did mention that even for two years I had to lower it to 38 points to allow Singapore students to study Medicine. Even so, it was almost like scraping the bottom of the barrel. 3.00 p.m.

It is important that we should understand the objective of this exercise. We are not trying to prevent clever students from wanting to be doctors but we are trying to achieve a better spread of talented students who will in future occupy leadership roles, either in the public sector or in the private sector. We must have them, otherwise Singapore must collapse. Doctors alone cannot keep Singapore afloat. They can cure Singaporeans who are sick but they cannot keep the nation economically viable or make it stable. We will not have a painless budget as we have this year, if Goh Chok Tong was a medical doctor.

As regards objections to the quota of females joining the Medical Faculty, I said in Parliament (Hansard, Vol. 35, col. 364, dated 16th March 1976.) three years ago that I wanted to conscript them into national service because of a shortage of doctors. Those who were in the Medical School vigorously objected. They told the newspapers, "My gosh, by the time I graduate I will be 24 years old. I must get married, otherwise I will be an old maid." It is very tough indeed for a woman who has to perform multiple roles: firstly, as wife to the husband; secondly, as mother to her children: and thirdly, to be on night calls at the Hospital or to look after sick people. She will not have time to do even cooking. In fact, I know that as of today, quite a number of lady doctors are not even in private practice and not all of them are working in the Ministry of Health. They would rather act as locum tenentes and they can bring up their children, which I thought was a very clever idea. They have time for their profession as well as for their family. When the husband gets home, he has a happy wife waiting for him.

Attrition rate among women doctors is very high, 15%- 20%, as the Member for Kim Seng has reiterated. We have 140 vacancies in the Medical Faculty in Year 1. I think about two years ago I was alarmed when I came to know that it took in about 60 females. If we have an attrition rate of 20%, that means we are not going to have 60 doctors who will be actively working. We will have only 60 doctors minus 20%. That is a considerable loss in investment, and their places could have been easily filled by male doctors.

And the other objection - it is not quite an objection really - is that female graduates are very choosy. In America, when a woman graduates as a doctor, her first choice of field of specialisation is obstetrics and gynaecology; second, paediatric; and third anaesthetics. Here in Singapore when I meet women patients they tell me they want to see a female doctor. But most of our obstetricians and gynaecologists are males, not females. I cannot understand why Singapore women do not want to do Obstetrics and Gynaecology. It is an open field for them. They can make a lot of money. The trouble, of course, is that babies pop up in the middle of the night and they have got to rush from home to the hospital to deliver. Some of them tell me that they do not mind so much the obstetrics part of it but they do not like the gynaecological part.

It is very difficult indeed to have female doctors on the establishment who do not want to do this and that but who want to work office hours, and watch the clock. I have been getting complaints. Our outpatient dispensaries open at 8.00 a.m. and close at 4.30 p.m. I had a complaint from a patient who went to a dispensary at 4.15 p.m. but he was turned away. He was very annoyed, and quite rightly because there was a big notice down there saying, "Opening hours - 8.00 a.m. to 4.30 p.m." Nearly 85% of the OPD doctors are females. I hope they are doing a good job, otherwise I will get more complaints. But this is only one of the reasons why we are imposing a limit and I had previously suggested that it should be 30%. We are more generous. So we are making it one-third - 33%.

The Member for Kim Seng was speaking on behalf of Tan Tock Seng Hospital doctors. I refer to his special field of Orthopaedics. I think the Member for Kim Seng is particularly more interested in orthopaedics than internal medicine. The quarterly statistics bulletin (July - September 1978) showed that in the Orthopaedics Department at Tan Tock Seng Hospital there were 492 discharges and deaths. That is, 492 admissions. For the next quarter, October - December 1978, the figure was 413. So there has been no dramatic increase between the two quarters. But I do agree with him that there has been an increase over 1977 for the simple reason that attendances at the A & E Department at Tan Tock Seng Hospital have risen by 57%. When we began the A & E Department at Tan Tock Seng Hospital in 1977, only during daylight hours, the attendances were 23,900. When we opened it for 24 hours, the attendances increased to 37,600. Ambulances have their directions. They have their zones. Their main objective in caring for patients who have met with an accident is to take them to the nearest hospital. I agree with him that the catchment zone for Tan Tock Seng Hospital is large. In fact, it extends to Katong and Bedok. It surprises me considerably. The zoning system is very artificial. It can be changed. We have been overtaken by urban renewal and population resettlement. Hospitals are long-lived buildings. Once you build a hospital, you cannot move the hospital together with the residents. We have been caught flat-footed. This is the problem that the Ministry of Health has faced; that instead of following what is in the think-tank of the Housing and Development Board or the Ministry of National Development, they thought that the Ministry of National Development officials would go to the Ministry of Health. It should be the other way round. So we have been caught out. But the zoning system affects not only the Ministry of Health but also the post offices. The post office, as I understand it, is now revising postal districts, for the same reasons that I have explained: resettlement of population and the building of more roads.

When Kent Ridge Hospital becomes operative in the early 1980s, probably 1982 or 1983, those who are living in Bukit Timah, Bukit Panjang, Woodlands, will find it very convenient indeed to travel down Bukit Timah Road, turn into Clementi Road, which is a dual-carriageway, and land themselves in Ayer Rajah Road, and that is Kent Ridge Hospital. As of this moment, the zoning for the Singapore General Hospital includes Woodlands, Bukit Panjang, Bukit Timah. It is a very strange way of zoning. I cannot understand the thinking behind the zoning system. I was not responsible for that. But that will change. If the staff in Tan Tock Seng Hospital or in any hospital find themselves overworked, it is quite easy to change the zoning system and re-direct the ambulances. But I ought to add, in all fairness, that when the orthopaedic surgeons are overloaded at Tan Tock Seng we do send across a spare surgeon from the Government Unit to Tan Tock Seng to help out.

If the Member for Kim Seng would like to volunteer his services, we will be happy to receive him, to help out his peers, in Tan Tock Seng Hospital. The Member for Kim Seng will have to remember that he has also to attend outpatients specialist clinics. I am quite sure he will be quite pleased to do that and set an example to his colleagues in the university. In fact, he is tempting me with the idea that 1, as Minister for Health, should take over all the doctors in the university under my wing so that we will have a fair distribution of talents in all our hospitals. But I think it will create a general row among the academics over university autonomy and academic freedom. So I will postpone that idea to some future date.

I am surprised, Sir, that this year I have been let off so easily!

The Chairman: There are still another two amendments.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I am also equally surprised that the Minister for Health has been rather stingy with tough remarks in this direction. I would just like to say that in actual fact we agree in the principle; perhaps in terms of approach it is different.

As regards volunteering for the Tan Tock Seng Hospital, that is a private matter. I can see the Minister afterwards on that matter. Because of the very satisfactory reply from the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ho See Beng (Khe Bong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code KB-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the subtle and indirect increase in fees levied by the Government hospitals and outpatient clinics on patients suffering from chronic sickness. 3.15 p.m.

Take an outpatient suffering from diabetes, for example. According to the past arrangement, he would first see a doctor in the outpatient clinic, he would be prescribed 60 tablets as a month's supply at two a day. In the following month he would be required only to visit the clinic for a further supply of the medicine, without having to see the doctor. In the third month, he would again be required to see the doctor, have his urine tested and be prescribed 60 tablets. The arrangement would go on like this in a cyclical manner. However, the arrangement has been changed recently. Under the new arrangement, the patient, after seeing the doctor on his first visit, is prescribed only 30 tablets, half a month's supply. On four subsequent visits to the clinic at an interval of half a month each, he only collects his medicine without having to see the doctor. In other words, under the past arrangement, he had to pay only $6 to see the doctor on his first visit, and on the second visit in the following month he had to pay only $3 per visit to collect the medicine. Under the present arrangement, he has to pay a total of $12 to see the doctor on his first visit and collecting medicine on three subsequent visits to the clinic at $3 per visit within a two-month period. This represents a disguised increase in the fees levied on the outpatients of this category.

Not only is there an increase in fees but also the patients have to put up with the additional inconvenience of paying more frequent visits to the clinic. The practice is unfair and wrong, for the Government should give equal treatment to all and should not practise discrimination in dealing with the patients.

The fact that the patients are required to collect medicine once every two weeks with a month-long supply of medicine reduced to half but without the benefit of a check- up by the doctor, is an obvious case of a subtle and indirect increase in fees. This practice should be discontinued as early as possible. The arrangement may have become more logical if the patients had been allowed to see the doctor when they turn up to collect the medicine as this may help keep tab on the conditions of the patients. The present arrangement of allowing the patients to see the doctor only once every two months with the dispensation of the medicine each visit reduced from a month-long supply to half a month's supply is clearly motivated by monetary gain. This is an unbecoming practice as far as the Government hospitals are concerned. Government hospitals should not try to make money out of the broad masses.

May the practice be discontinued as early as possible, as it has given rise to many complaints among the people now. Fairness should be made the norm whatever we may do; otherwise, there are bound to be grievances.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Sir, when the Member for Khe Bong talked about 60 tablets, I did not know what the tablets were for?

Mr Ho See Beng: Diabetes.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Thank you. It was last year when I raised the fee by 50 cents for outpatient treatment, and in the process I discovered the practice which the Member for Khe Bong has just recited to the House, namely, that patients are given monthly supplies of drugs and that they do not return until the next month. I thought this over from the viewpoint of a good doctor and a patient. If I were a doctor, it should be good medical practice for the doctor, who has prescribed a two-week course of medicine to his patient, to see his patient so that he knows whether his patient is alive and still well, or whether his patient is responding to the drug treatment, or requires a change in the drug regardless of whether the patient is a diabetic or a hypertensive. For this reason, I had suggested to the Outpatient Department doctors that they should put this into practice - that chronic patients should not be allowed to take home just one month's supply of medicine and do not see them at all. They may be dead. They may be alive. Nobody would be the wiser. If the chronic patient were to go to a general practitioner, I would lay a bet with the Member for Khe Bong that the general practitioner would insist that the chronic patient comes back once a week.

Mr Ho See Beng: But the Government is not supposed to make money.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: No. I think it is good medical practice that the general practitioner is doing that. The general practitioner wants to know what has happened to his patient. Is he taking his pills? Is he better? Is he worse? If he is not responding to his pills, he had better prescribe another kind of pills. If a blue pill is no good, then he will have to give him a red pill. For this reason, I discussed this very deeply with the Deputy Director of Medical Services (Primary Health) who has a very soft heart like the Member for Khe Bong, and she strongly objected to it. But I told her that from the medical point of view it is bad. If I were a patient I would like to be seen by a doctor. Would the hon. Member for Khe Bong like to be seen by a doctor if he were a chronic patient?

Mr Ho See Beng: Sir, on a point of clarification. The trouble is that this patient has been asked to go to the clinic every two weeks without having the opportunity to see the doctor. The doctor did not keep tab on the patient's condition. He just takes the money without seeing the patient.

Dr Toh Chin Chye: Thank you for the information. I am obliged to the Member for Khe Bong for that clarification, and he supported my point! We have got 80 to 85% lady doctors in the Outpatient Departments. who are watching the clock. On the average, an OPD doctor sees 100 to 120 patients a day. The doctor can spend on the average three minutes per patient. In Scotland, they did a survey and the general practitioner spends four minutes per patient. This is for $3. It was past bad practice in giving one month's medical ration and not seeing the patient. I was trying to correct the practice and make sure the patient sees the doctor. Now the Member tells me that the patient no longer sees the doctor. So I presume he just goes to the clinic and produces his OPD card to the nurse in charge who says, "You are a chronic patient. What is your supply? What is it, diabetes or hypertension?" She then gives the card back to him. But we have to cover up the shortage of doctors and the load on them. To reduce the workload we have introduced nurse practitioners. If a person is hypertensive, the nurse practitioner can take his blood pressure very easily. She is quite competent. If he is a diabetic, she can measure the glucose in the urine. It is very simple. In fact, she teaches chronic diabetics how to measure glucose in the urine. They are given Benedict's solution to take home. Diabetics are not just given tablets for oral treatment, they are given insulin for injection and insulin is very expensive.

This complaint of having to report to the doctor at the OPD every fortnight so that he can collect his supply of insulin or oral hypo-glycemic or anti-hypertensive drugs was made to me last year. I studied that complaint in some detail and conferred with my officials on the statistics and on the number of patients involved. They told me there were approximately 10,000 diabetics and another 10,000 hypertensive patients. These are figures rounded up. I have to take their word for it. This means that they see 20,000 patients less per week. They see them only once a month, as was the practice in the past. Because they complained of the overload of patients, I therefore agreed that we would resume the past practice of giving these chronic patients their monthly supply of the medicine. But they must pay for the month's supply. They cannot go once a month to collect one month's supply but pay for one attendance. So a directive was issued to all OPD doctors that if there are patients who find it inconvenient to go to the OPD clinics once every fortnight to get themselves checked and to collect their fortnightly supply of medicine, then they could be given one month's supply of medicine but they will have to pay for it. But not all would want to go to the OPD clinics only once a month because there is the advantage of being examined either by the doctor if he is free or by the nurse practitioner. That practice has been implemented and I hope the Member for Khe Bong is satisfied.

But from the medical point of view - the Member for Kim Seng can confirm it - it is very bad indeed for the doctor to go along and give one month's supply and does not see the patient any more. From the patient's point of view, I think it is even worse.

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

Amendment by leave, withdrawn. 3.30 p.m.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon:

(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code KF-04 of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: Mr Ch'ng, amendment No.(3).

Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon (Tiong Bahru): I am not moving, Sir.

The sum of $190,581,390 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $79,717,380 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head L -

Dr Lau Teik Soon (Serangoon Gardens): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code LA-01 of the Main Estimates.

Mr Speaker, Sir, regional conflicts like the wars in Indochina, and international economic issues like the rising tide of protectionism and increase in oil prices threaten our economic growth and prosperity, as well as our security and political stability. We face the danger of being cut off from our sources of investment, market and technology, particularly from the western industrialised world upon which our economic development so heavily depends. Our bargaining strength lies not only in our continued political stability and economic growth but, I believe, also in the collective power of ASEAN.

In the face of these challenges, I believe it is imperative that the Foreign Ministry should concentrate more on the cornerstone of our foreign policy, namely, ASEAN. We should utilise our resources to strengthen ASEAN solidarity and cooperation. This is in our national interests. Particularly in the field of economic cooperation, we should provide the impetus of ASEAN cooperation in intra-regional trade and industrial development.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since ASEAN's formation in 1967, ASEAN has developed into a viable organization and has manifested its solidarity at various times, especially after the fall of South Vietnam and Kampuchea, and more recently during the discussion on the new Australian International Civil Aviation policy. Moreover, ASEAN has shown solidarity in their dialogues with the industrialised nations like the United States, Japan and the EEC.

But of immediate concern to us is ASEAN economic cooperation and this is disappointing, to say the least. ASEAN intra-regional trade has been declining as against ASEAN trade with the rest of the world, and the original five ASEAN joint projects have not gone off the ground, I wonder whether the problem is one of political will or is it one of economic nationalism? That is, while the political will to push forward economic cooperation exists, nevertheless, economic nationalism provides an insurmountable obstacle.

In this connection, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to seek the Hon. Minister's clarification on a criticism directed at us, namely, that we have not done enough to promote economic cooperation. The critics cite two examples of economic nationalism on our part. Firstly, that we have given minor concessions in return for the preferential tariff arrangement. The argument is that since we do not have a high tariff barrier, reduction of tariffs will not affect Singapore as much as the other ASEAN states; hence, we benefit more from the preferential tariff arrangement. In my view, therefore, we have to think about giving some other concessions in return to make preferential tariff arrangement effective.

Secondly, we are being criticised for not being prepared to promote the technological development of the other ASEAN states which are less developed than us. The critics give the example of the diesel engine project. They argue that by going ahead with our own project we are undermining the diesel engine industry of our neighbouring states and therefore their efforts at industrialising their economies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, at a time when developing nations are fighting strenuously against the industrial nations for such things as better terms of trade and transfer of technology, we must be seen to be on the side of the developing countries. It is crucial that we identify ourselves very closely with our ASEAN neighbours and not with the so-called North or industrialised states.

I wonder whether the Minister could clarify our policy on the question of ASEAN economic cooperation and our role in the promotion of intra-regional trade and industrial development in the ASEAN region.

The Senior Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr S. Dhanabalan): Mr Speaker, Sir, I could not agree more with the Member for Serangoon Gardens that members of ASEAN have to increase their efforts at economic cooperation. I have stated previously in this House that the conflicts in Indochina have bought for ASEAN members time, time which they must use fully to develop their economies. While I would agree with the Member that progress in economic cooperation could have been better, I would not agree that it has altogether been disappointing. Many, of course, would wish a faster rate of economic cooperation among the members of ASEAN. But in these matters it is better to make haste slowly and lay a solid foundation of cooperation. There are many examples that one can cite of countries which in a flash of idealism have agreed on very laudable projects of economic cooperation but which in actual practice have run into many problems and have collapsed. Such a collapse has left the countries in a worse state of relationship with each other than before they embarked on such cooperation.

In ASEAN we have moved only as fast as the members as a whole can agree upon, and I think this is a realistic and practical approach. We have to work and evolve our own system of cooperation at our own pace, Very often critics who accuse ASEAN of very slow progress of economic cooperation have other models in mind, like the EEC. I must point out to such critics that the EEC is a very unique example which has not been really duplicated anywhere else. And there are many in the EEC who wish they could evolve something that is closer to the model of the United States of America which again maybe something that is very difficult for them to attain. As I have said, we have to evolve our own system at our own pace.

The Member for Serangoon Gardens has touched on two particular aspects of economic cooperation which he says have been the subject of criticism levelled against Singapore. He touched on the preferential tariff agreement and the ASEAN industrial projects, specifically the diesel engine project which was supposed to be Singapore's project. First, with regard to the preferential tariff arrangement, I am sure Members are aware that the ASEAN Economic Ministers have agreed on the implementation of tariff preferences which has so far covered 1,326 products. Of this total, Singapore has contributed 248 products. This includes both tariff cuts as well as binding of tariffs. A start has been made and there has been some progress. The ASEAN Economic Ministers have also agreed that in future, at each round of negotiations, another 500 products will be added to the list. The Member must realise that there are many problems in establishing a system which will afford preferential treatment of ASEAN products in the ASEAN markets. Just to mention one problem. Many of the ASEAN countries depend very heavily upon import duties as a source of revenue. Obviously, the more successful a preferential system, the more the loss of revenue.

Another problem relating to Singapore, which the Member has touched on, is that we have very few tariffs and even these are not at a very high level. There is some validity in the argument that we have little to offer in terms of preference to the other members of ASEAN. But we have to work within the framework of each ASEAN member's taxation and economic policy. When there is a general consensus among the ASEAN. members that it is advantageous to establish cooperation in trade through a common market type of arrangement with a definite time frame and a definite plan of implementation, then we in Singapore have to give serious thought to taking such action as introducing tariffs in order to give a protected market to other ASEAN products. At such a time we should be able to do a better cost benefit study and decide on a course of action which will be of advantage to the other ASEAN members as well as Singapore. But until such time, I think it is premature to consider any special measures to afford special entry over and above what we can do with our existing tariff structure.

In the field of industrial cooperation, I would like to inform the Member that the basic agreement on the ASEAN industrial projects has been initialled. The ASEAN Economic Ministers have also initialled supplementary agreements for the ammonia urea fertiliser projects in Indonesia and Malaysia, thus paving the way for their implementation. Singapore will be participating in both these projects. Thailand's soda ash project has been approved by the ASEAN Economic Ministers. In the Philippines the phosphate fertiliser project is now in the feasibility study stage. Members are aware that Singapore's project, the diesel engine project, has not been approved because of various problems. We have decided to go ahead with a small-scale diesel engine plant in Singapore which will not be an ASEAN project, that is, it will not enjoy any preferential access to ASEAN markets. To suggest, therefore, that by going ahead with this project we are undermining the efforts of the other ASEAN countries or projects in other ASEAN countries, I think, is not a very valid or fair accusation. Singapore's project will not be undermining the other projects in ASEAN countries any more than, say, a diesel engine plant in Germany, the USA, Japan or elsewhere, because it will not have any preferential entry into the ASEAN countries. 3.45 p.m.

Singapore has also played its role and has tried to contribute towards the spread of technology in ASEAN. We have offered many training places in courses basically in technical fields to trainees from the ASEAN countries. To be exact, we have offered places for 286 trainees in 87 courses. And we have also hosted meetings for the exchange of technical knowhow and on other technical subjects in Singapore.

In his concluding remarks, I think the Member tried to imply that in some way Singapore was not identifying itself with the developing countries in its international economic relations. I would like to disabuse the Member of any such impression. To give him one example, Singapore has very strongly supported the concept of the common fund, which really is of little benefit to Singapore. But we have decided to support this concept because we want to support any measure that would bring assistance to the other developing countries in their economic relations with the developed countries. I cannot think of any examples where we have clearly identified our interest against the interest of the Third world. If the Member can give me some examples, maybe I can be more specific in my reply. But I would like to assure him that this matter is always in our minds and that we have in the various international forums always identified ourselves with the developing countries.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Sir, I am glad to note that the Senior Minister of State has given the lie to the criticisms that Singapore has not played a role in ASEAN economic cooperation or that Singapore has not identified herself with the developing states in North/South discussions. But the fact still remains that ASEAN economic cooperation beyond nominal projects has not made much progress. One of the problems, I believe, is that negotiators at these meetings base their arguments on cost benefit analysis or whether or not each country is to derive mutual or even equal benefits. I think Members are aware of the wide disparities among the ASEAN countries, in extremes between Indonesia and Singapore. So on the basis of objective cost analysis of projects, it is of course very difficult to arrive at any project for cooperation.

I agree with the Senior Minister of State that ASEAN cooperation can only move as fast as the members can agree upon. But then there are handicap members within the organisation. If we are desirous of spurring ASEAN on the path of economic cooperation, there may be a case for reorientating the attitudes of our bureaucrats and officials, particularly when they negotiate on ASEAN economic cooperation.

Sir, I would like to stress that in view of the present political economic crisis, we may increasingly have to turn to alternative sources - sources of investment, of energy, of food and so on. We have been mainly dependent on the industrial nations. But today, of course, we face a lot of problems from them, such as problems relating to protectionism and to restrictive supply of oil. So we have to look for alternative sources, and I suggest that one alternative source is, of course, within the ASEAN region itself.

I understand that we have the organisation, ASCOPE, the ASEAN Council on Petroleum. To what extent we can assure ourselves of continued supply of petroleum, it is difficult to say. I suggest that we need to consolidate the goodwill that we have built up with the other ASEAN states, and to consolidate the goodwill, we need to be more flexible in our discussions on ASEAN economic projects.

Mr Dhanabalan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think there is some implication that a cost benefit analysis, if applied to ASEAN projects, would not result in any project. That is quite wrong. It is a question of what is imputed as cost and what is imputed as benefit. In the approach to ASEAN projects, if we take not only short-term benefits and short-term costs, but long-term benefits and long-term costs to ASEAN as a whole, I am sure we can discover projects which are worthwhile promoting. I do not think it is quite fair to accuse bureaucrats of adopting an approach with narrow views as to what is cost and benefit and blame it on them for the rather slow progress that we have made so far.

The Member mentioned about the need to study alternative sources of energy. This certainly is a very important subject. There are alternative fossil fuels in the ASEAN countries which could be sources of energy. Of course, this would necessitate a change in some of our present systems of energy generation. These are subjects which are being looked at by the various ASEAN committees which address themselves to these specific problems. ASCOPE is a committee in ASEAN but it is not an official committee. It is a committee established by the private sector. But there are also official governmental committees dealing with science and technology which can address themselves to these problems. I am sure that hardly anybody can really forget this problem which is looming so large in our minds and this subject would therefore get the necessary attention.

Dr Augustine H.H. Tan (Whampoa): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do agree with the Member for Serangoon Gardens that there is probably additional scope for economic cooperation within the ASEAN countries if the various member countries are prepared to be more flexible in their attitude towards cooperation. For example, one of the ways could be a trade off over time that certain countries get better projects in the immediate future but at some later stage in the future, more desirable projects are given to the other member countries who lose out initially.

But, at the same time, I should like to warn the Member that ASEAN, no matter what the amount or degree of cooperation that we can get in economic terms, will never be a substitute for our links with the rest of the world in terms of trade, access to technology, capital and so on. We might have to look to other avenues. One of the possibilities is a link-up with countries in a similar stage of development as Singapore. I am thinking of the middle level developing countries. If you look at the trade of nations, Sir, you will find that the largest is not trade between developed and developing countries but trade between countries at similar stages of development. Particularly among the advanced countries themselves, they trade a lot in similar products. For example, let us take motor vehicles. Japan and Europe export motor vehicles to America and they import American cars as well. It is the same for television sets, appliances, motors and a wide range of products. Therefore, why do we not look at the possibility of a link- up with other middle level developing countries to share maybe technology and increase trade? To my mind, a lot of trade does not occur between nations just because of a lack of information and sufficient contacts. Here, I would hope that the proposed Trade Development Council would really get off the ground and explore these possibilities.

Sir, there is another point at the back of the mind of the Member for Serangoon Gardens when he looked at the economic potential for ASEAN, that is, people tend to look at the EEC as the example to follow. ASEAN may have land area and population equivalent to or exceeding that of the EEC's totals in these categories. But what really counts, in economic terms, in size of market, is how much purchasing power, how much per capita income that ASEAN has. And if ASEAN does not really have that potential, let us scale down our expectations, because no amount of exhortations, no amount of meetings and goodwill and so on, is going to turn ASEAN into another EEC. It is like telling five small thin men to take on Muhammad Ali. By coming together, their muscle power, their punching power, will never equal one punch from Muhammad Ali.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, I do not know whether the Member expects me to respond. Perhaps a more closer analogy would not be five thin men trying to take on Muhammad Ali. But if we want a man to jump five feet, we have to find somebody who can jump five feet, and not five men who can jump one foot each!

Sir, I agree with the Member that sometimes looking at examples like the EEC can give rise to a lot of frustration and a feeling that we are not making enough progress. I do not want to go into the many reasons, historical, economic, cultural, that make the EEC what it is. As I have said, we have to be realistic. We have to work out our own brand of economic cooperation. We have got to do it within the kind of time frame that each member of ASEAN is prepared to accept.

The Member for Serangoon Gardens raised one other point - that there are countries in ASEAN which are handicapped. I am sure none of the members would like to be branded as handicapped. So far, none of the ASEAN members has asked for any specific or very preferential type of treatment from the other members. We have always tried to work out a system of working together where we can give and take on an equal basis. I think this is the only way that we can cooperate together. None of the ASEAN members will accept a system that makes it appear that that member is dependent or is in any way given special treatment because of a lack of development or level of development. I do not think any of them would like to be branded as handicapped. 4.00 p.m.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Mr Speaker, Sir, when I use the term "handicap", I mean the wide disparities between the ASEAN member states. I am sure the Senior Minister of State is aware that the Indonesian per capita income for 1977 is only US$170 compared with Singapore's per capita income of $2,450. This is related to the point that the Member for Whampoa made about purchasing power. We are not, of course, looking at the EEC model. It cannot be. And the various factors that he has mentioned, such as the cultural level, and the level of industrial developments of the states, vary within the five ASEAN members. However, we are in agreement that for the long term national interest of Singapore we have to tie our destiny very closely with that of the ASEAN neighbours. With that, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code LB-02 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, for FY 79 a provision of $1 million has been made for the setting up of overseas missions. I have just one small question to ask of the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Would he inform the House whether new missions will be set up and, if so, where will they be?

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, the Ministry intends to establish an embassy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, in the next financial year. The provision of $1 million under the subhead will be adequate for the expenditure on capital items and other establishment costs.

In the new financial year it is also intended to extend the concurrent accreditation of our missions in Bonn, Brussels, London and Paris, to the other European countries where Singapore does not at the moment have diplomatic missions. The expenditure for this will also come from this subhead.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, in the light of the Senior Minister of State's disclosure of further extending our missions' accreditation to the other countries in Europe, my question is whether there is sufficient staff to man these missions. When I say "sufficient staff', I have in mind the setting up of the mission in France, when it took the Foreign Ministry slightly over five years to find an ambassador. I hope he can provide further enlightenment on this aspect.

Mr Dhanabalan: I heard a whisper that the Member for Punggol is offering himself!

Sir, it is true that staff is one of the problems, and this is why we do not open many missions and we try to extend the accreditation of existing missions to cover as many countries as possible. With the existing staff in the European centres that I have mentioned, we will be able to cover a few additional countries.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, whoever prompted the Senior Minister of State must himself have an intention of becoming an ambassador! I hope the Senior Minister of State will take note of who the prompter is. As for me, I am not in the running. On the other hand, I am quite satisfied with the assurance of the Senior Minister of State that everything is being taken care of in the setting up of overseas missions.

On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $39,734,520 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

Head M -

Mr Tan Cheng San (Paya Lebar): ( In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1100 of Subhead Code MA-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, today the trade unions in our Republic have outgrown their traditional duty towards workers. The unions we have today are not only fighting for the interests of their members but also take an active part in nation building, social and economic development and striving for a better and a more just and ideal society. That we have been able to maintain our progress and prosperity is due to an important fact that the Government has in the last ten years or so actively promoted the idea of tripartite cooperation between Labour, Employer and Government. The political and military changes in this region coupled with growing international protectionism are constantly exerting influence on the economic development of our economy. Therefore, it is more important that the Government, Employer and Labour should continue to cooperate closely for our continued economic growth in this changing world.

It is obvious that for many years the trade unions have, for the sake of our continued progress and prosperity, exercised restraint in collective bargaining or in dealing with industrial disputes. Unfortunately, self-restraint has been taken for granted by employers, whose exploitation has made things difficult for the workers. This can be seen in their attempts to frustrate the trade unions' efforts in trying to organise workers who have not yet been organised. What is most regrettable is that some such employers come from civilised countries which set great store in human rights. This is a result of the foreign managers not understanding the industrial relationship between them and their employees. Therefore, the Ministry of Labour could play an important role in enlightening such employers and managers on the importance of tripartite cooperation.

Ever since the National Wages Council put forward the merit and demerit schemes, the National Productivity Board seems to be lagging behind in their work in this aspect. In fact, trade unions have shown more enthusiasm and resolution to this scheri4e than the employers. The National Productivity Board should make further efforts to study this scheme in depth so as to ensure that this scheme is not exploited or misused by the employers as a means to stop the workers' annual wage increase.

Sir, one effective way to increase production is to allow workers to work overtime. However, many companies lose sight of the fact that continual additional shifts of mechanical routine work can only have a detrimental effect on workers both physically and mentally. Tense mechanical work will make the workers feel disinterested and tired of their work. This starts them thinking of changing their working environment and is a cause for job hopping. Therefore, while the employers seek to increase production, they have to give some thought to improving the working environment, such as organising regular social and recreational facilities for the workers. With some exceptions, many factories do not have such facilities. The Ministry of Labour could play an active role in this respect by encouraging factories to set up such recreational facilities and, where necessary, encourage them to cooperate with the unions by providing such facilities or activities jointly with the workers.

The Ministry of Labour is planning to recruit workers in schools and community centres in order to meet the shortage of staff in some labour intensive factories. This is an enlightened move. In fact, the shortage problem is closely related to the concept of students and parents towards blue collar jobs. In order to solve this problem in a fundamental way, it is necessary to tackle with education first. I suggest that the Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Education, People's Association and the NTUC jointly set up a committee to systematically educate our younger generation about the correct value concept and attitude with regard to blue collar jobs. Furthermore, knowledge of the trade union movement and labour legislation should also be disseminated to the younger generation systematically by this committee, to enable them to understand the importance and prospects of blue collar job in the building of our national economy.

According to statistics for last year, job hopping is still a serious problem. There are many valid and complicated reasons for job hopping. Here, some employers should be made responsible for it. Employers who do not want to introduce new working methods and policy to train and encourage the workers, those who do not want to improve the working environment of the workers and those who do not want to reward the deserving workers will always face this serious problem of job hopping. In other words, only by fostering a sense of belonging among the workers to the companies through various advanced methods will they solve the problem of job hopping thoroughly.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon (Alexandra): Sir, the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1975, permits a worker to seek compensation from his employer in respect of occupational injury or occupational disease arising out of and in the course of his employment. At present for those drawing $750 per month and above, whose employment is not of a manual nature, and who are not covered by the Workmen's Compensation Act and in the unfortunate event of an accident whilst at work, the only recourse available to him will be the common law, which would mean very long and protracted procedures.

Sir, initially the ceiling was $400 per month, but this was raised to $750 per month under an amendment to the Workmen's Compensation Act in 1971. The figure of $750 per month has remained since, and over the last eight years this figure has become highly unrealistic. Let us see what happened between 1971 and the present.

Sir, salaries in the public sector, as a result of NWC wage increases, have escalated by at least 28.7%. So officers in the public sector who were then drawing about $535 per month basic, prior to the consolidation of salaries, are now drawing at least $750 per month. These people would, therefore, not be covered by the Workmen's Compensation Act. Sir, according to the Year Book of Statistics, if we are to compare the figures of CPF contributors earning $800 and above for the years 1971 and 1977, we will see a tremendous increase of 556.4%. 4.15 p.m.

Sir, in 1971 those earning $800 and above totalled 17,230. In 1977, this figure increased to 65,869. The ceiling figure of $750 was not a point in the Table, but by using the category of $800 and above which appeared in the Year Book of Statistics it reinforces our argument even more. We can, therefore, deduce that the number of contributors earning $750 and above must have been even greater.

Sir, this means that a very high percentage of our working population are no more covered by the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Therefore, I would like to seek the views of the Minister whether he intends to introduce legislation to amend the Act so as to cover our workers adequately. Alternatively, would he consider legislation to compel employers themselves to provide insurance coverage for their staff drawing $750 per month and above? The insurance coverage could provide for the same rate of compensation as that provided for under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

Sir, the Act also does not provide compensation for disfigurement on account of burns, and I feel that some form of compensation should be provided. Disfigurement after an accident, especially of the face, hands or any part of the body, brings untold miseries, frustration and helplessness to the person concerned, including his family, and some reasonable compensation could, at least psychologically, relieve his pains and anguish. For example, a badly disfigured female worker would suffer extreme frustration and depression, not to mention loss of prospects of marriage, and we would be assisting her considerably if she could receive sufficient compensation to enable her to engage a good plastic surgeon to rehabilitate her, if she is still not beyond reconstruction or repair.

There is another point which I wish to raise and, that is, whether the Minister would again consider the use of CPF funds to purchase houses and flats built by the private developers. This has been raised time and again in this House, but it appears that Members on this side of the House would have to keep on asking. The income ceiling of $1,500 has been imposed by the HDB on applicants. Those who earn more than $1,500 per month are not allowed to apply for HDB flats and they have to apply for HUDC flats. We all know that the HUDC's waiting list is as long as a four-year wait. This leaves a high proportion of our middle income workers without suitable housing as they are not in a position to purchase private housing and neither can they wait a long time for the HUDC flats. So could the Minister consider this point again?

The Chairman: Mr Phey Yew Kok is not here. Dr Ang.

Dr Ang Kok Peng (Buona Vista): Sir, I would like to join the hon. Member for Alexandra in his appeal to the Minister to revise the income ceiling of $750 per month so as to enable people with a higher income to claim workmen's compensation. I understand that this amount was fixed several years ago while in the meantime our workmen's earnings have increased substantially. To reinforce my colleague's argument, I would like to cite an example. If the National Wages Council's yearly recommendation had been implemented in full for the period 1972-78, a workman earning $200 per month in 1972 before the NWC wage adjustment would now be earning 82% more, and one earning $750 per month, 60% more. In view of this, I think the Hon. Minister should look into this matter to revise the amount of $750 to make it commensurate with the higher income of our non-manual workmen.

I would also like to draw the Hon. Minister's attention to another aspect of the Workmen's Compensation Act. In 1975, the quantum of maximum compensation payable in fatal cases was raised from $21,000 to $35,000 and, in permanent incapacity cases, from $28,000 to $45,000. Bearing in mind the increased earning capacity of our workers and the higher cost of living, would the Hon. Minister now consider it opportune to increase the maximum quantum of compensation in both cases?

Mr P. Selvadurai (Kuo Chuan): Sir, hon. Members would recall the Government's decision some years ago to allow CPF contributors to use their CPF contributions to purchase Housing Board flats. As a consequence, amending legislation was passed to ensure that HDB flats were immune from legal attachment by the general creditors on an owner in the event of bankruptcy. As hon. Members know, CPF contributors are similarly immune from such attachment.

We have now come across some instances, Sir, where the CPF Board has demanded a refund to the Fund of CPF contributions used by undischarged bankrupts to purchase HDB flats. There is no basis in principle or reason for such action on the part of the CPF Board. I would be grateful if the Hon. Minister would review the Board's policy in this regard so that an undischarged bankrupt and his family are at least allowed a roof over their heads. I believe, Sir, that the Official Assignee has got no objection in most of these cases to the bankrupt purchasing Housing Board flats with CPF contributions.

The Chairman: Dr Lau, is your Amendment (2) on the same subject?

Dr Lau Teik Soon: No, Sir. I have been advised to speak under Amendment (8) for convenience.

The Chairman: Very well. Mr Cheong, I believe you want to speak on the same subject.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Yes. Sir, in the Central Provident Fund (Amendment No. 2) Bill which had its First Reading in this House on 14th June, 1978, it was proposed, amongst other things, to allow an inspector of the Board to require an employer to produce for his inspection the audited statements of accounts of his undertaking. This step was obviously taken to ensure that employers comply with the provisions of the Act regarding the payment of contributions due to their employees. I would like to bring to the attention of the Hon. Minister that evasion of payment of CPF contribution is still widely practised by employers, particularly those engaged in retail business in shopping complexes. Many of these employers do not pay CPF contributions to their employees during their probationary period, which is also known as the trial period. It is difficult to detect these abuses as employees so affected are mainly young people who are unaware of their rights under the Act or are afraid to report to the Ministry of Labour.

One way to stamp out these abuses is to make it compulsory for employers, whose employees are covered under the Employment Act, to give a written letter of appointment to every employee stating in simple terms the position in which he is employed and the wages he is offered. The Ministry of Labour can assist by giving specimen copies of such letters so that this will to a great extent prevent such abuses by these employers.

Sir, under section 13 (3) of the Central Provident Fund Act, as mentioned by my colleague, the Member for Kuo Chuan, if a contributor is adjudicated a bankrupt or is declared insolvent by a judgement of the court, he is not permitted to use his CPF credits to pay for his Housing Board instalments. I had come across a similar case in my constituency. For many years this contributor has been making use of his CPF contributions to pay for his HDB instalments. But lately he was, due to unfortunate circumstances, declared a bankrupt and immediately his payment from his CPF contribution was stopped. He was left high and dry, so to speak, as he has lost his job because of insolvency and he has no other means of paying his Housing Board instalment.

Under the same Amendment (No. 2) Bill, Sir, there was also a provision to provide for nominees who are spouses of CPF contributors. One of the explanations given by the Hon. Minister was that the Government should protect the right of the spouse upon the death of the contributor. But here we have a contributor who is alive but due to unfortunate circumstances he cannot be protected by reason of the provisions of the Central Provident Fund Act as well as the Bankruptcy Act. As a matter of fact, Sir, I have written a memorandum to the Hon. Minister two months ago on this matter. I am sad to receive a negative reply to this request.

Sir, I am now taking this opportunity to raise this matter once again so that the Minister could give reconsideration to this appeal, as I am sure quite a number of contributors may be affected by this provision. 4.30 p.m.

The Minister for Labour (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Sir, the Member for Paya Lebar mentioned instances of some unenlightened foreign employers obstructing the efforts of trade unions to organise workers in their establishments, and he thought that these foreign employers did this through ignorance of our policy of tripartite cooperation. Mr Speaker, Sir, through its conciliation of industrial disputes involving foreign managers, my Ministry has, in fact, already informed them of the importance of tripartite cooperation. Furthermore, the National Productivity Board is planning to organise a series of seminars in the near future to inform foreign entrepreneurs and executives of our local laws and industrial relation practice. It is hoped that these efforts will help foreign employers to amend their ways.

The Member has also proposed the setting up of a joint committee consisting of representatives from the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of Education, the People's Association and the NTUC, to propagate the concept of blue collar work and to disseminate knowledge of the trade union movement and labour laws to the younger generation. My Ministry is of the view that it would not be necessary at this juncture to form such a committee. The importance of promoting blue collar jobs is well recognised. Besides repeated exhortation by political leaders, the Government is propagating the value of blue collar jobs through schools, vocational training institutes and the public mass media. The Employment Service Department of my Ministry has also been counselling those seeking white collar jobs of the value of blue collar work. However, no amount of public exhortation or propaganda can persuade the young workers to take blue collar jobs without some visible and tangible benefits. So long as the gap in remuneration between the white and the blue collar jobs is not. bridged and working conditions improved, the prejudice against blue collar jobs will remain. The recommendations of the National Wages Council last year had taken this into account, and it is hoped that over the years the present disparity in the remuneration between the white and blue collar jobs will no longer be apparent to the potential new entrants into the job market.

As for the Member's suggestion that knowledge of labour laws and the trade union movement should be disseminated to the younger generation, I assume by "younger generation" he is referring to those in schools and the vocational training institutions. While it is useful for pupils to imbibe such knowledge, the question here is whether it is of such major importance as to warrant adding it to the already heavy school curriculum. It would appear to me as an unwarranted addition to the school curriculum. Adequate information on this subject is available within the Government and the trade union movement. Any pupil with a special interest in labour laws and the trade union movement can always approach any of these bodies for the information. Besides, it is not too late for the younger generation to imbibe such knowledge when they start working.

Both the Members for Alexandra and Buona Vista have touched on the subject of workmen's compensation. They inquired whether the income ceiling of $750 per month could be lifted so that those earning above this sum could also be covered by workmen's compensation. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Workmen's Compensation Act will be amended to provide for better compensation for injured workers and the dependants of deceased workers. This has already been made clear in the Addenda to the President's Address. Among the amendments considered is the wage ceiling of $750 per month for the non-manual workers. This wage ceiling, as Members know, has been in force since 1971 and was fixed in line with that of Part IV of the Employment Act, 1968. As rightly pointed out by the Members for Buona Vista and Alexandra, the level of wages of workers has increased over the years. The extent of this increase will be taken into consideration in fixing the new ceiling. In addition, the quantum of the maximum compensation payable for death and permanent incapacity will be reviewed to take into account the rise in the cost of living.

I am afraid that under the existing Workmen's Compensation Act, it is not possible to take such factors as disfigurement and pain into consideration. The aim of the Workmen's Compensation Act is to compensate workers for loss of earnings. However, injured workers can always have recourse to the common law.

The Member for Alexandra pleaded again for the use of CPF money to purchase privately built houses. This same question was raised by the Member for Toa Payoh in 1971, the Member for Boon Teck in 1974 and in 1975, the Member for Sembawang in 1975 and the Member for Thomson in 1977. The same question was also debated during the Budget session last year. I am afraid the answer this time will still be the same. As Members are aware, the aim of the CPF is to provide savings for old age. The purpose of allowing the use of these savings for the purchase of publicly built flats was to enable the lower middle income workers to own their houses. This was necessary in view of the high cost of privately developed properties which were beyond their means. Besides, by their having a stake in the country through ownership of residential property, it helps us to build a more responsible citizenry and a more stabilised society. Measures have been taken to ensure that the use of CPF savings will not adversely affect the objective of providing for members' old age. Therefore, the amount of savings withdrawn is required to be returned to the CPF if members sell their flats.

Unlike the publicly built flats, the prices of private residential houses are subjected to the supply and demand of the property market. To allow the use of CPF savings for the purchase of private houses will result in an increase in the demand for such properties and consequently increases in prices beyond their real value. This will result in the loss of hard earned savings of members to the benefit of developers and property speculators. It is for this reason that the Members' request for the use of CPF monies for the purchase of privately built residential properties has been consistently turned down in this House since 1971. Even as late as the last Budget sifting, the Minister for Finance again rejected the request for relaxation on the use of CPF monies for the purchase of privately developed properties. I think a more profitable approach would be to examine in what way the demand for housing by the middle income group can be satisfied. If the HUDC waiting list is too long, consideration could be given to building more units and at a faster rate. If the income ceiling is the stumbling block, perhaps consideration could be given to raising the ceiling. 4.45 p.m.

Both the Member for Kuo Chuan and the Member for Toa Payoh have requested that undischarged bankrupts be allowed to continue using their CPF savings towards payment of their HDB flats. On this subject, the Member for Toa Payoh did write to me on the 7th November of last year requesting that undischarged bankrupts be allowed to use their CPF savings for payment of their HDB flats. Under section 13 (3) of the Central Provident Fund Act, the CPF savings of a CPF member who is adjudicated a bankrupt or declared insolvent by judgement of the court are deemed to be impressed with a trust in favour of the persons who are entitled to receive the savings upon his death. Such savings cannot be seized by the Official Assignee or any creditor for settlement of outstanding debts. The protection provided under this section of the Act, however, does not apply to CPF savings that have been withdrawn. Since the Attorney-General has ruled that CPF savings withdrawn for the purchase of HDB or JTC flats are no longer protected by the Central Provident Fund Act, it was decided that the undischarged bankrupt should not be allowed to withdraw CPF savings for this purpose. Accordingly, the Member for Toa Payoh was informed of this decision.

However, we have since discovered that the Housing and Development Act and the Jurong Town Corporation Act contain provisions which prevent the Official Assignee or creditors from seizing HDB or JTC flats of undischarged bankrupts. Under section 44 of the Housing and Development Act (Cap. 271), an HDB flat cannot be vested in the Official Assignee on the bankruptcy of the owner. A similar provision is made in the Jurong Town Corporation Act (Cap. 209). Accordingly, if CPF savings were allowed to be withdrawn for payment of a flat after the member has been adjudicated a bankrupt, the CPF withdrawn for this purpose would be protected for as long as the member does not sell his flat. In view of this, the CPF Board will examine further the request of the Member for Toa Payoh to allow undischarged bankrupts to continue using CPF savings to pay for their HDB flats.

As regards the case mentioned by the Member for Kuo Chuan, this CPF member first bought an HDB flat in Toa Payoh in April 1969. He subsequently sold the flat in January 1977. In September 1976, he bought his second flat at Marsiling Drive. He sold this flat in December 1978 and purchased his third flat at Bedok North in November 1978. On 11th February 1977, he was adjudicated a bankrupt and remains undischarged to date. When he applied on 27th September 1977 to use his CPF savings to buy a third flat, he declared falsely that he was not an undischarged bankrupt. Consequently, he was allowed to withdraw $9,471 from his CPF account towards payment of this third flat. Since he has made a false declaration and is an undischarged bankrupt, the Board requested the refund of $9,471.

The Member for Toa Payoh suggested that an amendment be made to the Central Provident Fund Act to provide for the issue of a letter of appointment specifying the job title, date of commencement of employment and monthly salary, to the employees so as to prevent evasion of payment of CPF. Mr Speaker, Sir, under the Act, every employer must contribute CPF for his employees from the date of commencement of employment, including the period under probation. To ensure compliance with this requirement, the Board has its own enforcement staff to carry out systematic checks on all employers. In addition, any employee can always complain to the Board's office against his employer for failing to pay his contribution promptly. The Board will act on all complaints, including prosecuting the employer in court, to recover the contributions due. As the existing enforcement measures are adequate, there does not appear to be any compelling reasons to make amendments to the Central Provident Fund Act for this purpose.

Dr Augustine H.H. Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I refer to the Minister's reply on the use of CPF savings for the purchase of privately built houses. The crux of his argument was that this would give a lot of benefit to the property developers, and speculators would try to cash in on the situation. Sir, he must try to understand the grievances of the category of people who are affected, people above the $4,000 per month income limit. They are faced with a property market which requires them to save a rather substantial sum of money before they can even make a booking for a terrace house, let alone a semidetached or detached house.

The Minister also stated that the purpose of the CPF is to provide for old age. Sir, for people in this category, I think there is over provision by the CPF for their old age. In fact, I think they would be better off in their old age than they are now. Thirty-three per cent of their salary, of course, with a limit a year is very substantial, together with the accumulated interest over time.

I think the Finance Ministry has taken a little step towards alleviating some of these grievances by raising the tax exemption in respect of CPF contributions from $4,000 to $5,000 next year. But still, perhaps the Minister could consider, in any future upward revision of the CPF and of the limit for CPF contributions, exempting those people who are not eligible for HDB or HUDC housing from any further increase in the CPF.

Mr Ho See Beng: Sir, one point I disagree with the Minister for Labour is that whenever the Government wants to allow CPF members to use their CPF savings it will advance all kinds of reasons to justify it. But when Members on the opposite Bench ask for the same thing, the Government gives all kinds of reasons to frustrate them.

An hon. Member: Hear, hear!

Mr Ho See Beng: Sir, if CPF savings could be used to buy SBS shares, I see no reason why CPF savings cannot be used to purchase privately built houses.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid I have to disagree with the Hon. Minister's explanation on the need of having employers issue letters of employment. We should take precautions rather than cure an ill that may arise out of a complaint. In the cases that I have mentioned, after the probationary period the employee is still in employment. So out of fear of losing his job, he will not report to the Ministry of Labour. After all, there is provision to amend the Central Provident Fund Act to penalise an employer who has breached the provisions of the Act. So why not provide a precaution rather than undertake cure by making sure that employers issue letters of appointments stipulating the amount of the CPF contribution based on the current percentage? In this way, complaints to the Ministry of Labour could be avoided.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, on the question of the use of CPF funds for the purchase of private houses, the Minister has said that the reason is that private developers are profit-oriented. May I remind him that HUDC flats are built and sold at a profit by the HUDC. If we apply the same reasoning to this question, we can see that his argument cannot be logical.

I also wish to add that I want to dissociate myself from the remarks made by the Member for Whampoa when he talked about revising the CPF contribution upwards. Personally, I hope this will not arise as, I think, our CPF rates are high enough already.

Dr Augustine Tan: Point of clarification, Sir. My suggestion was to freeze the current level of contribution by people above the $4,000 income limit, not to raise it.

The Chairman: Mr Hwang, you have indicated a desire to speak?

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Thank you for the opportunity, Sir. I am just wondering whether the Hon. Minister would like to take this opportunity to inform the House whether he is now in a position to give details as to the manner in which it is proposed to extend the CPF scheme to provide an element of life assurance scheme. The reason is that since the announcement made in this House a few months ago, there has been quite considerable speculation in the papers. There is even the suggestion that the life assurance business is going to be nationalised.

Sir, I must declare my position. I am in the insurance business but I do not underwrite life assurance business. But this fear is very real, Sir, and I think the sooner a statement is made the better it is for the industry. I do not know whether it is intended that the CPF would provide the insurance scheme itself or whether it is going to be done in conjunction with the private sector. The Minister should give an indication at this stage.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid I cannot give a definite indication to the Member for Jalan Kayu regarding the use of CPF money for life insurance purposes because the matter is still under deliberation and a decision has not yet been made.

Mr Ho See Beng: No justification yet! 5.00 p.m.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: There is every justification but the matter is still under deliberation.

I think there is a difference between the use of CPF money for the purchase of SBS shares and privately built flats. In the case of SBS shares, they were sold at par with the assurance of 7 1/2% return on capital invested. Therefore, one can be assured that the hard-earned savings will not be lost. In the case of properties built by private developers, however, the houses are not sold at cost. In fact, the prices are quite highly inflated and, therefore, the possibility of losing one's hard-earned savings is real.

I take the point of the Member for Whampoa. When we next consider the rates of CPF contribution we will take into account those people who earn above $4,000. The fact that they cannot use their savings for the purchase of private properties will be noted.

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, I would like to make a comment here. If these people in the above $4,000 per month income limit were allowed to use the CPF to purchase private houses, then I agree with the Minister that this would raise property prices in Singapore and, therefore, benefit developers and some speculators. But then the argument applies symmetrically to the purchase of SBS shares because the owners of the shares, no matter who they are, will benefit from the increase in demand for SBS shares. So profiteering still goes on and unintended benefits are passed on to other people as well. As to the possibility of loss of private savings because of demand and supply fluctuations - private savings in the form of CPF invested in private housing - adequate safeguards can be built into the system by allowing, say, no more than 50% of the cost of such houses to be underwritten by CPF money.

Encik Sidek bin Saniff (Kolam Ayer): Sir, one life ambition of a Muslim is to go to Mecca upon his retirement. But those who can afford would go even earlier, when they are stronger and healthier. Would the Minister consider allowing a Muslim to withdraw some of his CPF money to go to Mecca?

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, I do not know whether it was a slip of the tongue on the part of the Minister, but I think it is opportune to ask him now whether he can assure us that there would be no further upward revision of CPF rates.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: I am afraid I have to inform the Member for Whampoa that my answer to his question is no. In fact, I have just had a private consultation with the Minister for Finance, and he is not at all in favour of relaxing further on the use of CPF money, whether it is for the purchase of private properties or for making a trip to Mecca.

Mr Tan Cheng San: ( In Mandarin): Sir, after the detailed explanations by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave withdrawn.

The Chairman: I propose to take the Suspension now.

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and shall take the Chair again at 5.35 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.05 p.m. until 5.35 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.35 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head M (cont) -

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code MA-02 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like to speak about night work again, and I would ask the Minister to see whether it is feasible to do an in-depth study of the implications of night work in Singapore. If the experience of the Minister for Health is a good guideline, I would like to suggest that the Ministry of Labour take good care not to get its files burnt by any fire!

There have been a number of studies on the implications of night work, and I think it is useful at this stage of our industrial development to also make similar in-depth studies. It is perhaps necessary for me to preface my remarks by reiterating that, in our context, it is extremely important for Singapore to optimise its resources in terms of manpower and also in terms of the available working hours so that our industrial development capacity can operate to its optimum. In other words, I would like to reiterate that I am not against night work. In fact, it is important for us to optimise our resources and, where justifiable and necessary, we should expand our industries by utilising night work.

But as we expand our industrial capacity in this direction, I think it is useful for us to make early studies and preparation because there have been many instances of family problems arising from prolonged night work, not only in terms of one continuous shift but also prolonged cycles of night duty. In fact, the reasons for a major revision in the nurses' seven-night cycle were prompted by the same reason: it affected the physical health of the nurses. It reduces their productivity, especially when the nurses reach the fourth or fifth night-duty shift. Also there have been problems of social contact, as the workers tend to encounter problems of breakdown in friendship and community ties.

Based on the experience of the nursing service, it would be useful to see whether the same problems apply in the industrial sector. The study by the International Labour Organisation published in 1977 may be a good guide for us. However, I disagree with its conclusion that night work should be banned wherever its motive is founded solely by financial considerations of making costly equipment pay for itself more quickly. In the context of modern technology, it is important for investors to have sufficient profits to recover capital costs. So I think the exertion of this report is a bit too strong. Nonetheless the report does outline some of the problem areas which deserve serious attention by countries like Singapore which are still in an early stage of development.

I would like to ask the Minister whether he could initiate - if this has not been done - an in-depth study on the extent of night work in Singapore; what are the problems that have arisen from this and what more problems could crop up if night work is further extended. And perhaps also if he could set some broad guidelines or standards so that industries and departments, like the Ministry of Health, could use to ensure that the productivity of workers will not be reduced by an excessive or prolonged duration of night duties.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Sir, as mentioned by the Member for Kampong Kembangan just now, the International Labour Organisation has recently completed an extensive study on the effects of night work on workers. The study shows that night work does not give rise to serious medical condition, although it may initially affect the sleep and appetite of some workers. Persons with conditions of diabetes or peptic ulcer, however, tend to take night work less well than normal persons. This I LO study also reveals that female night workers tend to feel more tired during certain days of their ovarian cycle. However, this difference between the male and female workers in itself does not place women at a disadvantage in performing night work.

The Labour, Factory and Industrial Health inspectors in my Ministry jointly conduct checks on shift workers on a regular basis to ensure compliance with safety and health requirements. During such checks, these inspectors interview workers to find out what effects, if any, night work have on them. The feed-back from such interviews reveals that some night workers feel a sense of social isolation initially, but after a while they get accustomed to it. Through adjustment, our shift workers have overcome disruption to their families and social life. Apart from occasional sleepiness and fatigue, night shift workers report no serious ill-effects from work during the night. Many female workers interviewed have expressed a preference for work at night because they can earn higher wages and at the same time manage their homes during the day. 5.45 p.m.

The present employers of industria establishments must seek the approval of the Ministry before employing female workers on night work. Approval is normally given if the Ministry is satisfied that the female workers are not compelled to work during the night, and that they are working in a safe and healthy environment and are provided with appropriate incentives, such as night shift allowances and transport. Women suffering from diabetes or peptic ulcer are not allowed to work on night shift. Pregnant women are also not allowed to do night shift. So, in some way, the Ministry is already taking steps to ensure that the night work does not affect adversely the health of the workers.

But I am not so sure about the resources of the Ministry as to whether an in-depth study, as suggested by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, can be carried out effectively. I am also not so certain whether we can do any better than the ILO study. However, I shall discuss this with officers in my Industrial Health Unit to see whether such an in-depth study can be carried out.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I am indeed very glad to hear the reassuring remarks from the Hon. Minister. I am particularly glad because he has taken a very positive response to it. He could have taken a very critical or defensive stand. Since he did not do that, then he endorses my view that in our stage of development we still need to make arrangements for night duty because that is one of the ways to optimise industrial development. In many ways, we have got little alternative but, as I suggested, at our stage of industrial development if we do such a study, if we continue our monitoring, and if from the studies we find that night work could be rationalized, then possibly we could avoid serious problems in the future years of our industrial development on account of excessive night work.

For the remarks that have been given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement -

Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee: (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by the whole sum in respect of Subhead Code MA-01 of the Development Estimates.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: (5) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code MB-02 of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: Mr Cheong is not moving. Amendment (5), Encik Mansor.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I am not moving.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (6), Mr Phey.

Mr Phey Yew Kok (Boon Teck): Sir, I beg to move.

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code M B-03 of the Main Estimates.

I rise to speak not because I consider that the Minister for Labour has failed to do a proper job, but rather the officials of the Ministry tend to give an impression to workers, rightly or wrongly, that the Ministry does not fully understand and appreciate the aspirations of workers. Sir, such an impression is strengthened by a recent experience of the Singapore Industrial Labour Organisation (SILO).

As Members of the House may be aware, the local press last week carried a report of SILO winning the right to represent the industrial workers in Ford Motor Co. (Pte) Ltd as a result of a successful secret ballot for recognition conducted by the Ministry of Labour. The secret ballot victory was made more remarkable by the fact that the workers were represented by a non-affiliate of the NTUC for more than 20 years. But what was not highlighted in the report, Sir, was the disturbing fact that 90 workers chose not to vote in the secret ballot. The former trade union representing the industrial workers of Ford Motor, realising that it would lose the secret ballot for recognition of SILO, went on a campaign to persuade the workers to stay away from the secret ballot. If a larger number of workers had stayed away from the secret ballot, any victory in the secret ballot would be an empty victory.

Under Regulation 4(4) of the Industrial Relations (Recognition of a Trade Union of Employees) Regulations, 1966, a trade union would be granted recognition by an employer only "if the results of such secret ballot show that the majority of the employees entitled to vote are members of a particular trade union." In other words, a trade union seeking recognition from an employer must obtain the votes of the absolute majority of employees in favour of representation by the claimant trade union. If the number of employees voting in the secret ballot is less than the absolute majority of employees entitled to vote, the result of the secret ballot would be only of an academic interest to all concerned.

As Members of the House may recall, the campaign of the former trade union representing the industrial workers of Ford Motor to stay away from the secret ballot is similar to the campaign of the Barisan Sosialis to persuade the workers of Singapore to boycott the referendum conducted in 1963 to ascertain whether Singaporeans were in favour of Singapore joining Malaysia. To counteract such an effect, it was declared that any voter abstaining from voting would have been deemed to have voted in favour of recognition.

Sir, I am by no means trying to equate the significance of a secret ballot for recognition to that of a nation-wide referendum. But the principle underlying the conduct of the secret ballot is, nonetheless, similar to that underlying the conduct of a national referendum or a general election, when it is expressly specified that the result of the voting will count only if the majority of persons entitled to vote do so vote in favour.

The precise effect of Regulation 4(4) requiring an absolute majority as a condition for the granting of recognition is that it makes it easier for an unscrupulous employer or other persons to ensure the defeat of the trade union claiming for recognition. If the unanimous or vast majority of voting employees vote in favour of recognition then, by necessary implication, those employees who abstain from voting are to be considered to have voted against recognition. It would thus simplify the job of an unscrupulous employer to get rid of employees whom he considers to be undesirable. This would make a mockery of the very purpose of a secret ballot, which is intended to protect the identity of workers, whether they vote in favour or against recognition.

It is true that Regulation 4(2) provides that no one "shall in any way obstruct the taking of a secret ballot". The difficulty is to prove to the satisfaction of a court that a person obstructs in the taking of a secret ballot. Even if there has been a successful prosecution for obstruction of the taking of a secret ballot, the maximum fine of $500 is not likely to be an effective deterrent. As it is, there have been instances of employers threatening the employees who would like to vote in favour of the union. When such advice is coupled with the practice of some employers openly taking down the names of employees voting in the secret ballot, it would be rather foolhardy for employees not to heed the advice of the employer. It is a rather unsatisfactory situation.

But not too long ago the NTUC did make representation to the Ministry on the manner of the conduct of a secret ballot as effected under the prevailing regulations. I am of the firm view that the situation can be easily rectified if an amendment is made to the Regulations, either requiring all employees who are entitled to vote in the secret ballot for recognition so to vote in the secret ballot unless they are sick or abroad or have reasonable excuse, or making the results of the secret ballot to be based on the simple majority of the votes of employees who vote in the secret ballot. If the Ministry considers it rather too harsh to make voting in secret ballot compulsory, then a fairer remedy is to base the result of the secret ballot on the decision of workers who take the trouble to vote than on the decision of those who for some reason or other choose not to exercise the right to vote.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

The Minister of State for Labour (Mr Sia Kah Hui): Sir, if we were to agree to the hon. Member's suggestion of a simple majority of the votes cast, a situation can easily arise where the union which has won the majority vote could really be representing a minority of the bargainable employees in the establishment concerned. A claim for recognition by a trade union is that it represents the majority of the employees eligible to vote. So basing the majority simply on the number of votes cast and to ignore those employees who did not cast their votes can, as I said, give rise to a situation where the union will be really representing a minority. 6.00 p.m.

I do not know why the hon. Member is worried. In fact, from the 51 cases of secret balloting conducted for the 12 months between March 1978 and February 1979, in 39 cases all the workers who were entitled to vote participated in the balloting. In the remaining 12 cases, the rate of participation varied from 90% to 99%. In all instances, even if those who did not turn up for the ballot had voted, the verdict would have remained unaltered.

In the case of the Ford Motor Company cited by the hon. Member, prior to SILO's claim for recognition, the workers were represented by the Singapore Motor Workshop Employees' Union. It is true that the Singapore Motor Workshop Employees' Union instructed all its members to boycott the voting. As a consequence, out of 301 workers entitled to vote, only 216 or 72% participated in the balloting. But the outcome was that SILO had the majority of the votes cast, and even if those who did not cast their votes had been included, SILO would still have the majority. So I do not see any real need to make voting compulsory. As I have said earlier, if he were to leave out those who did not cast their votes or if he did not leave out those who did not cast their votes and simply base on a simple majority of the votes cast, a situation can easily arise where the union will be representing a minority in the establishment.

Mr Phey Yew Kok: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I find it very difficult to agree with the Minister of State that because the affiliates of the NTUC have been winning most of the secret ballots we should not change this regulation. May I refer to another case which is published in today's New Nation. The Food, Drink and Allied Workers' Union won another secret ballot. It is the same thing. Another non-affiliate of the NTUC tried their best, three times, to convince the workers not to vote and it took the other union three times to win the secret ballot. Is this not an unnecessary waste of man-hours for the workers who are required to vote three times to make this decision? The Minister of State has said that even without those who do not vote, we can still win. But I do not think this is fair, because for those workers who do not vote, it is a vote against the union. It is not a vote against the employer or others. Can I suggest to the Minister of State that the regulation be changed so that the abstention of those who do not vote should not be considered as a vote against the union.

Mr Sia Kah Hui: Sir, I would have thought that, after all the effort, the victory was even more glorious and more meaningful. Anyway, the suggestion is taken and we will watch the situation as we go along.

Mr C.V. Devan Nair (Anson): Sir, there was one point which the Member raised but was not referred to in the reply. That was the instance given of employers taking down the names of workers who went in to vote. Surely that is reprehensible and the Ministry could do something to persuade such employers not to indulge in such un-Singaporean practices.

Mr Phey Yew Kok: Sir, may I bring up another point. There were a number of occasions when unscrupulous employers used undue influence to pressurise the workers not to go and cast their vote. A very simple example - the manager just stood in front of the workers saying, "Look, those of you who want to vote can go in and cast your vote." No employee dared to cast his vote because the employer was standing in front of them. So that must not be taken to mean that the employee is voting against the union.

Mr Sia Kah Hui: Sir, from the instance quoted, I would imagine that there might have been cases where employers did try to influence the workers. I am sure we will have to exercise more supervision to ensure that things like that do not happen again.

Mr Phey Yew Kok: Sir, in view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Phey Yew Kok -

(7) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code M C-02 of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: Mr Phey, Amendment No. (7).

Mr Phey Yew Kok: I am not moving, Sir.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code MC-03 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, with your permission, can I also speak on my next amendment because the two subjects are interrelated, that is, industrial safety and industrial health.

The Chairman: Yes.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, it is normally not my practice to touch on this subject but I am sure we all miss very sorely the presence of the former Member for Potong Pasir and more so the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour. Anyway, the subject of industrial safety and health is a matter of utmost importance in the context of Singapore today. The subject is made even more significant and pressing with the event of last year. Here I am sure Members know that I am referring to the national disaster, the Spyros incident. As this is a matter which is now before the court, it is not my intention to discuss the subject at any length or in detail other than to say that because of the disasters in industry such as this, it is very important that all parties concerned in the promotion of industrial health and safety pay more and more attention to this aspect. I am very happy to note that under the vote for Ministry of Health in respect of the item 'Employment Standards Programme', there is an increase of about $250,000 or 9.8%, and that the major contributing factor to this increase is the creation of 10 posts to enable the Factory Inspectorate to step up the enforcement of industrial safety laws and regulations.

Sir, we note that in spite of the various concerted efforts by the Ministry of Labour and supported by the unions, we still continue to see a very high incidence of industrial accidents, in some cases leading to fatalities, in particular, the shipbuilding and repairing industry, the construction industry and, of course, the metal working industry. I think it is important that we should re-emphasise the need for Government, Employer and Labour to join hands to achieve industrial health and safety. It is important for the Government to periodically review its laws and regulations to ensure that we achieve a more acceptable level of industrial health and safety.

Sir, on the part of the National Trades Union Congress, we shall give whatever assistance possible and support to ensure that the programmes for industrial health and safety are carried out. We on our part will continue to further our efforts. However, there is a noticeable reluctance on the part of some employers to appreciate the value of industrial health and safety. Some of them are, in fact, penny wise pound foolish, and they have yet to accept the fact that job safety and productivity are closely inter-related.

Sir, a few examples where more intensification of enforcement could be carried out would be in respect of problems like noise-induced deafness which the former Member for Potong Pasir had very strongly advocated. If we were to refer to the statistics over the years, there is a very definite and sharp rise in the incidence of noise-induced deafness. I do hope that the Ministry of Labour will carry out compulsory screening of workers whose workplaces expose them to noise levels unacceptable for normal hearing.

In respect of the use of chemicals, solvents, etc., I think it is important that the Government should insist that where chemicals are involved adequate notices be placed to inform workers of the chemicals they are using and of the dangers involved. Last year the Senior Parliamentary Secretary gave a breakdown of the number of cases of industrial dermatitis, a total of some 177 cases. I think the figure could probably be higher this year. In respect of the new and more frightening area, i.e. occupational cancer, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said last year that they would be looking into this matter.

Sir, I think it is important that the Labour Ministry should look into these areas. In fact, in certain work places where lip service is paid to the concept of industrial safety and health and where some employers appoint safety officers and safety committees just for the sake of complying with the regulations, then there must be more than just this compliance with the law. Actually it is my intention here to ask the Ministry of Labour whether, after all these years of talking about coordination, there are plans to set up an institution for the training of safety personnel under a more concerted and coordinated programme. This is important because as of now the job of attending to these areas lies separately with the employers, the union and the Government. Perhaps an Institute for Occupational Health and Safety could be established with haste. Sir, I hope the Labour Ministry could comment on the points which I have raised. 6.15 p.m.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, during the debate on the President's Address, I brought up the question of the need for industrial safety to be observed strictly by employers. I also mentioned that despite the strenuous efforts on the part of the Ministry to educate the workers and to provide inspectors, yet more industrial accidents have occurred. In fact, since the last debate a number of industrial accidents have occurred resulting in loss of lives. According to a recent report, 12 persons have died as a result of industrial accidents in the year so far.

What I would like to seek clarification is whether the Hon. Minister has introduced new administrative measures to make effective the implementation of the various laws relating to industrial safety, such as the Factories Act. I understand that the shipyards are particularly negligent in ensuring that all necessary safety equipment are installed and operative.

I recognise that the Labour Ministry has been hard put to provide inspectors who are qualified and trained to oversee the various work places, particularly the shipyards, in the implementation of safety measures. Maybe the Hon. Minister should consider providing greater incentives for the officers who are in the Factory Inspectorate.

Another matter relates to employers who continue to disregard the Ministry's directives concerning industrial safety. What I would like to ask the Hon. Minister is whether he would consider punitive measures against employers with bad records, namely, those who continue to flout industrial safety laws and regulations and whose workers continue to work at the risk of their lives.

Mr C.V. Devan Nair: I ask for your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. While we are on the subject of occupational health and safety, I wonder whether the Minister for Labour could also bring under his purview the occupational health of working Members of Parliament. I submit that the freezing temperature in this Chamber is not conducive to the occupational health of MPs; we could do with a much warmer temperature in this House. Perhaps something could be done to ensure that we do not have to operate in such terrible working conditions.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, may I be permitted to speak on Subhead Code MC-04 now?

The Chairman: Yes.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Thank you, Sir. My friends in the United Workers of Petroleum Industry reminded me about the common practice of workers in workshops and petrol kiosks washing their hands with benzene. They told me that this is not a healthy practice because benzene and motor fuels generally contain alkyl lead anti-knock agent. Although the lead in these fuels cannot be absorbed into the body through the unbroken skin, their regular and repeated use as cleansing fluid may result in lead poisoning. I wonder if the Ministry of Labour could remind the public about the dangers of lead poisoning, particularly in workshops where there are metal chippings which could cause broken skin, thereby aggravating the dangers of lead poisoning.

On our part, and particularly with the United Workers of Petroleum Industry, we will urge our members and their friends to be aware of these hazards and to take particular precautions. At the same time, it is also important for the management to take steps to discourage workers from using benzene to clean their hands and to provide special unleaded gasoline for cleansing purposes.

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng (Mountbatten): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think I can speak with the least bias being a friend of labour and, at the same time, associating myself with the Singapore Manufacturers Association to speak on industrial health and safety. Whilst I do agree with the hon. Members for Kim Seng and Kampong Kembangan, I feel that this simple statement of penny-wise-pound-foolish, an accusation against the manufacturers, is a little unfair. Workers, I feel, are human beings and although we try to educate them to use safety devices, some do find it rather uncomfortable to use these devices.

The hon. Member for Kampong Kembangan has also brought up a very glaring mistake by workers who use benzene to wash their hands. I am sure that many other things do happen which we do not happen to notice, but when we ask workers to take care of themselves, they do not bother so much until something serious happens. So I suggest that the Ministry of Labour together with the manufacturers and the unions carry out a campaign to educate workers to respect their own selves, their health and also to use safety devices.

Mr Tan Cheng San: ( In Mandarin): Sir, with regard to industrial safety, although the Ministry has often urged management and employees to always pay attention to industrial safety in order to avoid unnecessary loss of life and limb, we still find workers continuing to fall victim to tragedies and disasters. In many factories, there are safety committees jointly set up by employers and employees. However, some safety committees exist in name only. They only meet a few times in a year. If a safety committee is to be successful and effective in its work, the employers have to be enlightened and encouraged to take initiative. The Ministry and trade unions can play a supervisory role in this respect. There should be frequent surprise visits to the factories by labour inspectors to ensure that safety measures are adequate and adhered to, and those employers who breach such regulations should be dealt with severely according to the law.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour (Mr Fong Sip Chee): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I just comment generally on a few points commonly raised by various Members. Perhaps I should begin with the Member for Mountbatten because his comment really stands out. After so many years, this is the first time we hear a voice defending the employers. Perhaps the debate will be quite different from now on, when it comes to this subject of safety and health of workers. I do not know whether the Member would extend his coverage to other aspects of labour legislation on employers. But I would seriously advise him to be more prudent and exercise his discretion.

I appreciate, Sir, his concern too, but generally most employers put the blame on the workers for failure to observe safety rules and regulations and good practices. This seems to be quite acceptable on the surface, but if we were to look deeper into the question, then we would find the real crux of the problem lies in supervision or the insistence, at least by the employers through the supervisors and safety personnel, on the workers to put on safety apparels. There was only one case of a worker who was disciplined for failure to comply with safety regulations. If the employers were to exercise the control which they ought to, then I do not think the problems of workers failing to observe safety regulations would arise as quoted by the Member for Mountbatten. I have heard many arguments, including those from statutory boards that the workers are difficult to control because they are semi-illiterate, illiterate, and of low education. I think there is a big fallacy in this argument. It is precisely because of their educational level that they are workers. Otherwise they should be executive directors or chief executive of the board. In that sense this argument cannot be used against the workers.

Supervision is the most important ingredient in safety management. This is particularly true in the construction site where safety supervision is very frequently "an experience in twilight zone", so to speak, because in one construction site there may be 10 contractors, each not knowing who is responsible for safety. I take this opportunity to emphasise again that it is a question of supervision.

The Member for Kim Seng and the Member for Serangoon Gardens raised the same point in direct opposition to the Member for Mountbatten. They seem to place the responsibility on the employers. Whilst I agree that the safety and health of workers should be a tripartite effort, principally it is a matter between the employers, the workers and the unions, because the Ministry of Labour cannot be everywhere all the time. It is important, Sir, that each of us should not merely pay lip service but to give our moral commitment to the question of industrial safety and health. There are employers who engage a safety officer or supervisor merely to satisfy the requirements of the law. Our view is that mere compliance with the law is as good as nil, if a safety officer is there just as a figure head and, in fact, some of them do not have sufficient knowledge of industrial safety and health. Because of this, the Ministry conducted many training courses at different levels of safety management in the various establishments - from safety officers to safety supervisors, even industrial first-aid course. We also participated in the University post-graduate course by giving lectures on this aspect of work, hoping that in the higher levels of management the knowledge and commitment of industrial health and safety would be evident at meetings of the board of directors. Members can therefore see that we have gone through the different levels of training for those people involved.

Sir, before I go on to the other points, may I just share my feelings with the Member for Anson. If I do seem to be trembling later, it is not because I cannot provide answers to Members but because I do feel the cold myself. 6.30 p.m.

May I now go on to the various specific points raised by the various Members. It is very prudent of the Member for Kim Seng not to go into the Spyros case because a number of people have been charged in court. I do not think we should touch on this subject at all. If we were to exclude that disaster, we will find that last year the industrial safety situation showed a very minor improvement of 0.5%. This improvement is negligible but it shows some effort. The increase of 10 posts in the Factory Inspectorate is, of course, welcomed and they will be put to good use. But the main problem is not so much an increase of staff every year. The Ministry of Finance will not be too kind to us if we keep on increasing staff. The problem is that both the Factory Inspectorate and the Industrial Health Division not only have to discharge their enforcement duty and functions but they are also involved in training, providing educational courses, training courses, as well as educational and promotional activities. Sometimes they also provide consultancy services to enlightened managements who seek assistance, out of their own volition and without any compulsion.

This leads me to the point raised by the Member for Kim Seng. He appealed for the setting up of a kind of body to coordinate efforts. I am pleased to inform him that since he raised the question in this House last year we have now been given the green light to proceed with the establishment of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. It has still a long way to go. We have to re-examine once again our objectives so as not to over-do things, and to draft the necessary legislation to give final birth to this institute. Right now we are undergoing a period of labour pains on this.

Sir, I will not pick bones with the Member for Kim Seng on this issue of noise-induced deafness. I am in complete agreement with him. He quoted 177 cases for 1977. Last year 1978, the number of cases was 257. This shows an increase. It is not because we have failed in our duty but rather noise-induced deafness surfaces only after a period of constant exposure to a noise level beyond 90 decibel. The increase in the number of cases confirmed last year goes to show that our surveillance programme is proceeding very well.

It is estimated that 20,000 workers are exposed to very noisy environment. Since we launched the hearing conservation programme, about 13,500 workers have been screened. We have repeated follow-up cases of about a few per cent, let us say, 3,000. It can be said that since we launched the programme in 1976/77 we have gone through about half the number of workers in the establishments which have a very high noise level. The difficulty here is that in discharging this particular duty we have to seek the cooperation of employers because it is not compulsory or mandatory by law that they must subject their workers to a screening test. We are considering now whether or not to make it compulsory. But there are very enlightened managements. After the exercise they mount their own campaign, and they conduct their own surveillance at their own expense. Perhaps the Member for Mountbatten will agree with me that we do find enlightened employers here - I am not apologising on behalf of the other Members - but there are employers who do respond to our efforts and to them I say a big "Thank You", maybe through the Member for Mountbatten.

On the question of solvents and chemicals handled by our workers, the number of cases is increasing. Let me refer to some statistics. Very fortunately we have only a few cases last year. On solvents, chemicals and other solvents, there were five cases last year, one in 1977 and seven in 1976. The other cases were minor. The main problem was noise-induced deafness and industrial dermatitis, which gave us a total of 583 confirmed cases. But very rarely did the damage due to industrial dermatitis become permanent. If they had undergone a course of treatment and be isolated from contact with this process, they could have returned to normal life without any loss of capacity. Unlike noise-induced deafness, where there would be some loss of hearing. On the question of occupational cancer or carcinogenic programme, mentioned by the Member for Kim Seng, I am pleased to inform him that the programme has been launched. We have managed to get the staff. We will first have to compile a register of those establishments and surveillance will go on. This is a long term exercise. I only hope that I can report to the House every year that the statistics will always remain at zero.

This is another programme on general safety situation. There am a number of equipment and machinery now being handled by workers who are not required by law to first acquire a certain degree of competence or expertise. For example, drivers of tractors, excavators and even some operators of lifting equipment like the crane, are not required by law to obtain a certificate of proficiency. There have been some accident cases in this area. We have even liaised with the Registry of Vehicles to try to impose some control. Unfortunately the law says that so long as the vehicle is not on a public road, the worker is free to operate those huge vehicles even without the knowledge of safe handling. We did organise some courses for dumper trucks and excavators, but I do not think that kind of ad hoc solution will help. It is hoped that after a period of time all these people handling heavy machinery and equipment, like tractors and overhead cranes, will be licensed or be subjected to a course of proficiency and certified fit before they are allowed to operate. If we were to impose the requirement now, it will completely upset a lot of our industry. We are very mindful of this. It will be done, particularly when the Institute is in operation.

The Member for Serangoon Gardens appealed for strict observation of safety rules. He also asked that more severe punitive measures be imposed. May I remind the Member that sometime ago the penalty under the Factories Act has been increased from $5,000 to $10,000 and that the custodial sentence has been doubled from three months to six months. We are reviewing the situation and might even further enhance the penalty. But in so doing we must bear in mind many other criteria which I do not think it worthwhile to discuss today. We just cannot increase the penalty or enforcement action through sheer anger. We need to examine the situation very closely before we come down to a decision. Certainly the matter is very much alive in our mind. We hope there will be no need for us to impose too strict a punitive measure, but if circumstances demand it we have no hesitation to do so.

The Member for Kampong Kembangan is particularly concerned about lead poisoning. The Member said "benzene". May I find out from the Member whether he means "benzene" or "benzine". They are, chemically, two different things. One is quite remotely related to the other.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Motor fuel.

Mr Fong Sip Chee: I hope the Member is not referring to C6H6 - Benzene. I think the Member meant b-e-n-z-i-n-e. In gasoline - petrol, there is some quantity of organic lead, about 0.08% per litre, acting as a kind of anti-knock agent in gasoline, and benzene is part of the grade. There is lead in benzene, but more frequently they use petrol. Organic lead is unlike inorganic lead. I hope the Member for Kampong Kembangan is following me. The only way a person can get organic lead poisoning is through acute exposure. That means he is suddenly exposed to a large dosage or through wounds. It is not like inorganic lead where a person can get lead poisoning through a chronic low exposure, i.e. accumulative exposure over a long period of time. That only applies to inorganic lead. So when we talk about organic lead of 0.08% in the substance that the Member referred to, there is very little danger of lead poisoning. We conducted a survey in 1977 and found that there was no incidence of lead poisoning through the use of petrol. This is a frequent practice though. I agree with the Member for Kampong Kembangan that it is not a good practice. It is a bad habit. There are other cleansing solvents or cream available in Singapore. I have got a list of the brand names here. For fear of being accused for being a salesman for these products, I will hand it over to the Member personally if he desires. So there is a little danger in that. But if we were to go to the battery shops, the electro-plating establishments, the danger of lead poisoning is very high. In fact, we were compelled to take action against a few establishments in the past.

As for the Member for Paya Lebar, may I have your permission, Sir, to reply in Mandarin, so that it would be easier for him to understand.

The Chairman: Yes, carry on.

Mr Fong Sip Chee: ( In Mandarin): The Member for Paya Lebar raised the point about safety committees. The importance of safety committees is understood by every body but unfortunately not every employer, trade union or employee understands its scope of functions. In the past we conducted training courses on how to form these committees and what their functions are to be, and that the success of these committees depended on the cooperation and joint effort of both employer and employee. Unfortunately, these safety committees downplayed the need for safety in the workshops and have not been able to recommend practical and specific measures. 6.45 p.m.

The Ministry is aware of the situation. Our Inspectorate officials also visit these factories. -One of their tasks is to find out whether they have got a safety committee in the factory. If there is, then we have the right to look into the minutes of their meetings, to sit in their meetings, and to offer guidance and direction. But it is impossible to deal with each factory in this manner because of the shortage of manpower. Possibly in future, we may lay down guidelines and regulations and the method of work for them to follow. These could be distributed through the trade unions and managements down to every safety committee for guidance. This aspect of the work is quite onerous and also unwelcome as the management may suspect our official interference while the unions may not know how to go about it. But with this guidance and guidelines, the safety committees should be able to carry out their work more smoothly. This is a very important link in the safety aspect of their work and we do not disregard it. We will accept the suggestion by the hon. Member for Paya Lebar and hope to be able to do more on this aspect of our work.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I must thank the hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary for saying that the practice of washing hands with benzene is not that serious, insofar as lead poisoning is concerned. If he has samples of the materials which are safe for washing of hands, maybe it is better that he sends the samples to the management rather than the union, because insofar as the workers are concerned they will use whatever product the management supplies them.

In this regard, I am very proud of my trade union comrade, the Member for Mountbatten, for his contribution and remarks which exemplified the reality of management and labour cooperation in the Singapore style of industrial relations, and this has even occurred in this august Chamber. Perhaps his ability to take alternating roles as management representative and labour representative is of good advantage to all of us. In fact, I recall the game played by children called teddy bear teddy bear turn around where they jump rope from one side to the other. I think it gives flexibility in our discussion. But the suggestion by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary asking the hon. Member for Mountbatten to take on greater roles would mean that we are going to ask him to play yet another game which is called teng-teng where the child throws a token into a square of a certain design and then jumps from one square to another, but once all the squares are occupied with tokens he cannot jump anywhere else. Anyway, I appreciate the contribution from the Member for Mountbatten. In fact, I mentioned that I would urge my friends in the United Workers of Petroleum Industry to carry out their own programme to educate members and their fellow workers on the real dangers of lead poisoning by the liberal use of benzene or other products. But I would now ask my friend, the Member for Mountbatten, to use his management cap to urge management to supply liberally cleansing solvents or any products which will not give rise to lead poisoning at all. If this is done, then I think this problem will not take up so much time in our debates.

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: Sir, may I just make a few comments. First, I must thank my hon. colleague, the Member for Kampong Kembangan, for those very kind words. The now Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry, at one time when he was on this side of the House, used four words - superior counter fire power. He realised full well when he was standing here talking about income tax that he would be fired upon. I realise, of course, the superior counter fire power of the hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour and the very fact that I am standing here and taking him on shows that I am not actually blaming any worker but that I am, in fact, merely concerned. For the sake of workers, I would stand here to receive his superior counter fire power.

Sir, I suggest that since there are culprits both on the management side and on the workers side, but the number is very small, and the very fact that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour also said that the improvement over safety was very slight, then I think, like many other things, because management and labour find it difficult to handle those very few difficult ones, we should appeal to the Government (the Ministry of Labour in this case) to step in and start some action to carry out, as I suggested just now, a campaign to really bring home the point of safety to workers and perhaps also to management.

Mr Fong Sip Chee: Sir, I have no intention to highlight the inadequacy of any Member. I only hope that if the Backbenchers can have enough controversy among themselves, my job will be very much easier as it proved to be the case.

We do have campaigns but it is not the kind of campaign that the Member for Mountbatten has in mind, because if we were to mount a national campaign we will find that about 2% of the exhibits will be relevant to perhaps 2% of the workers and the rest, 98%, will be totally lost. Because of this, we mount campaigns on an industry basis. For example, we have campaigns in the shipbuilding, construction, metal working, and the woodworking industries. These are the four industries which are most accident-prone, so that our efforts can be appreciated and also the knowledge imparted to workers in these industries can directly and immediately benefit them. For instance, a woodworking industry worker will not have to burden himself with a study of the machines in the shipyard. There are, however, certain features in industrial accidents, like failing from heights and being hit by falling objects which are very common in the shipbuilding and construction industry. We do have campaigns on that.

Cost-effectiveness-wise, I do not think it is good for us to organise mass campaigns on industrial safety and health. It is time-consuming and the effectiveness is questionable. If we were to do that, I do not think the Minister for Finance will give us more funds next year. We would expose ourselves to this folly.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, I think what is important really in highlighting these two topics is the fact that all parties concerned should pay an increasing and further interest on the subject. I think it is a very easy mistake to make if we think in terms of polarised position. Here we are appealing for cooperation from the various parties involved to improve the working environment for workers. In this context, I think the Ministry of Labour is indeed to be congratulated for the work it has put in, its enforcement measures, although we know that it is working under trying conditions. To avoid further cross-fire between the Government and the employer, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement -

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: (10) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code MD-01 of the Main Estimates.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: (11) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 2210 of Subhead Code MD-02 of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: Amendment (10), Encik Mansor.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I would like to ask your permission to withdraw this amendment because the subject I intend to discuss can also be covered in another amendment I have filed for Head Q.

The Chairman: Yes. Amendment (11), Mr Ng Kah Ting is not speaking. Amendment (12), Mr Cheong is not here. Encik Mansor.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code MD-02 of the Main Estimates.

With your permission, Sir, I would like to discuss two matters. One concerns procedures on the grant of work permits and the other relates to policy on sterilisation. In the course of my meet-the-people sessions I have come across a few cases of holders of work permits having their permits cancelled because it was known that they applied for permission to marry Singapore citizens. They were also told that the Immigration Special Pass would be cancelled and that they would not be permitted to enter Singapore at all. I think the Government is right in exercising stringent control over the entry of non-citizens through the present block permit and immigration policies. This is particularly so in regard to non-citizens who have no family ties in Singapore, but we must make some distinction here. I think special consideration should be given to Malaysian work permit holders who have Singapore citizen parents, brothers or sisters in Singapore. If they contravene the block permit regulations, then I think their permits must be cancelled but they should be allowed immigration facilities to visit their parents, brothers or sisters in Singapore. On the other hand, for Malaysian citizens, who have no Singapore citizen parents, brothers or sisters in Singapore and who contravene the regulations, then I think there is justification for us to be stringent.

Our present policy on controlling marriages between non-citizens and citizens is good and should continue. But the problem which seems to exist is that holders of block work permits are under the impression that their permits would be cancelled and immigration facilities clamped down only if and when they actually contravene the regulation by marrying without the Commissioner's approval. But from the few cases referred to me, I note that we seem to enforce the regulation once we learn that the holder has applied for permission to marry a Singapore citizen, at which stage the applicant has not as yet contravened the regulation. If it is indeed our policy to enforce the regulation from the time of application, then in all fairness this should be made known. Otherwise, the applicants go to the Registry of Marriages or the Registry of Muslim Marriages with the false impression that their application for permission to marry, made in good faith, would do no harm since they are merely applying for permission which is not an act of contravention as yet. Moreover, the officers in the Registries of Marriages have been known to give the impression that there is no harm in applying for permission to marry a Singapore citizen. I am not worried about the Malaysian citizen. What concerns me is the impact it creates in the minds of persons in Singapore, that is, his or her immediate family and the relatives. I am quite worried about this sort of impression. It creates a misunderstanding and suspicion about our integrity. 7.00 p.m.

With regard to sterilisation, I have been advised that on application the applicants will be told that approval will be given only if both the husband and wife are sterilised. I would like to appeal to the Minister if he could re-consider this rather stringent policy, I think it would be sufficient if only one is sterilised.

Mr Sia Kah Hui: Sir, I had better put the facts right at the outset. Block work permit holders who applied or contracted marriage with Singapore citizens or permanent residents will not have their work permits cancelled. Only work permit holders who marry Singapore citizens or permanent residents without the approval of the Commissioner for Employment will have their work permits cancelled.

The work permit marriage policy is well known. A public statement was issued on 25th June, 1973. That was almost six years ago. In that public statement the policy was clearly stated. If a person deliberately contravenes the policy, he is penalised notwithstanding the fact that his relatives are Singapore citizens. In any case, the work permit holders who contravene the policy are only barred from entry into the country for one year. They will be allowed to come in on a social visit pass in subsequent years. If the facts are straight, I do not think what the Member had complained of would apply.

As far as sterilisation is concerned, since the object is to limit the size of the family and the size of the population, since Singapore is such a small country, the sterilisation of one party does not really solve the problem. We will have to leave it at that.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, it would appear that the hon. Minister of State for Labour is aware of certain techniques whereby even if one party is sterilised, a couple can still have babies.

I must ask the Ministry officials and the Minister to forgive me for raising this matter, even though I have had correspondence with the officials concerned. I have received repeated petitions from a family concerned. I think they have a family of seven children. All of them are Singapore citizens and only one is not a Singapore citizen. That person was affected. It has been very difficult for this particular son to visit his family. I wonder if the Minister could make an exception and allow him to visit Singapore because, after all, he had been in Singapore, had a work permit and made some contribution to the development of Singapore. Other Malaysians who were not work permit holders could do anything, whereas he cannot come in and out of Singapore at any time. If the Minister could give some dispensation in this case, I think the family would appreciate it very much.

Mr Sia Kah Hui: Sir, since the hon. Member has cited a specific case, from the facts that he has mentioned, I am very sympathetic. If he were to put the case to us, we will look into the matter.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: Sir, if it is an assurance that approval will be given, or even half an approval, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $11,555,110 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $597,890 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.