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

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [7th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head S -

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

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

Mr Speaker, Sir, the rapid growth and development that is taking place in the various fields in our country can be attributed entirely to the wise leadership and able administration of the Government as well as the diligence and efforts of the people.

In keeping with the times and aim of nation building, the parallel and complementary development of land, sea and air transportation has been one of our major developments. Our pod has progressed from the fourth largest to the third largest port in the world. In certain respects, our land communication has become the object of study and emulation by other countries. Our civil aviation has progressed to a stage when we are now one of the few countries in the world providing the supersonic Concorde air service.

Take the bus service, for example, which occupies an important position in our land transportation industry. Since its major reorganisation, the bus service has improved a great deal. It is the main means of transportation for the broad mass of our people.

It has brought us prosperity and also solved the problem of transportation for the people. With the joint study and mutual consultation between the Singapore Industrial Labour Organisation and the SBS, bus service routes are being meticulously rescheduled, the standard of service is being raised and the welfare and interest of the workers are being looked after. On the other hand, the SBS has offered its shares to the public in order to increase its capital to purchase many more good quality vehicles, to build more bus interchanges and to provide balanced services in both the urban and rural areas. All these measures are being implemented step by step in order to benefit the broad mass of the people.

Bus workers who travel in their buses on the roads and working arduously day and night are a decisive factor in the quality of bus services. Bus workers play a very important role in our land transportation industry. Therefore, the dedicated service and contribution of the bus workers deserve our recognition and an honourable place in our society.

Workers in the bus service number some 10,000 people, comprising drivers, conductors, ticket inspectors, timekeepers, repair mechanics, and others. This is indeed a gigantic work force. Take, for instance, the drivers and the conductors. They constitute the majority of the bus workers. They have a close relationship with the people and have a direct contact with them. After the efforts of these many years, we cannot but recognise that the bus workers have performed well and improved the bus service. 2.45 p.m.

While the Government is seriously considering the Mass Rapid Transit System, the bus service undoubtedly remains an important means of transportation for the people. The bus workers are still the vanguard of land transportation. Their work is tough. They have to endure the heat, tolerate ill-tempered commuters and suffer the inconvenience of being jostled, pushed around and shouted at. Sometimes they have to contain the call of nature and other urgencies. However, their work is meaningful. It is lively. They push forward the wheel of progress of our society. They are making great contributions to the society and the people. To encourage the workers to be diligent in their work, the Singapore Industrial Labour Organisation and the bus company have set up an incentive bonus scheme. Workers' welfare and benefits are also receiving close attention.

Other than the incentive bonus award, suitable commendation and deserving honours should be awarded to those workers with long service, those who have been courteous to the passengers, helpful to the old and weak passengers, and honest in returning money and articles left by passengers and, not least, those who have built up a good image for the transport industry.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I hereby propose that the Ministry of Communications consider instituting a scheme for a special medal to be awarded to transport workers who have contributed to the building up of a good image of the transportation industry.

The Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture (Mr Ong Teng Cheong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad to hear that the hon. Member for Paya Lebar is pleased with the public transport service. I cannot agree with him more that this is the result of the hard work of our bus workers. There is no doubt that the bus workers have contributed much to our economy and I also agree that good bus workers should be rewarded. But I am afraid I cannot agree to the suggestion that the Ministry of Communications should set up a special award just for bus workers alone because workers in other fields also contributed to our economy and they will continue to contribute to the well-being of our country and society as a whole. I thought the most effective way to award the workers would be for the individual companies to administer these awards and various incentives rather than for the Government to set up special awards for a special group of workers.

Mr Tan Cheng San: ( In Mandarin): Sir, although I am not satisfied with the explanation given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin (Bedok): Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, I would like to raise some very pertinent points with regard to certain age-old problems faced by the Singapore Maritime Officers Union (SMOU). I say they are very pertinent problems because they are. I say they are age-old because they are that too.

It will be recalled that at about this very time last year I raised some of these very issues, these very same problems, these very same sore points. I raised them with all earnestness, with all seriousness, with a plea and a hope for these maritime officers. Yet what has happened since that time last year? Almost nothing - yes, all those problems encountered by these maritime officers have largely remained unresolved. Almost nothing has been done for them by way of protection. Does no one really care for their welfare? Does anybody care for their well-being? Does anyone at all really care for their professional and social betterment?

The SMOU is not covered or protected by any Act of Parliament. Members have no official basis for negotiations on fundamental labour rights of various kinds, such as public holidays, overtime pay, leave entitlement, proper working hours, reasonable working conditions, access to various recreational facilities, and so on. These are, Sir, fundamental factors that go to make a man's life, both at work and recreation, a little more tolerable, a little better, that much more acceptable, that much more conducive to greater working happiness and productivity. Surely the maritime officer is entitled to expect all these in return for an honest day's work. Yet what has he got up to now? What is his lot? Why is he being ignored? This is a strange fact indeed - a seeming paradox. Singapore is today the world's third largest or busiest port. Yet her maritime officers are not given their due. How strange! What a disappointment! It is just incredible.

The problems I have just outlined are just the tip of the iceberg. There are many more - many, many more - encountered by our maritime officers. Let me enumerate further just a few more problems.

There is the problem of a complete absence of local and home trade officers having any assurance of obtaining jobs with wages that are either reasonable or commensurate with skills possessed and today's acceptable standard of living. There should be some sort of mandatory ruling on this basic necessity for a reasonable life. The unemployment roster at the Maritime Office is only voluntary.

Then there is the long-standing problem of complete absence of an official governing body to settle serious disputes concerning maritime officers. Section 65 (1) of the Merchant Shipping Act (Cap. 172) states that disputes involving amounts over $50 lie beyond the jurisdiction of the Marine Office. This means that such disputes have to be proceeded with in a civil court, a process which is not only time-consuming but also costly. These are two facets the average maritime officer can ill-afford. In fact, most of them would not be in a position to do it at all.

Then, again, there is the other most disturbing problem, a problem which I stressed so seriously last year. Section 38 (1) of the Merchant Shipping Act imposes the ridiculously, the unbelievably tiny sum of a mere $100, as a fine on those who prey on the helplessness of the unfortunate marine officer desperately in need of a job. I refer to the penalty imposed on those who extort "coffee money" from marine officers in return for jobs. I refer to the widespread illegal brokering for jobs. Is there any wonder why such a practice is so widespread? It is unhealthy. It is un-Singaporean in character. It is wrong.

Sir, I have stated and outlined some of the many problems faced and encountered by the marine officers. To alleviate the pain endured by the marine officers, I would like to suggest that the SMOU be placed under the ambit of the National Maritime Board (NMB) in order to give it some status, some official standing. The Maritime Board extends its facilities and services to seamen, but not to the maritime officers. Why should there be a discrimination? Perhaps, Sir, a little amendment to the definition of "seamen" as it appears on page 252, No. 21 of 172 of the National Maritime Board Act would do the trick. It would solve this problem, at least, for a start. Other solutions could follow.

Sir, I am told that the SMOU has made an application or request for it to come under the ambit of the NMB. In this, it has the support and backing of the NTUC. The Member for Anson can bear me out on this. Now, why has it taken so long to take a decision to accept the application and to admit the SMOU into the National Maritime Board? Has the Marine Department anything to do with the delay in the decision-making? Has any pressure been exerted from any quarters to have the decision delayed? I ask a lot of questions because I do not have the answers, and because the marine officers do not have the answers. But I am sure the Minister has them. We would like to know what they are.

Surely, Sir, it is abundantly clear that it is best to put the SMOU under the ambit of the NMB as it is the most appropriate body to represent the Union in matters pertaining to areas of disputes, claims, etc. Also the NMB could beneficially take over the present obviously unsatisfactory arrangement, whereby the Marine Office does the voluntary registration of unemployed officers. This is because the NMB has all the facilities, the infrastructure, the manpower and the experience to effectively take over this function.

I am not alone in this area of concern. My colleagues, the Member for Bukit Merah and the Member for Khe Bong have also shown great concern over this whole set of problems facing the marine officers. The SMOU should rightly enjoy the same privileges enjoyed by the Singapore Organisation of Seamen (SOS) which is a member of the National Maritime Board. But apart from privileges, there is the more important question of effectiveness. The recent "Sankuru" and "Singapura" episodes and their subsequent release illustrated and proved a point, the very point I have been talking about - effectiveness. The part played by the SMOU on behalf of its sister organisation, the SOS, is now history. Without affiliation, without the support of the SMOU, without the solutions that have eluded them for so long, these marine officers are left to the mercy of all and sundry.

I therefore, once again, Sir, plead on their behalf for better treatment.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am aware that the Singapore Maritime Officers Union have made a request early last year. The matter is still under careful study by the Marine Department as well as the Ministry of Labour. Initial reaction from the Singapore Merchant Navy Officers Association was not favourable.

I would like to impress upon the hon. Member that on matters like this, we have to retain a certain sense of balance because our Republic is essentially an open, competitive society, and shipowners should be given the flexibility to choose their own crew. The maritime officers should also be given the choice to work for anyone they like.

I am not sure whether the Member is talking about the maritime officers as a whole or just the coastal trade officers. On the whole, we have to treat this with great care because about one-third of our seamen are employed on foreign flag ships. If we introduce these measures and other countries also introduce the same measures, we may end up a greater loser in the end.

Sir, my Ministry is aware of the activities of these illegal job agents, especially for the coastal trade maritime officers. I have no objection to the suggestion to increase the penalty from $100 to a greater figure if the hon. Member thinks that it will solve the problem, but I think it is best for the Marine Department and the Immigration Department to get together and look into these problems facing our coastal trade maritime officers comprehensively, with a view to eliminating these illegal activities that are going on.

Therefore, on the question of SMOU's request to come under the ambit of the National Maritime Board Act, I would suggest that he wait for a little while longer for the Ministry of Labour and the other related bodies to look into the matter more closely. 3.00 p.m.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: Sir, I am quite satisfied with the explanation given by the Minister, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

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

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: (3) That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code SB-01 of the Main Estimates.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code SD-02 of the Main Estimates.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: Sir, I am not moving.

The Chairman: Amendment (4), Dr Ong is not here. Amendment (5), Mr Tan.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon (Alexandra): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, Singapore is well noted for its highly efficient postal services. The Postal Services Department is to be congratulated for what is probably a most, if not the most, efficient and well-organised network of post offices and postal services. Sir, two post offices, namely, the one located at the Paya Lebar Airport and the other at Killiney Road, have their hours of operation extended into the night. These extended hours of operation, I think, began some years back. The night services at these two post offices have proved to be very beneficial to many people, including office workers who are unable to go to the post office during working hours and also to those businessmen who may have to go to the post offices later in the evenings. I would like to ask the Minister whether, in view of the popularity of the night services at these two post offices, he would consider extending the hours of operation of more post offices, particularly those which are ideally and centrally located in commercial centres, and perhaps in the larger housing estates.

My second point refers to the Killiney Road Post Office. Because of its location in a very busy commercial and tourist area, the post office has a very high turnover of mail and business. In the evenings there are only two persons on duty and these two clerks at the counter handle everything. They have to register letters, register parcels, receive messages for telegrams and sell stamps and very soon, according to the Minister of State for Defence, they have to start issuing exit permits for national servicemen. As a result of the very heavy volume of work, these two clerks are overburdened. Long queues of people, sometimes as many as 15 to 20 people, can be seen at the counter, and the service becomes very slow. Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister whether he would also look into increasing the number of staff at the Killiney Road Post Office in the evenings.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, the operating hours at most of the post offices are 8.30 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. from Mondays to Fridays and 8.30 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. on Saturdays. The need to extend the counter service hours of these post offices depends very much on the demand, whether it is of such great extent as to justify the extension of the operating hours. In the next financial year the Postal Services Department will be extending the counter service hours of Toa Payoh Central and Jurong Town post offices from their normal morning hours of 8.30 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. daily except for Sundays and Public Holidays. I agree with the hon. Member that extended business hours should also be considered for post offices in other town centres in the future. I am sure the Postal Services Department will look into that possibility.

As regards the Killiney Road Post Office, unfortunately I have not been there myself. I will just have to take the word of the Member that there are long queues in certain evenings. I would definitely ask the Postal Services Department to investigate whether there is any justification for them to request and convince the Ministry of Finance to increase the number of workers at the post office.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, in view of the highly satisfactory answer 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 S be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code SF-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture to the Points Demerit System because I have received many complaints since its implementation. The complainants alleged among other things the draconian measures imposed on the offending motorists over very minor offences by the Traffic Police Enforcement Section. Just take, for example, the case of an offending motorist who was charged for entering a wrong traffic lane. It was a very minor offence because the driver, instead of taking the centre traffic lane to go straight, took the third traffic lane on his right which only serves traffic turning right. Although he was in a wrong traffic lane, he did not cause obstruction because as soon as the traffic light changed, first, from red to amber then to green, he drove straight on instead of turning right. This is the only difference, but he was fined $50 plus three demerit points. The traffic offence cited by me just now is a very minor one and it suffices to warn the offending motorist, but it is unfair to punish him with a double penalty such as an offer of composition of $50 plus three demerit points.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, unfortunately the Member for Khe Bong was not around earlier when I was giving my Oral answer to a question on the Points Demerit Scheme raised by the Member for Ang Mo Kio. For the information of the Member for Khe Bong, although the Road Traffic Act comes under the portfolio of my Ministry, the enforcement action and the imposition of fines and demerit points are administratively carried out by the Traffic Police which does not come under my Ministry.

However, I mentioned earlier, in answer to the question raised by the Member for Ang Mo Kio, that offences such as forming up incorrectly on a lane when turning right or left are minor offences, if a motorist accumulated 12 or more demerit points for the first time, composed wholly of minor offences of this nature, then only a warning letter will be issued to him instead of suspension. I have earlier agreed to issue to Members a list of offences, the composition of various types of offences which relate to the various periods of suspension, for their information so that they will be able to advise their constituents when they meet them in their meet-the-people sessions. I must admit that I sympathise with those who are not only fined but were also awarded demerit points for traffic offences. I myself receive complaints not only from my constituents during my meet-the-people sessions but also from members of my family who commit traffic offences from time to time. But nature being what it is, penalties have to be imposed as a deterrent to discourage motorists from continuing with the careless and dangerous driving habit.

Mr Ho See Beng: In view of the reply, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendments stood in the name of Mr Cheong Yuen Chee:

(7) That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code SF-02 of the Main Estimates.

(8) That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code SF-03 of the Main Estimates.

(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code SF-04 of the Main Estimates.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Sir, may I have your permission to raise my amendment (7) together with amendments (8) and (9) as they are inter-related?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code SF-02 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, the surcharge on road tax and the limitation of PARF eligibility for cars above 10 years old should be reviewed. Not all vehicles above 10 years old are not road worthy. In fact, we are penalising the careful and thrifty car owners, who keep their cars in roadworthy condition. Since these provisions were introduced sometime ago, I feel that it is time that the Ministry of Communications reviewed the position so that there can be some improvement. Surely some concessions could be given to such car owners, such as periodic inspection of their old vehicles to ascertain the road worthiness before registration. The decision to discontinue granting the PARF concessions for cars above 10 years old by 1980 is really unfair, I would also submit that this provision could be reviewed by the Hon. Minister concerned. 3.15 p.m.

Sir, in the testing and licensing of drivers, various measures have been taken to reduce the number of road accidents. I spoke on this subject in this House sometime ago on the need to tackle the problem at source, that is, the learner drivers. Accidents or near-accidents can be caused through improper use of indicator signals on vehicles. The total dependence on indicator signals by learner drivers should be discouraged. Use of hand signals should be made compulsory for all learner drivers. It is not surprising to see many motorists often use wrong directional signals, sudden signals or no signals at all, thereby not only causing accidents but inconvenience to other motorists. I would suggest that the Registry of Vehicles should seriously consider making it compulsory for learner drivers to use hand signals while they are driving.

Sir, the last point I would like to make is on enforcement. The Hon. Minister has just mentioned that sympathetic consideration will be given to motorists who have accumulated 12 demerit points and whose licences have been suspended. I wonder how sympathetic is the consideration. At one time, the suspension was three months. Now, in some cases, it has been reduced to 1 1/2 months. This shorter period still causes extreme hardship to drivers who have to earn a living through driving, that is, taxi drivers, bus drivers, lorry drivers and so on. I would suggest that a shorter period of, say, one or two weeks, be imposed if no serious injury or death resulted from the negligence of the driver concerned. In this way, we could really say that sympathetic consideration has been given.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Sir, thank you for the opportunity to speak on the points demerit system. Like the Member for Toa Payoh, I am not satisfied with the answer given by the Hon. Minister. He has said that since the introduction of the points demerit system there were 3,000 cases of suspension. This works out to an average of 200 cases per month. If we look at the statistics purely in terms of statistics alone, then, of course, it seems nothing very serious. But if we look at the figures closely and think in terms of the number of families that are going to be affected, then it is a rather serious situation. I submit that every month 200 families are going through traumatic experiences.

Sir, to many people, suspension of a driving licence often means not just a temporary loss of income but, more seriously, a permanent loss of a steady job, and this results in serious financial hardship stretching beyond the period of suspension. Suspension affects, in fact, not just the driver and members of his family but, in many cases, many other people. For instance, we take the case of a school bus driver. If he is suspended from driving, then all of a sudden the parents of those school children who make use of his service would be hard-put to make alternative arrangement.

Sir, last night during my meet-the-people session, I was saddened by a tearful couple who came to see me with a baby in arms. Notwithstanding the fact that I managed to get their suspension reduced to 1 1/2 months, they told me that 1 1/2 months to me might be short but, to them, how are they going to live? Sir, this is not just one of those so-called sob stories. I hope the Minister will be more sympathetic rather than shove it aside and say that this is one of those sob stories and should not be taken too seriously. On the contrary, I think we ought to take it very seriously. We are talking about 200 families who are put in a traumatic situation every month.

The Minister mentioned that if an offender should accumulate 12 points for four minor offences, then he would just get a letter of warning. I am not sure whether this is the case. I am just wondering whether there is a breakdown in communication where the message has not gone down the line because I do have a couple of cases where I wrote in and said, "These are four minor offences and why have you not considered the case more sympathetically?" I think given the state of our roads in Singapore which are always congested and by no means a simple traffic system, it is very easy to accumulate 12 demerit points over any one period of 12 months. Therefore, I think the present system is really very, very harsh, especially for those who depend on driving as a living. I would like to appeal to the Minister once again. If members of his family fail to appeal to him, probably they have got much better transport arrangement, and maybe he will be more sympathetic towards people who do not have such good alternative transport arrangement.

Mr Seah Mui Kok (Bukit Ho Swee): Sir, I would just like to join my colleagues in this House in appealing to the Minister that he should not just express his sympathy verbally but that verbal sympathy should be translated into action, with results. I am faced with similar problems at my meet-the-people sessions. A taxi driver who had accumulated 12 demerit points was suspended from driving for two months. After making an appeal, he got one month's suspension. He has four children who are schooling. For one whole month he was deprived of any income at all. If a driver has been suspended from driving for one or two months, I do not think he can maintain his alertness. Should he go back to driving after an absence of one or two months, I think his driving will be worse. He will cause more accidents. I strongly appeal to the Minister to sympathise with such people and, if possible, waive the suspension. It is a negative way of punishment. It should be more an educational exercise.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, let me first answer the easier question about cars above 10 years old in relation to the Preferential Additional Registration Fee. I would like to inform the Member for Toa Payoh that we are actively reviewing this particular restriction in the light of the introduction of compulsory inspection for motor vehicles. The review and studies are not yet completed, and I am therefore not in a position to make any statement at this stage.

The second point raised by the Member is about the compulsory use of hand signals by learner drivers. Hand signals are compulsory when a learner driver is taking his driving test. We can therefore assume that he practises hand signals while under instruction. But the fact is that as a learner he is not perfect, and sometimes he may forget to give his hand signal as he should. If the Member is suggesting that the Traffic Police or the Registry of Vehicles ought to take action against learner drivers in this regard, then we may be faced with enforcement problems. Also we will be getting a lot of complaints from learner drivers that the suspension of their provisional driving licences will affect their livelihood.

Regarding enforcement problems raised by the Members for Jalan Kayu, Bukit Ho Swee and Toa Payoh, as I have mentioned, we have always been very sympathetic to those who depend on driving for a livelihood and who had their licences suspended. In the past, the maximum suspension period was six months and it has been so applied throughout. Since Members have raised this question in this House sometime last year and appealed on behalf of their constituents, a special liaison committee comprising the Registrar of Vehicles, officials from the Ministry of Communications and Ministry of Home Affairs, and the Officer-in-charge of Traffic Police himself, was formed last year. The committee has set out these new tables where different periods of suspension are imposed on offenders who commit various types of offences. As I have promised Members earlier on, I will be supplying these lists to them for their information. They can study them first before they raise this question again in the future.

In answer to the question raised by the Member for Jalan Kayu about warning letters issued to offenders, the fact is that there have been cases where letters of warning have been issued instead of suspension. These cases totalled about 5% of total offenders that have been brought to book so far. I think one of the most positive solutions to this problem is for Members to advise their constituents to be more careful on the road and not to commit offences. What is the point of committing an offence and then run to the Member of Parliament saying that he is suffering hardship? We can do the best we can to alleviate the hardship problem faced by our constituents but we cannot help our constituents to break the law. I have mentioned earlier that the objectives of this whole exercise are to deter motorists from careless and dangerous driving, and to identify them, and to remove the habitual bad drivers from the road for ,the safety of our citizens and road users in general. 3.30 p.m.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, I am not saying that the ROV is not sympathetic. They are, but their sympathy is constrained by a very harsh framework. What I am saying is that the system is still harsh. It is still too stringent. The system itself is not sympathetic.

On another aspect I must admit to some degree of confusion. The Minister has said that if a motorist commits four minor offences of three demerit points each, then he will just get a warning letter. But in the next breath he says that there are only about 5% who get such warning letters. Where do we stand? If a motorist commits four minor offences, does he just get a warning letter, or will he be suspended?

The other point is that when people are suspended from driving, it is not because they have not been careful. There is such a thing as contributory negligence. Collisions often occur at road junctions. It is very difficult to say who is to blame. In a headlong collision at a road junction, there is such a thing as contributory negligence under the common law. It could be 50 - 50 or 30 - 70. But as far as the Road Traffic Act is concerned, if there is a collision, the Traffic Police will just say, "Sorry, six points" and that is that. It is very easy to pick up 12 points. A motorist needs just two collisions at a road junction to pick 12 points. And it may not be due to his fault. But as far as the Enforcement Unit is concerned, they are not going to bother too much about contributory negligence, whether it is 70 - 30 or 60 - 40. All that they are interested in is to say that both are to be blamed and so both will get the demerit points, and it needs only two collisions to pick up 12 points and be suspended for 2 1/2 months.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I must admit that whatever system we adopt, it cannot be perfect. There is always the human factor and human judgment. If the Member for Jalan Kayu can recommend a perfect system to reduce traffic accidents, thereby ensuring the safety of our road users and citizens generally, and without getting blamed for being too harsh on the offenders, I will be too pleased to consider it.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the taxpayers expect the Government to do its job. The taxpayers do not expect the buck to be passed back to them by having to make suggestions.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as the Government is concerned, this is about the best system that we have so far.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $72,122,480 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $245,591,080 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head T - The following amendment stood on the Order Paper Supplement:

Mr Lai Tha Chai:

Mr Tan Soo Khoon:

Dr Ong Leong Boon: (1) That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1100 of Subhead Code TA-01 of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: Mr Lai Tha Chai is not here. Mr Tan Soo Khoon.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

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

Mr Speaker, Sir, last week an article in a newspaper in Singapore headlined the question, "Can we live without television?" The article went on to cite an experiment which was conducted in Japan in which a selected group of families were deprived of their television sets for a certain period. The experiment was intended to find out what effects it had on people who were deprived of television for that period. Sir, the results were quite astonishing. Some of the families became hysterical and some broke off from the experiment even when it was only half way through. But, Sir, I am sure that if we were to conduct a similar experiment in Singapore, given the state of affairs in RTS, I do not think we would be worse off.

Sir, it seems to me that our television programmes seem to be less and still less entertaining as the years go by. Take, for example, a typical Saturday programme on TV. Last Saturday I had the opportunity to spend the afternoon watching TV. It started off with a feature film in the days of the silent film era. Sir, I do not know in what year this film was made. It must have been 30 or 35 years ago, I was not born yet. Following that film, there was a repeat programme of a soccer match which took place quite sometime back. Sir, may I say that sometimes I get the feeling that "RTS" does not stand for "Radio and Television Singapore" but rather "Repeat Television Singapore", considering the number of repeat television programmes that we get every week. Not only that, but I would like to point out that although we claim to have colour TV programmes - and we have to pay more now, $54 a year for a colour TV licence - we still get a very good share of black and white programmes. Sometimes I think that the Ministry of Culture is beginning to behave like the Ministry of Finance. Until very recently when the Ministry of Finance gives us something with one hand, it takes it back with the other. Now the RTS gives us colour TV but it takes back something by giving us films without sound.

Sir, as the afternoon dragged on, I was entertained to another half hour of lessons on how to play the guitar. Following that, there was another half-hour documentary film featuring some wild animals. Later on in the night, there was the usual "Cultural Diary", telling us who was playing the violin at which concert hall, who was giving a talk at the National Library, and the night ended with a midnight movie which was 27 years old. This film was, in fact, dated 1952. I knew a little because at that time I was already three years old. So much for a so-called entertaining week-end.

I must point out that after a long day's work or a long week's work, our people expect some entertaining programmes on TV and not what is dished out on the screen at the moment. We all know, from the results of a survey conducted sometime ago, that Singapore has the highest attendances in cinemas. Given the highly efficient film censors that we seem to have and the types of films that are shown in our cinemas, the fact that our people prefer to go to the cinemas instead of staying home to watch TV must point to a very sad state of affairs with our TV programmes.

Another point which I would like to raise with regard to RTS is the presentation of news. Sometime last year the format for presenting news was changed. It begins to look more lively. But I am just wondering whether RTS could do something with some of our news readers. Some of them are as old as RTS.

An hon. Member: What is wrong with that?

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, an hon. Member has asked me, "What is wrong with that?" Sir, some of them look like vintage to me, and if they had been around as long as RTS has been around, you must agree that 15 years is a long time for a pretty face to remain pretty. I hope something can be done in this direction because a good news reader need not be seen on TV. She can still be heard over the radio.

Sir, I now move on to another point. This concerns the Board of Film Censors. The question of the classification of films has been raised in this House on many occasions. In the last few months especially, I have seen many letters written to the press asking when the Ministry of Culture would introduce the classification of films. Most of us know that our film censor is very strict, the scissors are very sharp and very often he cuts out highly entertaining films or entertaining parts of certain films which cannot be screened here. As a result, when we go to the cinemas we are subjected to very sudden changes in the sequence of the film. Sir, I do not wish to go into the merits or demerits of film classification as these points have been raised in this House on many occasions. I remember that last year the reply from the Ministry of Culture was that this matter was being studied and the classification of films would be introduced at the appropriate time. My question to the Minister now is, what will be his decision after the study has been made, and if he intends to introduce film classification?

Mr Lai Tha Chai (Henderson): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me a chance to say a few words.

Sir, the Ministry of Culture has radically changed its policy since last year. It changes for good. I quote two examples: (1) the formation of the Singapore Symphony Orchestra, and (2) the establishment of the Singapore Cultural Foundation. Let me first deal with the Singapore Symphony Orchestra.

The Singapore Symphony Orchestra's operating expenses run to more than one million dollars a year. This may be the most expensive cultural activity in our Republic. My friends have been frequently discussing with me as to whether it is worthwhile to spend such a large sum of money on an orchestra.

I am not a musician nor a music fan. I know nothing about the great works of Beethoven or Schubert. But I support this idea. We should have something best we can find in Singapore, not only in London, Paris or New York. We should have ballet or an orchestra. These are few of the best things in the world. I remember in early 1967 when Dr Goh Keng Swee initiated the idea of forming the Singapore Girl Bagpipers in the People's Association, it was said that such a band was irrelevant to our Singapore society. But today it has become part of Singapore culture accepted by the people. 3.45 p.m.

For this reason, I wish to praise two gentlemen in particular, who have devoted their time and energy towards the formation of our SSO. They are Mr Tan Boon Teik, the Attorney-General and Chairman of SSO, and Mr Choo Hoey, the Conductor of SSO. They have been responsible for the success of the SSO and I hope they will lead the SSO to greater successes. We must succeed in building up our SSO to be one of the best, if not the best, orchestras in the world.

The question now is: where do we get our financial support for the SSO? SSO is unlike SIA (Singapore Airlines) which is capable of making profits every year. I know that the Government supports SSO's expenditure for the first two years. After that, it will have to depend entirely on public donations. I do not think it can survive and make continuous progress year by year if it has to depend solely on donations from the private sector. SIA and other profit-making statutory boards should come forward to make substantial contributions to SSO.

We now ask people to support the Singapore Cultural Foundation (SCF) on the one hand and, on the other, we also ask them to support the SSO. I do not think that is practical in the long run. I propose that all donations for cultural activities from the private sector should go to the SCF. SCF should then allocate a proportion of its collections to SSO every year. By the way, the SCF should get support, as it should be, from all walks of life. It should aim to collect $10 million instead of $5 million over the next few years.

Everybody knows that material investment in cultural activities will never yield any financial returns. It is just like the vehicles of the Parks and Trees Division watering the plants along the roads every day. We cannot get the water back to the vehicles but we can see the results on the plants and trees. They grow bigger and greener - this is what the Ministry of National Development is doing now - and this provides a better and healthier environment for us all.

So I hope that people from all walks of life will give their support to SCF. I have full confidence that through the SCF we will have more colourful and lively cultural activities that will help us to build what we want to call our "Singapore Culture".

Sir, I do not know whether the Hon. Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture will like to share my views on this subject.

Sir, I support the move.

The Chairman: Dr Ong is not here.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): Sir, may I speak now so that I need not move my amendment later on?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I share the views expressed by my colleague, the Member for Henderson. We have been repeatedly warned of the danger of becoming a deculturised people as we progress rapidly towards urbanisation and industrialisation. Perhaps it is time for us to sit down and think of the price we are paying for urbanisation and industrialisation. Though the symptoms of the evils of urbanisation have not reached an alarming level as to call for an immediate check, the tendency of more and more people becoming soft-headed is certainly not conducive to building a cohesive and harmonious nation such as ours. The price we pay for urbanisation and industrialisation may be too high if we do not act fast enough to counter the deculturisation progress. In this regard, Sir, I am glad to note that the Government has now realised the importance of cultural promotion on top of the indispensable economic advancement.

Sir, 1978 is the turning point, as mentioned by the Member for Henderson just now. We saw the Government's interest in forming the Singapore Symphony Orchestra and the setting up of the Cultural Foundation in the later part of the year. We are therefore gratified to note that members of the public have given ardent support to the Cultural Foundation. We learned from the Acting Minister for Culture, when he declared open a fund-raising art exhibition last Saturday, that within a short space of time the Foundation had received donations amounting to $1.2 million. This is indeed heartening as well as encouraging. It goes to show that Singaporeans are not that apathetic towards a good cause.

Of course, there is still a long way to reach the target of $5 million. But surely we cannot afford to wait until the target is attained before we begin to do something tangible. I think it is natural for everybody to be anxious to know how the Cultural Foundation is to be utilised in the promotion of cultural activities in our island State. And we also want to know whether the Cultural Foundation is going to finance the Symphony Orchestra, as suggested by the Member for Henderson just now. So could the Minister concerned inform this House whether plans have been drawn up in this direction?

Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me the opportunity to raise a few questions to the Hon. Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture.

Last year, I spoke and criticised Radio and Television Singapore on the quality of our locally produced programmes. I am not going into it again this time. But I just want to pose a few specific questions as a follow-up on this subject. I would like to ask the Minister six questions which I hope are not too many.

(1) Were any of our producers and senior technical staff sent out from Singapore for training during the last two years? If there were, where were they sent to?

(2) Are there difficulties in sending staff for training overseas? If there are, what are these difficulties? I hope it is not a financial problem again.

(3) Do we have foreign experts presently stationed at RTS to assist in the upgrading of the quality of our locally produced programmes?

(4) What is the present status of the training school run by RTS?

(5) How many sub-titlers are there in RTS? What are their qualifications?

(6) Finally, could we have more sub-titles in Chinese for English programmes for the benefit of the Chinese educated viewers?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture (Dr Ow Chin Hock): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission I would like to answer on behalf of my Minister the points raised by four hon. Members.

The Members have touched on three areas: (1) Singapore Cultural Foundation; (2) RTS programmes, the pet topic of several hon. Members; and (3) film classification.

Let me answer the hon. Members for Henderson and Jurong first. Sir, I am very heartened by the speech made by the Member for Henderson and also by the Member for Jurong. I wish to thank them for their encouragement and support for my Ministry in its efforts to promote cultural development. We have no illusions. The setting up of the Singapore Cultural Foundation is only the first step in our collective effort in promoting culture.

I agree with the Member that the Cultural Foundation Fund has to be utilised carefully. In fact, it is my Ministry's intention to invest the cultural fund and utilise the interest generated to finance worthy cultural projects and to offer financial assistance to deserving individuals and cultural bodies in the pursuit and advancement of the arts. These include offers of travelling awards and scholarships.

Our initial target is $5 million, but that is not our limit. At present, since launching the project three months ago, we have raised $1.25 million and that accounts for 25% of our initial target. But with the enthusiastic support that we have, we hope to exceed the targeted sum.

The hon. Member for Henderson has touched on the Singapore Symphony Orchestra. As Members are aware, this is in fact the brainchild of the Deputy Prime Minister. The SSO is registered under the Companies Act. It is administered by a Board of Directors comprising prominent persons and music enthusiasts. The Singapore Symphony Orchestra has its own endowment fund. The existing arrangement of the SSO taking the form of a company is to ensure that the Orchestra has flexibility in the recruitment of talented musicians and in financial administration. There is no contradiction between the two funds - the Singapore Cultural Foundation and the Endowment Fund of the Symphony Orchestra. Corporations, other organisations and individuals who have a keen interest in symphony music and would like to see this flourish should be encouraged to give their support to the Endowment Fund of the Singapore Symphony Orchestra. On the other hand, those people or organisations may donate generously to the Singapore Cultural Foundation which caters for the arts in general.

Sir, for the information of hon. Members, at present large-scale renovation works at a cost of $3 million are being carried out at the Victoria Memorial Hall. We hope to provide a new music hall, rehearsal room and office space, and to house the Symphony Orchestra. This shows our support for the Symphony Orchestra. 4.00 p.m.

The Member for Jurong has touched on the question of how we utilise the fund. I think I have touched on this earlier. I mentioned that we would not deplete the fund by paying out from the capital sum. Rather, we would try to finance a worthy cultural project by interest generated by the fund. I hope I have answered the questions of these two hon. Members.

Now, TV programmes. I am a little bit surprised to learn that the Member for Alexandra, being a bachelor, can spend the whole week-end watching TV. His complaint that the TV programmes are very dull or uninteresting is a very subjective one. In fact, just a few days ago I had to put up with a Minister in the Members' Room for about 15 minutes listening to his complaint on similar lines. Sir, I submit that all these observations are very subjective ones. The Member mentioned that the week-end programmes are very dull. But I think 260,000 viewers of the programme titled Starsky and Hutch telecast over Channel 5 at 8.30 p.m. on Saturdays would not necessarily agree with that statement. Recently we have just completed an audience survey. The results show that both Channel 5 and Channel 8 enjoy a fairly good level of viewership on Saturdays and Sundays. Viewership for Channel 5 on Saturdays reaches a peak of 260,000 at 8.30 p.m. For Channel 8, the peak is about 550,000 between 9.00 p.m. and 10.00 p.m. On Sundays, the peak viewership is 220,000 for Channel 5 at 8.30 p.m. and 550,000 for Channel 8 between 9.30 p.m. and 10.00 p.m.

The Member also complained that the film is as old as 25 years. For the information of the Member and of the House, RTS is facing a big problem in this area. The reason, and I hate to bring it up, is money. Let me quote some figures. RTS' offer of rental for an English feature film for colour transmission of 90 minutes' duration is US$330 (S$825). For a black and white film the rental payable is US$260 (S$650). These rentals are chicken feed, as far as the film distributors are concerned. They can screen this film in a third or fourth rated cinema for just one round, and the take is enough to generate 10 or 20 times that offered by RTS. So they are not willing to release these films to RTS unless they are sure that they have exhausted all the box office draws, and normally this takes at least a few years. It is not true that all the films shown by RTS are as old as the Member for Alexandra. For example, last year or two years ago, we screened a film called They shoot horses, don't they? That film was only five years old.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Once in a blue moon.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: As I have mentioned, with the financial constraints, this is the best we can do. In the case of Chinese feature films, sometimes we can get a film within three years of production from independent film distributors in Taiwan. Other Chinese films are controlled by two major film distributors in Singapore, and we cannot convince them to release the films to us earlier for the same reasons that I have mentioned for English feature films. In the case of Malay feature films, most of them are from Indonesia. Again, we are facing a problem here, and also for the same reasons.

The Member also made some complaints about colour and black and white TV programmes. He said that the licence fee for colour TV has gone up to $54 and for black and white, it is $36. For the information of the hon. Member, the licence fee collections do not go into the pockets of the Ministry of Culture or RTS. We hope that by 1981 all the local productions will be in colour. As for foreign black and white films produced by foreign TV stations or film makers, we have no control.

The Member commented on the presentation of news. I must thank him for his kind words. In fact, the improvement in our news bulletin is not confined only to the presentation or the change of format. May I just elaborate here. In May 1978, RTS subscribed to the direct satellite news-feed, which means that any major international event can be telecast within 24 hours. Previously we had to wait three to four days. Hon. Members must have seen the news features on the Sino-Vietnamese war or the riots in Iran soon after the event, thanks to this direct satellite feed. Another change is that we have introduced the news flash, that is, we break into the programme to bring the most important news headlines to the people of Singapore.

I think the Member is happy with the new format but he is not happy to look at the faces of some of the news readers. I think he is referring to one or two particular faces. Let me inform the Member that it is very difficult to find a good news reader because nowadays some people insist on the BBC standard of pronunciation. If the hon. Member has somebody in mind, who is good looking and can pronounce like the BBC announcers, please let us have his name.

Let me answer the point raised by the Member for Changi. This is also related to RTS' programmes. He raised six questions. First, he asked whether the producers and senior technical staff have been sent out for overseas training. For the information of the Member, in 1977, RTS sent out 16 staff members, including six from the Programme section, six from the News section and four engineering and technical staff. In 1978, RTS sent out 20 staff members, including four from the Programme section, eight from the News section, seven from the engineering and technical field, and one from the Commercial section. For the first three months of this year, we have sent out four officers for overseas training.

His second question is, is there any difficulty in sending out staff for training overseas? The answer is, of course, there is. Partly, the problem is money. Another problem is that there is a shortage of staff. Whenever RTS sends a staff member or a producer out for training, the manpower in that particular section is depleted by one.

The Member also asked whether we have a foreign expert presently stationed at RTS. The answer is yes. We have the Chief Director, Stage and Design Division, Programme Servicing Department of the Japanese Station NHK to help us. Now he is in RTS. He is going to be here for two years with effect from last September. He is here as an expert in scenic design for colour TV. We are trying to get a script writer from Taiwan to conduct training courses for RTS staff. He was supposed to be here last year but unfortunately because of some delay, we may not be able to get him until the second half of this year.

The Member also asked about the present status of the Training School. The proposal to set up a training school for RTS staff was first submitted to the Ministry of Finance in 197 3. Well, Members know the answer. Later we had to revise our proposal in July 1974 to meet the expected increase in costs and there has been no firm decision on this project up to now. I believe that in December 1978 we modified our proposal somewhat and forwarded it to the Ministry of Finance. I hope we can hear the good news sometime this year.

The Member for Changi also asked a very specific question on the sub-titlers. We have altogether 10 such posts in RTS. The breakdown is as follows: Six English and Chinese, three English and Malay, one English and Tamil. There is still a vacancy unfilled. The qualifications for sub-titlers are that they should possess a GCE certificate or its equivalent with at least 3 'O' levels and are proficient in their relevant languages and English. But I am sad to note that the starting salary is $400 for GCE holders and $600 for HSC holders. These low salaries are not able to attract the right people, and that is why we could not expand this service rapidly. I agree with the hon. Member that this is a very important service but because of manpower constraints we have to put up with the situation.

Now, film classification. In the last few months the Straits Times has published as many as nine letters from its readers and, in fact, the Straits Times also sent a reporter to interview all the members of the Appeals Committee. They came out with three reports plus an editorial. Last year, as mentioned by the Member for Alexandra, we said that we would look into it. We have studied this question carefully and have now come to a decision. We have decided against it. There will not be any film classification. The reason is that we are not convinced that a classification system will result in better quality films to be shown. On the contrary classification may encourage an influx of films on violence, sex exploitation and pornography. To satisfy myself, just a few weeks ago, senior officers of my Ministry and I went to the Film Censorship Board to look at all the cuts. We are convinced that at least 90% to 95% of those cuts ought not to be shown under the most liberal category of film classification. If hon. Members are interested - 4.15 p.m.

Some hon. Members: Yes!

Dr Ow Chin Hock: - we could invite Members to a viewing session of all those cuts and probably the videotape on the well-known pornographic production of Deep Throat. However, I want to point out that we have never prohibited the exhibition of any good wholesome films. In fact, we encourage the screening of these films but we will not permit the screening of scenes that can have an undesirable impact on our population, particularly the younger ones. I hope I have answered all the questions.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Sir, in his reply, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that the Cultural Foundation Fund would not be used until it had earned interest from investment. Can the Parliamentary Secretary enlighten this House whether the investment is a short-term or a long-term one? If the investment is a long-term one, does it mean that in the interim any cultural activities will not be financed by the Cultural Foundation?

Dr Ow Chin Hock: Sir, the investment is a short-term one. We hope that by June this year, it will generate some $30,000 of income from interest. I must clarify one point and, that is, we do not have to wait until the $5 million target is achieved before we give financial assistance, provided the amount applied for is modest. Apart from the Cultural Foundation, I would like to mention that we do have a vote given by the Ministry of Finance to assist the cultural bodies. Thanks to the generosity of the Ministry of Finance, the vote has been increased 10 times from $10,000 to $100,000.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, I am highly appreciative of the Parliamentary Secretary's concern over my bachelorhood. He was wondering why I was spending my Saturday evenings at home watching TV. Let me assure him that my staying on to watch the late night movie is only a preliminary to my Saturday night entertainment which, I must add, is certainly more entertaining than what we get over RTS, and it continues late into the night, long after RTS has closed down its transmission.

It appears to me that maybe it is because the Minister for Finance is sitting here that he is putting the blame on the Ministry of Finance for not giving RTS enough money. I could not help but notice the Minister for Finance listening very attentively to the complaints of the Parliamentary Secretary, and it is my hope that he heard well and in future he will be able to allocate more funds to RTS. After all, I am sure the Minister for Finance needs to be entertained too.

Sir, yesterday the Parliamentary Secretary announced that RTS would be converted into a statutory board. When I heard that yesterday I was very hopeful that, with the flexibility that statutory boards have, RTS would be in a better position to present better programmes. But from the defensive reply given by the Parliamentary Secretary, it looks as if Singaporeans can continue to look forward to more boring evenings and weekends.

Sir, I am very surprised at the decision taken not to classify films. The Parlia- mentary Secretary seems to be thinking that by classifying films we would unleash a host of highly undesirable films on Singaporeans. I would like to point out that I am not thinking in terms of exhibiting films like Deep Throat On the other hand, classification can mean better films for our people. It also means that undesirable material, like violence that we see so much on our screens, will not be seen by children under a certain age group. It can mean that too. Perhaps the decision that was taken was based on the opinions taken from the wrong people.

In this respect I would like to refer to a news report I read last year, in which the Ministry of Culture sought the opinion of cinema owners and distributors as to whether classification of films should be introduced in Singapore. I think this is another instance of administrative lapse on the pan of our civil servants, which the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour raised in this House last week. Naturally, if they ask the people who stand to benefit least from film classification, the answer is no because once they classify the films the size of the audience will be reduced. If there is a film which has too much violence and cannot be seen by children below the age of, say, 18 years old, naturally we get a smaller audience. But if the films are not classified, then it is open to everybody. I think this is an instance where the Ministry of Culture has arrived at a wrong decision by consulting the wrong people. I hope that this matter will be looked into again and that perhaps at some future date the Hon. Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary will tell us that they will review the matter. In the meantime, it looks as if one man, the film censor, will continue to decide what is good for Singaporeans, and what should be seen and what should not be seen by Singaporeans.

Encik Sidek bin Saniff (Kolam Ayer): Sir, we must be fair to our news readers. I think there is a grain of truth in the saying that beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. In the eyes of a bachelor as against the eyes of a married man like me, maybe it is different. Being a married man, I do not know whether or not it is wise for me to say this. I think there is nothing wrong at all with the looks of our lady news readers. To me, they are quite all right. In fact, I would say that some of them are quite beautiful. Please do not tell my wife about this.

I am a Muslim and I do not know about wine but they say there is something special about vintage wine. Perhaps, I can say this from my own personal experience. I met a girl at the age of 18 years. She now has four children and I still find her very attractive.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: Sir, allow me to reply to some of the remarks made by the Member for Alexandra. First, let me emphasise that the constraint faced by RTS is not entirely financial. Financial constraint is just one of the problems. In fact, there are other constraints. Let me quickly go through them. Firstly, there is the constraint of the form of organisation, and that is one of the reasons why we propose to convert RTS into a statutory board.

Secondly, we have to import TV programmes from the United States, Hong Kong, Taiwan and other countries. We cannot dictate to these TV stations or studios what themes or stories they should produce. In many instances, we cannot accept these films. Therefore, we face the problem of supply. I will give a specific example. Taiwan produces quite a number of TV programmes. We televise the so-called Chinese drama serials once a week but, in their case, it is televised everyday. Many of these Taiwan films cannot be shown here for obvious reasons. One is political. They have a different political outlook, and the other reason is that some of the films are violent kung fu films.

In the case of the United States, we have recently rejected a top-rated entertainment programme called Three's a Company. I think the hon. Member for Alexandra knows about this particular TV programme. I have shown this to the hon. Members for Jurong and Kolam Ayer.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Wrong people.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: Recently, we have set up a Programme Advisory Committee and the two hon. Members are serving on the Committee. This particular entertainment programme was shown to them and all the committee members, including the two principals, a senior officer from the Ministry of Social Affairs and a professor from the University of Singapore who is a sociologist, all agreed that it is too permissive for the viewers here. This is the type of constraint we face. It is not entirely financial. Another constraint we face is the lack of a supporting industry. In Taiwan, Hong Kong or the United States, they have a movie industry; so there is a pool of talent from which they can tap. Here, we have to start from scratch. We have to start our own workshops and train our own performing talents and our own script-writers.

Regarding film classification, the hon. Member is concerned about the impact on children. So am I. I have two daughters. The present classification system is quite strict in terms of morally objectionable material. The only complaint from parents is against kung fu films. I do not know, but probably we can ask the film distributors to put out some kind of advice to say that a certain film contains certain violent scenes and parents must use their discretion whether or not their children ought to see such films. There will be no enforcement, but it will be done voluntarily by the film distributors. We can look into this.

The hon. Member said that we consulted the wrong persons, I assure the Member that film distributors are not the only category of people we interview. We also talk to others. He also made the remark that it seems that only one man, that is, the Chairman of the Board of Film Censors, decides on what Singaporeans should or should not see. It is not true. We do have an Appeals Committee comprising different people, including the Member for Punggol.

The Member for Kolam Ayer made some comments about our news readers. I do not think I can respond in any way. I agree with him.

Mr C.V. Devan Nair (Anson): Sir, I am prompted by the reply of the Parliamentary Secretary to ask one question which must intrigue Members of this House as well as members of the public. Is there a keen competition for membership in the Board of Film Censors and on the Appeals Committee? But I would like to make it clear, Sir, that I am not in the running. 4.30 p.m.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: Sir, the Member has referred to the membership of the Appeals Committee. The Committee members are appointed by my Minister for a term of two years. The Member for Anson is not interested. However, if any Member is interested, he can approach my Minister.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Sir, unfortunately I was expelled from this Committee.

Sir, the Hon. Parliamentary Secretary has just informed the House that the Ministry of Finance has very generously increased the vote for cultural promotion in the coming financial year. This is indeed a good sign as it shows that the Government is beginning to recognise the importance of cultural promotion.

In this respect, may I make a humble request? Will the Ministry of Culture consider rendering financial assistance to the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts which is said to be in financial difficulties? The Academy, which was set up some 40 years ago, is the only institute that provides formal training to would-be artists. A great majority of our artists today, including the artist who is doing sketches of Members in this Chamber at this moment, are graduates of this Academy. As the Academy has contributed much towards the promotion of art in our country, I think it is time the Ministry of Culture did something to help the Academy, within the limits of its resources.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: Sir, if I recall correctly, on 10th January 1979, in reply to a question (Hansard, Vol. 38,col. 69) raised by the Member for Thomson, the Senior Minister of State for Education mentioned that a total sum of $86,000 had been given to the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts. I think the Member for Jurong, as an artist, realises that the problems of the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts are not entirely financial. The major problems are, in fact, organisation and management. As it is a private body, we cannot move in and take over.

I have recently been invited to be the Vice-President of the Singapore Arts Council. The President is the Hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour. We will see what the Singapore Arts Council can do. But asking the Cultural Foundation to launch a rescue operation at this juncture is not possible because, as I have mentioned just now, the interest we can generate from the investment of the capital fund will only amount to about $30,000 by June this year. Even with the amount given by the Ministry of Education, they still cannot do much. I do not think the financial assistance provided by the Cultural Foundation will be of any help. I must emphasise that the problems are more those of management and organisation.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, unlike his Minister who gave me a highly satisfactory reply to an earlier question, I find the Parliamentary Secretary's answer less satisfactory to me. But, nevertheless, I beg leave, most reluctantly, to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code TE-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I wish to make some observations on the Library Services Programme, which objective is to provide public library services. While there has been an improvement of public library services, nevertheless, there is still room for improvement. About 70% of the population are housed in HDB flats and the majority of them are young. There is therefore a need to encourage the young people to form the habit of reading. To my mind, reading broadens one's outlook.

I notice that the National Library has branches in some constituencies, like Queenstown, Marine Parade and Toa Payoh. But what about the other housing estates? Hence, I see the provision of the Library Extension Service which provides a mobile library in some of the areas which have no branch libraries. This service is also extended to Punggol at the Punggol Community Centre on a bi-weekly basis. However, a period of two hours in the evening per service for the children to borrow books is hardly sufficient. Moreover, there are not enough books to give the children a wider choice. In other words, the mobile library can only carry a limited number of books. We must also not forget that there should be some space in the mobile library for the children to browse through the books. In any case, only a few children are allowed in the mobile library at any one time. Since the library extension service is provided in the community centre, would it not be better to display the books in the community centre itself where the necessary space can be made available for such a purpose? This will not only provide more space for the children to browse the books but it is also healthier that way, because it is so crammed up in the small mobile library. I have been in one of them. That is why I can make this observation.

This brings me to one small point. I was surprised to read the newspaper sometime last year that the National Library had closed its doors to many school children who wanted to make use of the reading rooms in the National Library to swot out for their terminal examinations. I do not know what the reason was for locking out these school children. I believe most of them come from the Housing Board estates so that when the examination comes around all the children want to go to the National Library where they can work in quiet in order to do well in their examinations. I think an explanation should be given for this policy. There was some play made in the press about some children who took to reading under the street lamps in certain places. I am not at all surprised that as a result of poor lighting these children become myopic.

This brings me to the last point on loan services. There was an appropriation of $2,018,000 for this project in FY 78. There is no such provision this year. I wonder if the Minister for Communications and the Acting Minister for Culture could give us the reason why there is no, appropriation for loan services this year.

Talking about the appropriation for loan services, I note that there is a small increase of less than $250,000 for the acquisition of books and other materials for loan to the public. May I suggest that more reference books pertaining to the school curriculum be made available to the students because I believe that reference books are quite expensive and may well be beyond the means of some students. After all, there is a provision of $5.26 million under the Main and Development Estimates in respect of library services. In order to get -every cent worth I hope the Minister concerned would comment on my remarks.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi (Kampong Kembangan): Sir, if I am allowed to speak now, I would prefer to do so because the points I intend to raise are similar to those which have been raised by the Member for Punggol.

The Chairman: So the Member does not intend to speak on Subhead Code TE-04?

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: If you allow me to speak now, there is no need for me to move my Amendment No. (5).

The Chairman: Yes.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi: I will be very brief, Sir. I will only put my questions to the Parliamentary Secretary. Firstly, what is the progress of the plans in the National Library to computerise the library procedures? When will the computerised programme be put into effect? Secondly, what is the present position with regard to the implementation of the recommendations made by the survey on the study and reading facilities for students? I think the report on the survey was made in October 1977. Thirdly, what further plans does the National Library have to extend its policy of decentralisation? In particular, I would like to ask, as the Member for Punggol has asked, whether the Ministry could consider extending its mobile library services to more housing estates. And in providing these mobile library services, whether the National Library, in conjunction with the People's Association, youth groups, maybe the Citizens' Consultative Committees, the community centres, and civic organisations in the constituencies or housing estates, will mobilise the students so that when the mobile service does come to the housing estates, it will be fully used by the children in the estates. 4.45 p.m.

Thirdly, whether the National Library could also consider designing a plan on how to encourage the reading habit at home. I am sure we are all agreed that the habit of reading books at home is important because what the child reads or how interested the child is in reading normally depends on the interest and reading habit of the parents. Perhaps if the National Library could think of such a service, then through this service we could help the parents to help their children to inculcate a more abiding reading habit at home.

Finally, I would like to enquire whether the National Library has plans to further urge more editors of professional journals in Singapore to publish the new books that have been acquired by the Library, and whether the National Library could expand its programme of select reading, through which programme the Library would distribute or publish more book reviews or synopses of articles of interest to specific readers in Singapore. On this matter, I was thinking of the benefits that can accrue if the National Library, with the help of professional persons or professional organisations, could review books or journals and make them available to leaders or active members in civic organisations in the field of sports, cultural promotion, or child care, and so on. If we can expand this book review service or providing synopses of professional articles, many people in the civic or community service organisations will benefit from ideas or suggestions that are available in these publications.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Sir, I just want to seek some information from the Minister concerned or his Parliamentary Secretary. The sum to be allocated under this Subhead is for the acquisition of books and other materials for loan to the public. I just want to know what is the policy and criteria for the acquisition of books, periodicals and other materials.

Secondly, I just want the Minister or his Parliamentary Secretary to give breakdown figures and their related percentages on the number of books acquired last year in terms of (1) language stream; (2) origin; and (3) level.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: Mr Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member for Punggol has raised three specific points: (1) on the mobile extension library services; (2) on the study facilities; and (3) on the loan services.

The mobile extension library services are offered to 11 community centres. The mobile library provides a useful service to readers in the rural areas and in housing estates which are far from the central and branch libraries. As observed by the hon. Member, the majority of the users of the mobile extension library services are young children. In the opinion of our library staff, they are adequately catered for by the weekly visits of two to four hours each. On the other hand, the older children and the adult readers prefer to go to the nearest branch library where, as observed by the Member, there is a wider range of books and more services are available.

With regard to the Member's suggestion whether books could be put in the community centre instead of in the mobile library vehicle, this can be looked into. But I think two problems can arise. One is security and the other, manpower. With the cooperation of the community centre staff, I think this can be easily resolved.

With the policy of decentralisation of library services in order to meet the needs of the people by the establishment of branch libraries nearer their homes, it is not necessary to expand the mobile services. Indeed, as more branch libraries are established, there will be less need for such services.

At present, there are three full-time branch libraries at Queenstown, Toa Payoh and Marine Parade. We also have part-time branch libraries at Siglap, Chai Chee and Jurong. A full-time branch library will be provided at Whampoa Community Centre this year and the fifth full-time branch library will be ready in FY 81 at Bukit Merah. With this decentralisation of branch libraries, the need for mobile services would be less.

The hon. Member has raised a hot issue, i.e. study facilities for students. The action to bar students from doing their private studies in the libraries was regrettable but necessary in the circumstances. Let me explain. Firstly, the primary function of the library is to encourage members of the general public to read or borrow library books or other materials. The libraries are not designed to provide facilities for students to do their homework or to study for examinations. For a long time, the National Library adopted a very lenient attitude which permitted the students to do their private studies in the library or its branches. At first, this did not seriously interfere with the primary function of the library as a resource centre to all sections of the public, children, young people and adults. However, lately, particularly during examination time, the situation worsened. Not only were all the seats taken up but students squatted between book shelves and in the common area to do their studies. As a result of numerous complaints from members of the public, the practice of allowing private study in the library was discontinued in September 1978.

The Library's action was, in fact, prompted by a survey conducted in January 1977, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Kampong Kembangan. The survey revealed that if the National Library were to provide this kind of service, then even with the expansion programmes up to 1985, the number of seats in all our libraries will have increased only from the present 1,000 to 5,000 in 1985. And even if all the 5,000 seats are offered to students to do their studies, they cannot accommodate even 1% of the student population. Of course, hon. Members will argue that not all the half million students will be using the library at the same time. However, even if we were to confine this service to the secondary school students or junior college students who are members of the National Library and allow them to do their private study, their number would be over 60,000. It is obvious that the National Library cannot provide this kind of facility; other solutions have to be found for students who lack a proper place to study. So far, as a follow-up of the survey, I believe 13 schools and 44 community centres have provided this kind of service.

But I would like to inform hon. Members that since the ban, students have continued to use the library to borrow, read and consult library materials related to their studies as well as to their leisure needs. The level of loans in the three libraries which were surveyed has been maintained and, in fact, it has increased slightly. So the use of libraries has not been affected by this decision.

The hon. Member also mentioned about the loan service. In FY 78, $975,000 was earmarked for the purchase of books and periodicals. We spent about $830,000 for the purchase of 84,991 books. The balance of $145,000 was used to subscribe to 1,804 periodicals. This year, we have a provision for the purchase of books and periodicals. It has increased to $1.22 million. We expect-to purchase 90,300 books and also to make subscriptions to 1,810 periodical titles.

The hon. Member mentioned about the change in the Subhead. The Subhead for the maintenance of books and repairs to books was transferred from the programme called "Collection Activity" to the "Loan Services Activity" in FY 79 because the job is mainly done by the staff undertaking Loan services. The amount has not been affected. It has been increased from $128,000 in FY 78 to $154,000 in FY 79.

Coming to the specific points raised by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, in fact, some of them have already been answered in my reply to the Member for Punggol earlier on. On the Member's special question relating to computerisation, I am glad to report to the House that Treasury has approved the National Library's proposal on computerisation. It will be implemented in three stages. The first stage is computerisation of the Library's catalogue. This will be implemented in June this year. The second stage will be the computerisation of the Loan and Reference services. Finally, the computerisation of all other aspects of Library services. The whole project, in three stages, is targeted for completion by FY 83.

The hon. Member has asked what is the present position with regard to the implementation of the recommendations of the survey which I mentioned earlier. As I have mentioned, study room facilities have since been provided at 44 community centres and 13 schools. In addition, study room facilities have also been provided in churches, mosques and other civic organisations. I do not have the exact figures on this. For the information of the Member, a committee comprising representatives from my Ministry, Ministry of Education, HDB, People's Association and other organisations, has been formed to look into this matter of providing study facilities for students.

5.00 p.m.

Just now, in answer to the query raised by the Member for Punggol, I also touched on the policy of decentralisation. I have also touched on mobile services. The hon. Member wants to know whether the mobile service programme can be offered in conjunction with the People's Association Youth Group and community centres. In fact, all the while this is what we have been doing. Under this scheme, the community centres provide the physical facility and we provide the service. Apart from that, our National Library also has a joint programme with the community centres, the People's Association and the Youth Group. For example, we have lectures for the public, loan of books to the People's Association kindergartens and training of kindergarten teachers with respect to a particular area, say, book development for children.

The hon. Member asked whether the National Library could encourage the reading habit. I agree with him that the inculcation of a strong reading habit is best done at a young age. I think the primary responsibility should best rest with the schools and other educational institutions. However, the National Library will do its share. It will continue to help to promote the reading habit. An example of the Library's effort in this area is the visit of library officers to schools when requested, and pre-school book reading programmes for kindergarten children and their parents. Parents are also introduced to books suitable for their children and are encouraged to help develop their children's reading habits by reading these stories to them. This year, in commemorating the International Year of the Child, the National Library plans to hold talks on book reading at community centres for parents. In addition, the preparation of booklists, book exhibition, story-telling sessions in the library and talks are some of the other services aimed at the same objective.

The final point raised by the hon. Member for Kampong Kembangan is whether the National Library can expand its special service. He asked for more editors of local professional journals to publish new books acquired by the Library. Wherever resources permit, the Library has expanded its services. The Library, in fact, is urging editors of local professional journals like Home magazines and newspapers to publicise acquisitions. Editors of these publications receive regularly the library accession list of new books. The hon. Member may be pleased to know that the Library is, in fact, expanding the selected booklists to 18 this year. Last year it was 13. The Library, as I mentioned, whenever it can, has submitted booklists to target groups. For example, a book list on sports subjects has been given to the Singapore Sports Council and to sports clubs. Book exhibitions and talks have also been organised.

With regard to synopses of articles, a lot of work or preparation is required. With the manpower shortage, the Library is not able to offer this particular service. What the Library has done is to provide an index of articles and periodicals. That is the best we can do.

The Member for Jurong has asked some specific questions regarding the collection of books in the National Library. For the information of the Member, as I mentioned just now, the National Library purchased a total of 84,991 books. The breakdown by language stream is as follows: Malay books 7,175; Chinese books 30,934; Tamil books 1,292; and English books 45,990. This represents an increase in FY 78 of about 9% over the total number of books purchased in the previous year, FY 77. The cumulative figures by language stream are English books 593,005 representing 52% of the total collection; Chinese books 329,969 representing 29% of the total collection; Malay books 143,247 representing 13%, and Tamil books 92,592 representing 6%. Books in the National Library are not grouped by educational level. They are by age groups. There are three age groups. For children up to the age of 14, about 35.4%. For the young people, the teenagers, from 15-19 years old, it is about 9.9%; for adults it is 54.7%.

With regard to the composition of local and foreign titles, since the publishing output in Singapore is very low, the proportion of local titles for purchase is rather small. At present we do not have the exact figures but we estimate that the proportion cannot be more than 10%.

Dr Augustine H.H. Tan (Whampoa): Sir, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture quoted figures to try and justify the policy of the National Library in preventing the students from using the Library to do their homework and private study rather than as a reference facility. First of all, how would the National Library be able to distinguish between legitimate users of libraries, either students or the general public using the library properly as a reference facility, and students and others who use the library for private study? I think it is an unenforceable kind of distinction. I can see the point that if students are allowed to squat between the stacks then the legitimate users of the libraries will not have proper access to the books. But the use of tables and chairs, I think, should not be denied to the students.

What we all, and the Parliamentary Secretary in particular, ought to realise is that there is demand for study facilities because many people live in one-room and two-room Housing Board flats in which students do not have proper study facilities, I am glad he noted that there is now a greater provision of such study rooms in many constituencies. In Whampoa we have tried to provide a library, air-conditioned, fairly big in size and initially I was rather happy when the National Library offered its cooperation in extending to us its branch facility. But now I am rather doubtful whether it is a blessing or not. If the National Library were to insist that we should prevent students from using our facilities for private study purposes, I would say to the National Library to take its books out and we will run the place ourselves because, to me, what is fundamentally important is that students should be provided with study facilities and the reference books, both of which are necessary. To say simply that the number of rooms is woefully inadequate in relation to the size of the student population is to admit that we have to build more branch libraries.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I am going to touch on one point that the Parliamentary Secretary has not answered. My suggestion was that the acquisition of more reference books for the students pertaining to the school curriculum should be looked into. If he could answer that question, I will be quite happy and I will then beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: I think the Member for Whampoa has raised this matter in the debate on the President's Address, and at that time there was no opportunity to answer him. He has mentioned this facility in his constituency. As the Member for Leng Kee, I have more than my share of one-room flats. I have 12 blocks of one-room flats and they represent 27.5% of the voters. So I am just as concerned as he is.

The ideal solution would be for this study facility to be provided in the schools or near their homes. Asking the Library to provide such a facility is not fair. It is a matter of priority. What is our function? We have to cater to the need of library users. Library users include school children, and the library is a place for them to use the available reference books or library materials, but not for their private study. In his remarks, the Member also said that if we were to insist that students cannot do their private study in the part-time library set up at the Whampoa community centre, he would rather go without this kind of service. At present we are monitoring the situation and we are particularly concerned about the use in the central library at Stamford Road. He may want to know that the number of seats there is only about 100 and many users, particularly the adults, have, before the ban, complained that students have been occupying all the seats. We find the situation in other branches not that bad, particularly in the mornings. But the point is that during school examinations the situation is worst. I have personally visited the branch libraries and the central library twice and my last visit was just a few days ago, in anticipation of the query by the Member for Whampoa. The library staff told us that before the ban, during the examination periods, about twice a year, the students would even line up one hour before opening time. Sometimes just to show their sympathy, the staff opened the doors slightly earlier for students to come in. As soon as the doors were opened, the place was flooded with students and all the seats were occupied. It always ended up with arguments and the staff members had to act because of complaints from the users of the library that they had no place to sit. I sympathise with the Member because, as I mentioned just now, I also face the same problem. I am always worrying about where the students from the one-room-flats in Leng Kee will go to. But it is not fair to ask the National Library to provide such a service.

Just now in answer to the query of the Member for Kampong Kembangan, I did mention that we have established a committee. Hopefully one solution would be, if we can convince the HDB, to utilise the void decks as a place for the students to study. They can be run somewhat along the lines of a community hall. If the place is properly chosen, relatively quiet and even airconditioned, and managed by the Residents' Committee or the Citizens' Consultative Committee or the Management Committee, then this probably is one solution. Just now I quoted the figure of half a million people. It is not possible for the library to provide this service to such a large number of people.

With regard to the specific point made by the Member for Punggol about reference books, this can be looked into. I hope he keeps to his promise to withdraw his amendment.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I must thank the Parliamentary Secretary's concern over my promise. May I say that I stand by what I say, and on that note I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $42,787,900 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $5,402,200 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

5.15 p.m.

The Chairman: I shall now deal with the remaining heads of expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order Paper Supplement. In respect of the Main Estimates, they are Heads B, C, D, F, G, H and X.

I propose to take those heads of expenditure en bloc.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads of expenditure which appear in the last column of the Schedule of Estimated Expenditure under the Main Estimates on page 23 of Paper Cmd 4 of 1979 stand pan of the Main Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980," put and agreed to.

The Chairman: In respect of the Development Estimates, they are Heads F, G and H.

I propose to take those heads of expenditure en bloc.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads of expenditure which appear in the last column of the Schedule of Estimated Expenditure under the Development Estimates on page 24 of Paper Cmd 4 of 1979 stand part of the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980, "put and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $2,914,041,130 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Main Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980, contained in Paper Cmd 4 of 1979," put and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $2,560,208,470 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980, contained in Paper Cmd 4 of 1979," put and agreed to.

Resolutions to be reported.

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

The Minister for Finance (Mr Hon Sui Sen): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions.

First Resolution reported -

"That the sum of $2,914,041,130 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Main Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980. contained in Paper Cmd 4 of 1979."

Second Resolution reported -

"That the sum of $2,560,208,470 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980, contained in Paper Cmd 4 of 1979."

Mr Hon Sui Sen: Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions."

Question put and agreed to.

Resolutions accordingly agreed to.