SINGAPORE BROADCASTING CORPORATION BILL

Order for Second Reading read. 4.48 p.m.

The Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture (Mr Ong Teng Cheong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

This Bill seeks to establish the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation to take over the functions of the Broadcasting Department (RTS) of the Ministry of Culture. The Bill also seeks to make consequential amendments to the Broadcasting and Television Act.

The reason for converting RTS into a statutory body is to free the Department of Broadcasting from administrative and financial constraints so that the organisation can expand and develop into a lively radio and television station.

The Singapore Broadcasting Corporation as a statutory body will have the authority and flexibility to recruit artistes, producers, script-writers, choreographers and other personnel, and to determine their emoluments, to improve and expand services, facilities and equipment, and to acquire new technology in accordance with the needs of the broadcasting services.

Financial support from the Government is vital if the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation is to develop into a reputable organisation capable of producing good quality programmes. The Corporation, by its nature, performs a public service and cannot be entirely profit-oriented.

Because of the influence and impact Radio and TV have on the population, especially the young, it is vital in the public interest that the Government retains control over the policy of. the Corporation.

May I now outline the main provisions of the Bill.

Clause 2 contains the definitions of the various terms used in the Bill.

Clause 3 establishes the Corporation as a body corporate.

Clause 4 provides that the Corporation should consist of a Chairman and a Deputy Chairman and from three to seven other members. The First Schedule to the Bill empowers the President to appoint the Chairman and Deputy Chairman, and the Minister to appoint the other members.

Clause 5 deals with the functions and duties of the Corporation. It also stipulates that the programme broadcast by the Corporation shall not offend against good taste, decency, religion and that sufficient time is given to news and current affairs.

Clause 6 furnishes the Corporation with powers to carry out its functions which include the establishment of television and radio stations, determination of the hours of television and sound broadcasting, and acceptance of advertisements upon payment of charges.

Clause 7 provides for external radio service on the direction of the Minister.

Clause 8 empowers the Minister to give directions to the Corporation on policy to be followed or on any other matter concerning the functions, operations and administration of the Corporation. In an emergency, the Minister may suspend the Corporation from performing all or any of the functions and powers and take over these functions and powers until he modifies or revokes the suspension order.

Clauses 9 to 14 contain provisions for the appointment of staff, including the appointment of the General Manager who will be the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, and the making of regulations relating to staff matters.

Clauses 15 to 25 contain provisions dealing with the Corporation's financial matters and the financial procedures to be adopted by the Corporation.

Clause 18 provides that the Minister may make grants-in-aid to the Corporation out of money voted by Parliament, especially in respect of capital expenditure.

Clauses 26 and 27 contain provisions dealing with the transfer of properties, rights and liabilities to the Corporation.

Clauses 28 to 34 provide for the transfer of Government staff to the Corporation on terms no less favourable than existing ones; allow officers in the common-user service an option to remain in the Government service; and the Corporation to lay down the terms and conditions of transfer.

Part VII of the Bill covering clauses 35 to 51 deals with miscellaneous provisions, including a provision (clause 35) to prohibit anyone, except Government departments, from installing or working a broadcasting apparatus in Singapore without a licence, and provides the Minister with the power to exempt any person from this provision.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed. 4.55 p.m.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome the establishment of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation which will replace Radio and Television Singapore.

Sir, there has been talk of the desirability of the Broadcasting Department of the Ministry of Culture to be a corporate body so that it can be more effective and efficient. The merits and demerits of this idea have yet to be seen, and I can only hope that when the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation is set up it will serve the community better. In any case, this Bill is long overdue and I am glad that after its Second Reading the Bill will be committed to a Select Committee. Here, Sir, I would like to urge that more publicity be given to the Bill so that more people can come forward to express their views on it.

I fully agree that the Government should retain control of the Corporation in view of the very important functions it has to play in the community. But there are other aspects which I wish to touch upon, One of these concerns financial support from Government. The Hon. Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture has said that financial support from the Government is vital if the SBC is to develop into a reputable organisation capable of producing good quality programmes. Hence, the House expects that Government's financial support should in a very great measure help towards the setting up of SBC as well as other expenditure that may be forthcoming.

But, nevertheless, Sir, it should be borne in mind that the main objective of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation should not be entirely profit-oriented, as pointed out by the Minister just now, otherwise the public might not be able to enjoy the programmes. What I am trying to say is that I know of some TV stations which are very much commercialised and, as such, commercials take up most of the time. The functions and the role of the SBC would then be lost if it has got to look after the prospect of maintaining itself through programmes which bring in revenue. But I would contend that the SBC should provide the public with good programmes and films of good entertainment value. Therefore, Sir, I am sure that the SBC will not have to be self-providing and will have to rely heavily on the Government for financial support. In this respect, I would urge the Minister-in-charge to take this into consideration.

Now, Sir, it is also imperative that the SBC should look into the question of obtaining up-to-date equipment and sufficient manpower in order to render a good service to the public. Compared with the equipment used in some other countries, I think the equipment that RTS has at the moment is still far behind time. Just to illustrate, Sir, in the presentation of news over TV at 9.30 p.m, and the newsreel that follows, although the news presentation has improved with some changes in the news readers, what is more important to the TV viewer is the clarity of voice and the intelligent reading of the newbreader so that the news can be clearly understood. Also, far from a flat presentation of news where one sees only the newsreader reading the news, on-the-spot coverage of important events flashed on the screen will be more desirable. I believe this may well be one reason behind the need to convert the RTS into a statutory body. I do not wish to go into the details of manpower and equipment, but suffice it to say the SBC should look into these two functions which are very important areas in its role in the community.

As this Bill will be referred to a Select Committee, I shall touch briefly on some aspects of it. In Part II, clause 4 concerns the Constitution of the Corporation and the provisions of the First Schedule to the Act. May I ask the Hon. Minister concerned why the Corporation should have not less than three members and not more than seven members? I agree that the Corporation has an important role to play. The other question is the appointment of the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman by the President and the appointment of the other members of the Corporation by the Minister. I am quite sure there are good reasons for this.

Sir, Part III of the Bill deals with the functions, duties and powers of the Corporation which have been quite clearly spelt out. But, as I have pointed out earlier, I can only hope that in view of the importance of this powerful mass media, the public will have a better and more efficient service.

Part IV deals with provisions relating to the staff of the Corporation. We have just heard the Hon. Minister elaborating on the provisions of Part IV. I have also mentioned earlier of the need for adequate manpower in order to provide this service with better programmes. I am reliably told that there has been some difficulty in getting staff of good calibre, including artistes, producers, choreographers and other personnel. This is a question of dollars and cents. I am also told that the fees payable to these artistes have remained unchanged since 1971. It has been said that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. So it is a question of rates in terms of monetary return. I only hope that this matter will be looked into by the SBC when it is set up.

As regards Part VII, among the provisions in clause 49 there is the question of licence fees. I would urge that when the SBC is set up, one of its first functions will not be just to increase the radio and television licence fees. Sir, with these remarks, I give my full support to the Bill. 5.07 p.m.

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me the opportunity to say a few words in support of the Bill.

RTS has been frequently criticised, both in this House as well as by members of the public because the standard of television and sound broadcasting services is not up to expectation. It is now realised that the only way to upgrade the services is to relieve RTS from the strings of the Ministry of Culture by which it is attached all along.

The Singapore Broadcasting Corporation Bill will certainly put the RTS in the right footing by upgrading its television and sound broadcasting services. The Bill, when passed, will effectively free RTS from all the policy, the administrative and above all the budgetary constraints which have been standing in its way of improvement and progress for years. With its new freedom, it is hoped that the SBC will be able to work out its excellent conditions of service to attract more talented people and, most important of all, to retain them with better monetary rewards. Therefore, it is hoped that the longstanding shortage of trained, talented and experienced personnel can be resolved. We can expect to see an overall improvement forthcoming, particularly in the colour production of more local programmes and also news with newsreel presentation.

If our locally produced programmes are comparable to foreign productions in terms of quality in the future, the SBC could perhaps look into the possibility of exporting them to our neighbouring countries or to other foreign countries, just as RTS is presently importing relevant programmes from overseas to meet the demand of our local viewers. This will also possibly help SBC to earn revenue.

As the cost of upgrading the quality of television and broadcasting services will undoubtedly be high, whereby the SBC has to pay for it, it is hoped that such high cost will not be eventually passed on to our viewers and listeners.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill. 5.11 p.m.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have read the Explanatory Statement on the Bill and I have also listened most carefully to the Hon, Minister. But it is still not clear to me why it is necessary to convert RTS into a statutory board. What are the things that a statutory board can do that the RTS in its present form cannot do?

It is generally known that some of our civil servants tend to attribute any departmental ineffectiveness or shortcomings to the fact that, as a Government department, their hands are tied and that there are also financial and administrative constraints. Consequently, there are things which they would have liked to do but they cannot do. The impression conveyed is that a statutory board enjoys considerably more flexibility and freedom of action.

Sir, if what is believed by these Government officers, which seems to be shared by the Hon. Minister, is indeed true, then there must be something basically wrong in the way the Government departments are organised. Surely the answer would be either to find out where we have gone wrong or why we have gone wrong and try to put things right, or simply allow all departments to become statutory boards, For once I do not believe there Is anything wrong with the existing system in the RTS. I do not think we should allow any part of Government service to reduce the extent of its accountability to Parliament by becoming a statutory board without good justification.

Sir, the Hon. Minister seems to give the impression that by simply converting RTS into SBC we are going to see an overnight improvement in the standard of services. I do not see how this is possible. Where are the present administrative constraints? What are the present financial constraints? He seems to contradict himself when he said, "We still need to control them. I do not think we want to be too commercialised." If that is the case, then the constraints will still be there, if any. Sir, I am not satisfied that a case has been made out to justify the conversion of RTS into a statutory board.

Perhaps I should also mention that, in going through the Bill, it seems to me that, in so far as the provisions on accounting and auditing are concerned, the stipulation is not in accordance with the standard clauses recommended by the Auditor-General for statutory boards. I am not sure whether it is an oversight or whether it is an intentional attempt to reduce the degree of its accountability to Parliament through the Auditor-General's Office. 5.14 p.m.

Encik Sidek bin Saniff: Mr Speaker, Sir, while embarking on a new horizon, I think it is only appropriate that we congratulate the RTS for the services it has rendered. Sir, every child has a parent, but not every child has an extra parent - from plain black and white films to colour and more attractive programmes. Of course, I am referring to television which allows millions of people to watch the same film and to share the same jokes. Those who try to hate it, I would say were rather quite unsuccessful. For instance, the famous actor, Orson Welles, once said about television: "I hate television. I hate it as much as peanuts. But, by gosh, I can't stop eating peanuts."

I would suggest that the SBC especially must be very selective as well as innovative - selective in the selection of material, films or whatever it is, whether from abroad or local; innovative in the sense that we must make it a point to further accelerate and refine our local production so as to reflect our people, our thinking, our way of life and, in the final analysis, our identity. This must be checked constantly. Otherwise TV will be offering not popular art but entertainment which is consumed like food, forgotten and replaced by new dish. So consonant with this, I think we need to inculcate further interest in our local talent. I would suggest that the Minister look after our local talent and their quality. For instance, in drama, or whatever it is of the art that they are involved, I must say that many of them simply out of love, continue painstakingly even though the payment I would say is rather meagre. I hope the SBC will be the impetus to our young local artistes willing to create a special identity through the modern, important media. For instance, I would also suggest that since we are talking so much nowadays about moral education, maybe it is important that the Minister look into this matter and try to introduce moral education on television, if possible during prime time. 5.18 p.m.

Mr Lai Tha Chai (Henderson): Mr Speaker, Sir, the establishment of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation marks a milestone in the era of cultural development in Singapore. The SBC will take over the functions and duties of the Broadcasting Division of the Ministry of Culture. Like other statutory bodies, the Corporation hopes to be able to provide better broadcasting services for the people, as the Acting Minister for Culture pointed out just now. It has to be so, for why else should it be formed to replace the present Broadcasting Division?

We have been watching the TV programmes of RTS since the 1960's. There has not been much remarkable improvement in its quality. Perhaps the only worthy improvement it has achieved is the introduction of colour TV. Very often we hear grouses and complaints from radio listeners and TV viewers. The Broadcasting Division is aware of its shortcomings and failings and is itself desirous of remedying them, but it faces constraints such as financial resources, lack of expertise and for many other reasons. This does not mean that the staff of the Broadcasting Division at present are not working hard enough, or there is a lack of suitable personnel whose talent can be tapped.

Most of the constraints against improvement are due to lack of financial support. The Broadcasting Division could not get sufficient funds from the Ministry of Finance. That is why the Ministry of Culture has now decided that the broadcasting services should go on its own and be self-reliant.

I wish to comment on two clauses in the Bill. Clause 49(2)(a) states that the Corporation may prescribe "schemes for the award of scholarships and other financial assistance to employees attending courses of training". This provision enables the SBC to take the initial steps to tap and encourage talents to make greater contributions, This is a right move if we are to improve and progress, The talents must be recognised and rewarded.

Clause 5(2)(c) states that the duty of the Corporation is:

"to ensure that nothing is included in the programmes broadcast by the Corporation which -

(ii) offends any racial group or may promote ill-will between different races or different public groups:"

This provision illustrates the concern that the SBC bears on our multi-racial society. What I mean is that even programmes, such as those in the Tamil language, which only serve a minority and hence lose money, will continue to be telecast over TV or broadcast over the radio. As a matter of fact, we should also produce better programmes in such minority languages. On the other hand, all the dialect programmes such as the 'Romantic Swordsman' ( ) which is very popular should be gradually and slowly discouraged as we are now encouraging the use of Mandarin to replace dialects.

The provisions of clause 6 (h) and (n) in the Bill mean that, unlike the Broadcasting Division working within limited resources, the SBC will be able to expand its services and make further progress with the greater flexibility and with more resources than they now have.

I can see that the SBC has a great role to play in shaping the cultural destiny of Singapore. It will take a lead in the promotion of the varied cultures of a multi-racial society of ours.

Sir, I support the Bill which is to be committed to a Select Committee for further study.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, I would like to thank the various hon. Members for supporting the Bill and in wanting to see more lively programmes over radio and on television. In supporting the Bill, they have pointed out a few areas of concern. The reason for converting RTS into a corporation is mainly to improve the performance in that it will cut down unnecessary red tape and to be able to come to decisions and action quicker. There is no other substantial difference between RTS as a department and SBC as a corporation besides this. That is why I have mentioned in my statement earlier that the main reason for converting RTS into a statutory body is to free the department from the day-to-day administrative and financial constraints. The overall policy of the Corporation will continue to be under Government control.

The Ministry of Culture is happy with the arrangement that has been reached with the Ministry of Finance on the Corporation. With such an arrangement and with a very understanding Minister for Finance, as far as this particular Bill is concerned, I can assure Members who are concerned about the quality of the programmes to be produced by the Corporation that it will not offend against good taste and decency.

I appreciate the other points raised by Members about the accounting arrangement. I must admit that I am not too conversant with the accounting arrangement of the other corporations or Government departments. No doubt we will look into these aspects raised by Members. Since we are committing this Bill to a Select Committee, all the various points raised will be looked into at the same time.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Resolved,

"That the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation Bill be committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and seven Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection."- [Mr Ong Teng Cheong].