Sir, this Bill was introduced some two months ago. At that time, there were some misgivings as to what our attitude was. Today, the Second Reading of this Bill coincides with the emergence of the new Liberal-Socialist Party, and the first act of this Party is to introduce a piece of social legislation that will be good for all, especially so for the clerical people and the shop assistants. As you will have seen in the explanatory note, this Bill is intended to protect a large number of employees who find it difficult to come together to carry out collective bargaining with a large number of employers in various trades and industries. The largest section of these workers comes under the definition of shop employees. As hon. Members are themselves aware, Singapore is a city of many shops. You find them more highly concentrated in the city, but even in the remote areas you do find many shops. Born and bred in Singapore, and constantly rubbing shoulders with the common man in the city - I have many friends working as clerks and shop assistants - I see how they work, the opportunities given to them to rest and play, and also the remuneration they receive for their employment. By and large, I should say, shopkeepers do keep a large number of their shop assistants contented. But there is a section of employers, by whatever name we may define them, who are really slave-drivers, and they extract from their employees the fullest amount of work that a human being can afford to give without injury to health. It is within my knowledge, Sir, that some shop assistants wake up as early as six o'clock in the morning and they start working and they are kept working until about eleven or twelve o'clock in the night. I believe, Sir, that this sort of treatment is not the best that we can accord to a fellow human being. I believe that no one inside this Assembly House or outside this House will disagree with me when I say that shop assistants are not machines. They are just like you and me. They must work for their living, but I believe also that they should be given sufficient time to relax and sufficient time to recoup their lost energy. The case of the clerks, generally speaking, is not as bad as that of the shop assistants, except that there are proprietors who will make a clerk do more than his fair share of work. In quite a number of instances, I know that clerks do carry home a lot of work to do. Sometimes they have to carry on working in the shop itself until very late at night. Most of them are accounts clerks and correspondence clerks. As to ventilation and place of work, you will find that the shop assistants usually work either in the front of the shop or in the backyard. Clerks, however, are usually given a desk in one obscure corner that is least useful to business. In that sort of a place, you will usually find insufficient lighting and ventilation. Perhaps a few of these employers try to improve those conditions and put in a dingy lamp or a little fan, but this will not help to cool the place or change the air sufficiently for the clerks to work in healthy surroundings. I need not say it too often, but I know that it is within your knowledge that clerks and shop employees are not having an easy life. They are employed in small numbers. One shop may probably employ two or three shop assistants. Some may even employ just one assistant and because the shop assistants are so disunited and because it is so hard for them to get together, it is difficult for them to make justifiable demands - demands for better working conditions or better wages. It is therefore the duty of every Assemblyman here to help them to get a square deal through legislation. I have come into contact with many employers. In fact, some employers have written to me. I am very happy to say that the employers today are not the employers of yesterday. Most of them agree that more favourable conditions should be established. Many of them have gone through my Bill, and, after that, have written to me saying that it is in line with what they would like to see done. This Bill, Sir, aims at giving every shop and clerical employee a total of fourteen consecutive paid holidays for one year's work. This is in addition to the weekly holidays. There might be cases, Sir, where an employer may want to employ a clerk for eleven months and, after that, dispense with his services. In this Bill, Sir, we have made provision that, if that should be the case, the employee will still be entitled to one day's paid holiday for every month of service he has given. Another important part of the Bill, Sir, aims at giving maximum protection to a worker in the matter of hours of work. It advocates that a shop assistant can only be asked to work up to a maximum of eight hours a day or forty-five hours a week; for a clerical worker, seven hours a day or thirty-nine hours a week. Good employers have already observed these conditions for a very long time. This is nothing new to people who are considerate, but what we do want here is for other employers to follow that good lead. The case that I am talking about applies, Sir, especially to clerical workers. I believe that all employers and those who have contacted me and written to me will support this Bill wholeheartedly. You will remember that we had in the past a measure called the Weekly Holidays Ordinance. When it was enforced, proprietors feared that their businesses would be adversely affected. They thought probably they would lose one-seventh of their business in a week. However, when that Bill became law, businessmen soon discovered that they were continuing to do the same volume of business in six days instead of seven. Even many of those proprietors who can keep their shops open for seven days a week are also following that lead and they set aside one day as a holiday. In fact, Sir, customers are already aware that Sunday is a rest day and they do their buying during the other six days. Similarly, Sir, today we find our shops opening from six o'clock in the morning until twelve o'clock at night. We find that the shop assistants will have to wake up early, attend to the customers during the first few rush hours up to about ten o'clock, and after that, we find that they are just made to hang around the shop doing nothing but wait for the next rush period at one o'clock. Thereafter, there is another lax period, and another wait for the next rush period. Later on in the night, you will find that the shop is open to a few stragglers who will come to buy their goods at the latest hour possible. If this Bill should become law, Sir, and if shopkeepers can regulate their hours and make the workers work in shifts, I envisage that business can probably start at about eight o'clock and end at about six o'clock in the evening. This will not adversely affect business. I believe the result will be the same as that achieved by the Weekly Holidays Ordinance and that people will learn to buy their things early before the shop closes. Instead of the shop waiting for the customer, it will be the case of the customer knowing when to buy. We now turn to another very important part of the Bill which affects wages. Now, we may have a large number of workers doing the same type of work but in different shops. Some of the workers are paid more. Some of them are paid less. Some are paid even lower than what they should get. Now there is a great difference of pay and many workers are dissatisfied, but the present set-up is such that if they are dissatisfied with their pay, the only alternative they have is to resign from their jobs. We know, of course, that this weapon cannot be used by many of the shop assistants and therefore legislation must be brought about to help them. We would like, Sir, to see that a worker be paid a minimum wage. The minimum wage is not to be determined by the employer or the employee. We believe, Sir, that there are many people in this world who have a conscience, and we believe that, if one side will give to the other side what it hopes the other side will give to it, then this world will be a better world. We do not believe that the workers' best solution to have their demands met is the strike weapon. We believe that the best weapon should be negotiation. We believe that if the workers can band themselves together, say, a small number of workers in one whole street banding themselves together and negotiating with their employers, come to an agreement among themselves and then bring their case to the Labour Department, much waste of time and dissatisfaction will be avoided. Here, I am talking about how they arrive at a minimum wage. They arrive at that minimum wage by negotiation first and after that have it confirmed with the Ministry of Labour. Now, talking about minimum wage, Sir, I would like this House to know that there are many in Singapore who would want to make the workers misunderstand what is actually a minimum wage. They are, in fact, spreading rumours round - and they are mischievous rumours too - that the minimum wage is actually the highest wage they should get, or they will get, if this Bill goes through. I know that we, who are sitting here in this Assembly, know what is a minimum wage but I would like the workers at large to know that if we fix a minimum wage of say $150, then an employer cannot pay a worker less than that sum but may pay him, say, a sum like $200 or $250 or anything that is higher. I say this, Sir, for the benefit of many people outside this Assembly who cannot understand what is a minimum wage. In this Bill, the provision is centred on co-operation between worker and employer, but in many cases there may not be full agreement on this subject and things may come to a deadlock. In this case, Sir, we have the Tribunal coming into the picture where both sides are represented by equal numbers and another equal number of independent people sitting on that Tribunal to find out what should be the most equitable wage. Once that determination is reached and signed by the Minister, it will then be fixed. However, Sir, in many cases, we do find that determinations, whether they are arrived at by negotiation or by the findings of the Tribunal, leave things that are much to be desired. In all probability, one side of it is discontented, and we do not feel that it is good to tie any party down. Hence, provision is also made in this Bill that a determination can also be revoked if both sides agree to it, or if one side is dissatisfied, but if they revoke it and it comes to the Tribunal, then the Tribunal will fix it. In a matter of wage disputes, we do find that we have a big class of people whom we call shop assistants but we must also understand that although there are shops in the city and shops in the rural areas doing the same type of business, yet one type may be doing better business, having a busier time, and the other type may not be as busy or as prosperous. Therefore, to draw a hard line and make this determination binding on all classes of people or on all shops is not quite right. In this Bill, we have made provision that a small area may be taken into account or a certain type of business may be classified together for such purposes for a determination to be made. Another part of this Bill - clause 4 - is also important. This clause provides that all employees who are employed on contract or agreement before this Bill becomes law, and whose terms are even more favourable than those provided for, shall not be deprived of such benefits but shall continue to enjoy such advantages. It is my intention, Sir, that this Bill should be committed to a Select Committee of the House before it comes up for the Third Reading. Contrary to the opinion expressed by some Members in this Assembly that we have the cooperation of the Government in drafting this Bill, we say, "No, we have done this all on our own. We have done our best." But we believe, Sir, that this Bill can be further improved. We know that there are many people inside this Assembly as well as outside it who can give us valuable assistance. We do not say that what we say must be right, but we say, "We will take what is best from everybody and incorporate what is most practicable and what is most useful for the workers in Singapore." I have noted, too, that Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 11 of 1956 has been published giving the Government's version of what the Shop and Office Employees Bill should be like. I feel, Sir, that if this Bill goes into Committee, the good ideas that are in this Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 11 may also be incorporated into this Bill. Further, Sir, before I conclude, I would say that we are grateful to the Hon. the Chief Minister for expressing his intention to co-operate with us on this Bill when I move it for the assent of this Assembly. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.