Hansard, 1957-10-16

The following Members have, under the provisions of subsection (3) (i) of section 47 of the Singapore Colony Order in Council, 1955, obtained from the Speaker, permission to be or to remain absent from meetings of the Assembly:- Mr R. Jumabhoy (Telok Ayer) - from 20th September to 31st October, 1957. Mr Lim Cher Kheng (Changi) - from 8th October to 30th November, 1957. Mr R. C. H. Lim (Nominated) - from 23rd September to 1st November, 1957. Mr Chew Swee Kee (Whampoa) - from 27th September to 13th October, 1957. Mr John Ede (Tanglin) - from 16th to 20th October, 1957. Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim (Sembawang) - from 16th to 17th October, 1957.

Mr Stanley Toft Stewart, Chief Secretary (Acting), took and subscribed the Oath of Allegiance.

Governor's Assent to Bills passed

I have received two messages from His Excellency the Governor. The first message, dated the 12th September, 1957, informs me that, having received instructions from Her Majesty through the Secretary of State authorising him to do so, His Excellency had that day assented to the following Bills which were passed by the Legislative Assembly on the 22nd May, 1957:-

Announcement by Mr Speaker

Hon. Members will recall that on the 11th September, 1957, I read a message from the Speaker of the Federal Legislative Council acknowledging with thanks the receipt of the resolution of this Assembly which contained a message of greetings and good wishes to Members of the Federal Legislative Council on the occasion of the attainment of Independence by the Federation of Malaya. I have since then received a further letter from the Speaker of the Federal Legislative Council. It is dated the 24th September, 1957, and reads as follows: "Dear Mr Speaker, I duly communicated to the Legislative Council at its meeting on the 3rd September last the message of the Singapore Legislative Assembly which was conveyed in your letter of the 21st August, 1957. The Council wishes me, on its behalf, to convey its very deep appreciation of the warm good wishes and brotherly sentiments expressed in the message. Yours sincerely, Dato HAJI ABDUL MALEK Speaker".

Policy on entry and on protection of local musicians

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare what is the present practice of the Government with regard to the entry of alien musicians and musical bands seeking employment in Singapore; and what is the Government's policy on the question of protecting local musicians from unemployment as a result of imported alien musicians.

Sir, the entry of alien musicians and musical bands seeking employment in Singapore is governed by the provisions of the Immigration (Prohibition of Entry) Order, 1953. Among the categories of persons set out in the Schedule to that Order who may be admitted into Singapore are persons with professional or specialist qualifications which would enable them to follow their profession or occupation in the Colony without prejudicing the interests of persons already resident in Singapore and possessing corresponding or similar qualifications. The present policy of the Government, Sir, designed to protect local musicians from unemployment as a result of imported alien musicians, allows for the admission of not more than two foreign musical bands into Singapore at any one time, subject to the local sponsor who is desirous of importing the foreign band engaging an equal number of local musicians to play with imported bands. The maximum stay in Singapore for each imported band is six months. This policy is at present under review in the light of the experience gained and of the Government's policy on the tourist trade.

Will the Hon. the Minister inform us whether the review is intended to widen or to narrow the limits of entry of alien musicians?

It is intended that the number fixed at present of two bands may be increased. One must not overlook the fact that a foreign band here means employment for local musicians.

Government policy on entry into Singapore

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare if he will state the Government's policy regarding (a) the entry from China of wives of Singapore residents who already have wives in Singapore; and (b) the entry from China of aged parents of Singapore residents having no other relatives in China to look after them.

Sir, with regard to the first part of the question, it is the policy of the Government not to permit entry into Singapore of such wives, invariably referred to as secondary wives. In very special circumstances where the wife in China is the primary wife, the policy may be relaxed. In such cases, certain factors meriting consideration and normally taken into account by the immigration authorities must be satisfactorily proved or established. It will be appreciated that the circumstances of every case vary and, in consequence, each case is thoroughly investigated and carefully considered on its merits. The entry of persons described in the second part of the question is governed by paragraph 7 (f) of the Immigration (Prohibition of Entry) Order, 1953.

Implementation of recommendation by Court of Inquiry into Trade Dispute

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare whether and when his Ministry will implement the recommendation for a secret ballot in paragraph 9 (iii) (b)* at page 8 of the Report of the Court of Inquiry into the Trade Dispute at the Singapore Harbour Board as contained in Sessional Paper No. S. 7 of 1957. *Following is paragraph 9 (iii) (b) - "In the case of the Singapore Harbour Staff Association the question of whether or not it is representative of a majority of workers in the Singapore Harbour Board, is more difficult and clouded by the effect of disorderly administrative practices in the keeping of books, accounts and other papers, and with inadequate routine of notification of changes, particularly on the alteration of the Association's rules to include all employees of the Singapore Harbour Board. From the evidence presented to us there are signs that something like 4,000 workers were members of one particular union, the Singapore Harbour Board Workers Union, and that with the addition of members of the Singapore Harbour Board Staff Association, the total figure would have been somewhere around 7,000. Whether or not the 4,000 members of the Singapore Harbour Board Workers Union can now be considered as members of the Singapore Harbour Board Workers Union, from the evidence provided by the Registrar of Trade Unions and his Assistant, and from the submission of counsel. It is our opinion,therefore, that further evidence should be collected in the form of a secret ballot by members whose names appear on the membership cards of the Singapore Harbour Board Workers Union and the Singapore Harbour Board Staff Association. The question to be asked should be whether or not each one of these men supports the Singapore Harbour Board Staff Association. The ballot could be easily arranged by the Ministry of Labour in co-operation with the Registrar of Trade Unions and the Supervisor of Elections."

Sir, the question is in regard to a suggestion and not a recommendation of the Court of Inquiry. This question is under examination in the light of its wide implications.

Can the Hon. Minister for Labour and Welfare indicate when we can expect an announcement of the decision arrived at?

In this case trade union organisations will have to be consulted for their views, and as soon as these views have been gathered by the Labour Department, a decision will be given.

Purpose of quoting foreign government tourist office expenditures

asked the Chief Secretary what was the purpose of a Singapore Government Press Statement issued at 1200 hours on 17th September, 1957, reference INFS. SE. 57/ 46, which quotes from "Travel News" the figures in U.S. dollars of foreign Government tourist office expenditures.

Sir, the purpose of the release to the Press to which the hon. Member refers was to provide information about the financial assistance given by some other governments to promote tourism in their countries.

Sir, will the Hon. the Chief Secretary tell us whether it is part of the duty of the Information Service of Singapore to disseminate information completely irrelevant to Singapore?

Sir, it is a function of the Department of Information Services to stimulate public interest in the Government's activities including the promotion of tourism, and one means of doing so is the issue of news items about what is being done concerning tourism in other countries.

Sir, has the Hon. the Chief Secretary seen this press release?

Yes, Sir.

Does he not agree that it might be of some advantage both to the people of Singapore and to the Director of Information to tell us why this curious release was made, in which there was nothing else but a quotation from some United States magazine - Travel News - reproduced at great expense to the Singapore Government?

Sir, it was not reproduced at great expense.

Future arrangements when Pan-Malayan Department is separated

asked the Chief Secretary who will audit the Accounts of the Government of Singapore and its agencies when the office of the Director of Audit, Malaya, which appointment hitherto has been for both the Federation of Malaya and Singapore, is separated.

Sir, no decision has yet been made to split up the pan-Malayan office of the Director of Audit, Malaya. Although under the Constitution of the Federation of Malaya the Director of Audit, Malaya, has become the Auditor-General, Federation of Malaya, he is still, as far as Singapore is concerned, Director of Audit, Malaya, and as such he will continue to audit the accounts of the Government of Singapore. Provision for the audit of the accounts of the Government of Singapore will be made in the new Constitution of Singapore.

Number Malayanised and compensation paid

asked the Chief Secretary to state as at 10th October 1957-. (i) the total number of expatriate officers who have left the service of the Singapore Government as a result of Malayanisation; (ii) the number of such officers from each department; and (iii) the total amount of compensation paid.

Sir, the total number of expatriate officers who have left the service of the Singapore Government to date, 16th October, as a result of Malayanisation is 164. The number from each Department is as follows: Administrative, 22; Legal and Judicial service, 3; Broadcasting, 4; Botanic Gardens, 2; Police, 25; Prisons, 18; Customs, 3; Income Tax, 4; Marine, 2; Marine Surveys, 1; Education, 15; Medical, 30; Immigration, 5; Labour, 2; Survey, 1; Civil Aviation, 5; Meteorological, 3; Postal, 2; P.W.D., 9; Telecoms, 1; Statistics, 1; Defence Services, 2; Printing, 1; Museum and Library, 1; Accountant-General, 2; total 164. The total compensation paid to date is $8,596,116.45.

'Free the innocent, try all others'

asked the Chief Secretary whether, in view of the uneasiness and grave concern of trade unionists and Chinese-school teachers and students at the arrests by the Police in August and September this year under the Preservation of Public Security and Banishment Ordinances, he will take steps for the early release of the innocent and give all other persons arrested an opportunity to answer the Government's allegations against them in open court.

Sir, the hon. Member is well aware of the reasons why these two Ordinances are on the Statute Book. All persons arrested thereunder are dealt with strictly in accordance with the law.

Has the Government any concrete proof that these people are engaging in subversive activities?

Is that not a matter, which is of its nature secret? Unless the Hon. Minister wishes to reply, he need not reply.

The information is secret.

Release suggested in view of guarantees

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware of the public concern at the detention under the Banishment Ordinance of Dr Chuang Chu Lin, a person reputed not to be a Communist; and whether, in view of the guarantees and assurances given by responsible Chinese educational and community leaders regarding Dr Chuang's past and future activities, the Government will consider releasing him.

Sir, as the hon. Member is now aware, the Council of Ministers has decided that Dr Chuang Chu Lin should be banished. This decision was made after very careful consideration of the case and of the representations received for and against his release.

Is the Hon. the Chief Secretary aware that there has been no explanation for this grave step?

Sir, as I said in my first reply, the decision has been made after very careful consideration.

asked the Financial Secretary if the Government will consider making a grant of $10,000 to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals towards the capital expenditure required to establish the Society's proposed premises at Pasir Panjang.

Sir, the Government already makes an annual grant of $5,000 towards the recurrent expenditure of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and it is regretted that it is not possible at this time either to increase this grant or to make a contribution towards the capital cost of the Society's proposed premises at Pasir Panjang.

Increase suggested to match higher Bank Rate and encourage savings

asked the Financial Secretary whether in view of the recent increase in the bank rates and in view of the necessity to encourage more savings he will take steps, if necessary by amending legislation, with the object of raising the rate of interest payable on deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank.

Sir, the matter has been considered but it has been decided that it would not be appropriate to change the rate of interest paid by the Post Office Savings Bank. The P.O. Savings Bank does not compete with commercial banks or borrowers appealing to investors in the stock market. It does not raise or lower its rate of interest on deposits in sympathy with movements in the stock exchange. It aims at giving people in the lower income group easy facilities for saving small amounts in circumstances of absolute security, and guarantees a rate of interest which remains steady and certain over the years and which is reasonable having regard to the security and the facilities afforded by the Bank. In this connection it is perhaps interesting to note that despite booms and depressions, disasters and victories, the rate of interest paid by the P.O. Savings Bank in the United Kingdom has remained at 2 per cent since 1864; while the rate of interest paid by the P.O. Savings Bank in the United States of America has remained at 2 per cent since 1910. It is open to doubt whether the P.O. Savings Bank could in fact raise the rate of interest at the present time even if it were regarded as politic to do so. As the hon., Member is no doubt aware; the P.O. Savings Bank is intended to be a self-supporting institution. Its deposits are required by law to be invested in trustee stocks, which yield a comparatively low rate of interest. Its income is derived solely from interest from these investments. From this income, it must meet its operating costs and pay the rate of interest on deposits, which is prescribed by law. It should also, if circumstances permit, build up a reserve against depreciation of investments. If its income is insufficient to meet running expenses and statutory interest charges, the deficit must, by law, be made good by Government. The financial position of the Bank at the present time has been examined. Indications clearly are that if the rate of interest were to be now raised to 3 per cent - which would still be low compared with the yields obtainable elsewhere under stable and secure investment - the Bank would find difficulty in meeting its running expenses and interest charges, and the deficit would have to be met from the general revenue by Government. Such a situation would not, I am sure, be in accordance with the wishes of the hon. Member.

Commission suggested to investigate and recommend action

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing whether he has received the Report of the Audit of the Accounts of the Singapore City Council for the year ended 31st December, 1956, by the Director of Audit, Mr H. M. Watson, and (a) if he will make a statement on the aforesaid Report; and (b) if he will consider taking steps with the view to the setting up of a Commission of Inquiry to investigate the circumstances which led to the loss of public funds and property as contained in the Report and the lack of control of the Accounting System of the City Council, and to recommend what action is to be taken against the Heads of Departments concerned.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in accordance with section 54 (1) of the Municipal Ordinance, the Director of Audit forwarded to me on 5th September a copy of his report on the audit of the accounts of the Singapore City Council for the year ended 31st December, 1956. I have asked the President of the City Council if he would let me have the comments of the City Council on this report, and I am informed that it has been referred to the Council's Finance Committee for consideration, and that it was also tabled with no comment attached at a meeting of the Council held on 30th September, 1957. I am further informed that the Finance Committee has appointed a sub-commit-tee to consider and enquire into the whole of the Auditor's report, and that it is expected that the sub-committee will report back to the Finance Committee later this month, and that it is only then that the Finance Committee can fully consider the report in the light of the facts which can be placed before it. When I have received and studied the full report of the City Council, I will consider whether any step should be taken for further investigations.

Is the Hon. the Minister aware that in many instances, where a committee of the City Council was concerned, funds were waived without the knowledge of the full Council?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I may or may not be aware of that fact but I am aware of this fact, that in the first instance the responsibility for the proper upkeep of the accounts of the City Council lies on the shoulders of the City Councillors themselves. The hon. Member for Queenstown happens to be a City Councillor and I am sure he should put the question to himself first before he puts it to this Assembly.

Under such circumstances will not the Minister feel that a commission of enquiry is most necessary to look into the funds and the audit of the City Council, rather than to leave it in the hands of the City Councillors themselves?

We cannot have a debate.

Committee suggested to investigate applications and recommend revised allocation system

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing if he is aware of the difficulties experienced by the public in getting Singapore Improvement Trust houses, and if he will consider setting up a Committee of Inquiry to investigate the outstanding applications, and to recommend a revised system of allocation of Singapore Improvement Trust houses.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am aware of the difficulties experienced by the public. These difficulties will remain so long as the supply of Singapore Improvement Trust accommodation does not meet the demand for it. With regard to the suggestion for a committee of enquiry, I am not aware of the hon. Member for Queenstown's reasons for dissatisfaction with the present points system of allocation, and of the need for any investigation or revision such as is suggested; but if he will let me have any suggestions for improvement of the system I shall - and I am sure the S.I.T. will also - give them the fullest consideration.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing if he will make a statement on the progress in the establishment of a Housing Authority.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the draft legislation is still under preparation.

Can the Hon. Minister tell us how long will it take to complete this report?

I am not quite sure whether the hon. Member wants a report or a statement on the question of the progress of the establishment of a Housing Authority. He has asked me to make a statement. A statement can be in one sentence or in twenty sentences; I have made my statement in one sentence.

Is the Minister aware of the concern of the public in the long delay in setting up this Housing Authority?

There is no delay, Sir.

Dissatisfaction over accommodation offered, and suggested policy change

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing whether he is aware that the residents of the Selegie Road/Short Street area who have to move to the alternative accommodation offered them in the Albert Street S.I.T. Flats are dissatisfied with the inadequate accommodation offered, viz., one bedroom and one sitting-room for a family of three to ten persons; and whether in view thereof he will consider, as a matter of re-housing policy, that provision be made in the Improvement Schemes for each dishoused family of five to ten persons to be given a fiat consisting of two bedrooms and one sitting-room.

Mr Speaker, Sir, similar representations have been made by the hon. Member for Stamford. I understand from the Singapore Improvement Trust that all families in the Short Street/Selegie Road area are being offered accommodation of the basic two-roomed (i.e. one bedroom and one sitting-room) fiats at a specially reduced and heavily subsidised rental of $30 a month. If the families wish to have and are able to afford larger accommodation, they will be considered for transfer to such accommodation when they become available.

Can the Hon. Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing give any indication whether any such accommodation will be available in the next four years, taking into consideration the fact that the S.I.T. has only built 1,000 houses in the last 18 months instead of 6,000 as expected?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I cannot prophesy but we are trying to do our best.

Treatment facilities in Government Hospitals

asked the Minister for Health to give details of the existing facilities in Government Hospitals for the treatment of cancer.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the facilities which exist in the Government hospitals for the treatment of persons suffering from cancer are surgical, radium, deep and superficial X-ray therapy. There are today 670 beds available for general and orthopaedic surgery, and a further 40 beds for gynaecology, and amongst these, beds are made available for those seeking treatment for cancer. Two deep X-ray machines are in operation and another is due to be installed soon, providing a total treatment capacity of about 100 daily. Quantities of radium are available for the treatment of cancer.

Withdrawals over $100 without reference to Kuala Lumpur Headquarters

asked the Minister for Communications and Works, with reference to the Post Office Savings Bank, whether he will consider making arrangements so as to allow a Singapore depositor to withdraw the whole or any part exceeding $100 of the amount standing to his credit without reference to the Savings Bank Headquarters at Kuala Lumpur.

Consideration has already been given to the matter. Arrangements would not be justified which would enable a depositor to withdraw the whole or any part exceeding $100 of the amount standing to his credit without reference being made to accounts kept in the headquarters of the Savings Bank. The purpose of this reference is to ensure the security of the deposits, which security is possibly the chief attraction in the Post Office Savings Bank account. Further, the prevention of fraudulent practices in connection with P.O. Savings Bank accounts can only be effected through some centralised control. The fact that reference has to be made to Kula Lumpur is simply because the P.O. Savings Bank accounts are kept centrally in Kuala Lumpur. If at some future time arrangements are made to keep the accounts in Singapore, it will of course be no longer necessary to refer to Kuala Lumpur.

Cannot a separate headquarters be established in Singapore to deal with these withdrawals?

I think that is really a separate question, Mr Speaker; it involves the whole question of pan-Malayan departments and some rather wide matters of policy.

Progress, and number of applications received, approved and rejected

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry to make a statement regarding the progress made by the Industrial Promotion Board, and also to state (i) how many applications for aid have been received; (ii)the number of applications that have actually received financial aid; (iii)the number of applications still under consideration; and (iv) the number of applications for aid that have been rejected.

The Board has held 13 meetings, Sir, since its inaugural meeting on 1st March, 1957, and the fourteenth meeting will be held on the 30th of this month. The Manager was appointed on 11th April and the Board is at present housed in my Ministry. The Board has so far sanctioned loans of $70,000 at 7 per cent interest on long-term credits. Its powers are clearly defined by the Ordinance. In answer to sub-question (i), Sir, 45 applications for funds have been received by the Board and each applicant has been interviewed by the Manager. So far only 24 of these applicants have completed the questionnaire sent to them by the Board. The Board has also been asked for advice by five concerns and technical assistance is now being given to all five applicants. In answer to sub-question (ii), two applicants have received financial aid and also assistance with their technical, legal and managerial problems. In answer to sub-question (iii), eight applications are now under investigation. There are also 21 outstanding applications where the applicants have not yet returned the questionnaire to which I referred. The premises of six of these have been visited by the Manager of the Board. In answer to sub-question (iv), 14 applications have been rejected but it is likely that at least three of these will be reconsidered if the applicants adopt suggestions made to them by the Board.

The Hon. Minister previously assured the Beehoon Association people of help. I would like the Minister to inform the House whether such application has been considered favourably.

Sir, the assurance I gave to the House was that I would do my best to see whether the Board would consider favourably the application of the Beehoon Co-operative Society. However, it would be very impolitic for me to put pressure on the Board because it is a statutory board, and I think it is not to the interests of Singapore that a Minister should exert pressure on such a Board. If the Board feels that it is not in its interests to grant a loan to any applicant, then it is at liberty to refuse. However, regarding this Beehoon cooperative's application, it has been under consideration and the Manager has met the members of the co-operative and given them some advice on how to reorganise their factories. The problems are very complex. For instance, if they are to install mechanical driers they will have to acquire land and abandon squatter production methods. It is now up to the Cooperative to satisfy the Board that it can produce Beehoon economically and that any loan granted by the Board it will be able to repay.

On the first part of the answer, Sir, does it mean that opinions and assurances of Ministers are next to useless and may be rejected at will?

Sir, the hon. Member has either completely misunderstood my assurance when I gave it or is trying to take a different meaning. The assurance I gave was that I would try and see if the Board would give the application favourable consideration. That is all. I cannot - I stated that when I moved the Second Reading of the Industrial Promotion Board Bill - put pressure on the Board, and I will not do it - even if I am in a position to do so; I will not do it.

10.32 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have a statement to make on local government elections. I think hon. Members of this House will be interested to know what progress has been made towards holding local government elections. According to the envisaged programme, the intention is to hold elections to the City Council under the Local Government Elections Ordinance on Saturday, 21st December. As you are aware, claims and objections have already been heard and it is expected that the electoral registers, as amended and certified, will be available to the public before the end of this month. All the other administrative arrangements for the elections, such as the delimitation of polling districts and the selection of polling stations, is well advanced, and this information will be gazetted shortly. The issue of the writ of elections will take place on 1st November, specifying 18th November as nomination day. As the life of the present City Council expires on 7th December, it will be necessary to extend its life to cover the interregnum period. To this end, new legislation is now under preparation and will come before this House at its next sitting. The purpose of this legislation is simply to validate all business conducted between 7th December and the holding of new elections on 21st December. As regards elections to the three rural District Councils, it is envisaged that this will be possible about April/May next year. Already, the electoral divisional boundaries drawn up by the official Committee have been referred to the All-Party Committee and Government has adopted two amendments, which were suggested by that Committee. The boundaries will shortly be gazetted and the preparation of the registers has already started. It will then be possible to proceed with claims and objections and with the other legal requirements in the same way as for the City Council. A more detailed programme will be announced later. Meanwhile, administrative arrangements to establish rural District Councils are under way. 10.34 a.m.

"amend the Tan Tock Seng's Hospital Ordinance (Chapter 149 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Health (Mr A. J. Braga); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Monday, 18th November, 1957, and to be printed.

"to amend the Customs Ordinance (Chapter 160 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Financial Secretary (Mr T. M. Hart) read the First time, to be read a Second time on Monday, 18th November, 1957, and to be printed.

"to amend the Mental Disorders and Treatment Ordinance (Chapter 145 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Health (Mr A. J. Braga); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Monday, 18th November, 1957, and to be printed.

Order for Second Reading read. 10.36 am.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The purpose of this Bill is to enable the Official Assignee to continue proceedings commenced under the former Workmen's Compensation Ordinance, which was repealed by the Workmen's Compensation Ordinance, 1954. The repeal of the former Ordinance does not affect proceedings instituted under it, or any right, privilege, obligation or liability subsisting thereunder, and the Interpretation of General Clauses Ordinance provides that such proceedings may be continued as though the repealing Ordinance had not been passed. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation appointed under the now repealed Ordinance was appointed by name and not by office. He has now retired from the Government service and, it not being possible to make any further appointment under the now repealed Ordinance, it is necessary to make some other provision for the continuation of proceedings under that Ordinance. This Bill is designed to give the Official Assignee power to deal with such proceedings and, for that purpose, to have all the powers of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation under the repealed Ordinance. Sir, I beg to move. Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly. Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. [Mr Shanks] Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read the Third time and passed.

10.40 a.m.

Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's authority to move, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $30,310 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 41 of 1957. This, Sir, is a short message containing four applications necessary to close the 1956 accounts. The nature of these votes is explained in the message. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second it. Motion accordingly committed to Committee of Supply. Motion and Schedule considered in Committee of Supply.

10.41 a.m.

The summary is at page 2. Head 14- The sum of $800 for Head 14 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 32 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $13,805 for Head 32 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Chairman, I would like the Hon. the Financial Secretary to tell us after the expenditure of such a great sum of money what benefit has been derived from it - whether Singapore has increased its acreage under cultivation or has benefited in any other way by this expenditure.

Sir, the benefits of such agricultural shows or trade exhibitions are not apparent visibly and at once. They are long-term benefits which arise as a result of people visiting these places, seeing things - manufactures and produce - which they have not seen before, and being attracted by the way these things are manufactured or produced; and therefore the benefit is one which is derived slowly.

Considering the small acreage available for agriculture, then how much benefit can the Hon. Minister predict that we will have of manufacture deriving from such?

Sir, as the Hon. the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing just now said in reply, I am no prophet, but the hon. Member must remember that it was not only agricultural products that were put up for show at the Agricultural Exhibition but there were also cows, pigs, poultry, fish and other things, and the hon. Member, I am sure, is well aware that the Government is concentrating now on increasing livestock breeding, pig-breeding, poultry rearing and so on, rather than on agriculture because, the island being of such a small size, we cannot have much agriculture in the real sense of the word.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $13,805 for Head 32 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 41 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $13,138 for Head 41 stand part of the Schedule."

Sir, could the Hon. the Financial Secretary explain to us what these legends mean? - "P.E.". "O.C.A.R." and "O.C.S.E." - who were going to be the great "banana" colonels in this coupon-distributing spree,

As I understand it, Sir, the first question of the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar is what the capital letters refer to. I should have thought that after three years' consideration of the Estimates and the messages, which come up every month, he will know that these refer to Personal Emoluments, Other Charges Annually Recurrent and Other Charges Special Expenditure. I understood him to ask also who the people were who operated this particular scheme. As far as I am aware, Sir, they had no rank - they were merely ordinary Government officials who were recruited for these posts because they fortunately had had previous experience of operating a petrol-rationing scheme and therefore were qualified to organise and control this department, and to make all the necessary arrangements for a petrol-rationing scheme. These two officers were in Division I; the rest of the officers in the temporary department were clerical officers, typists and two inspectors. 10.45 a.m.

I do not want to anticipate the item appearing in Paper No. Cmd. 42 of 1957 but could we be enlightened as to why this expense of the petrol rationing office has been split into two halves, one in No. Cmd. 41 and the other in No. Cmd. 42 when they apparently refer to the same office?

It would be convenient for hon. Members if both items could be discussed now.

The petrol rationing office was set up in November, 1956 when the Suez crisis broke out and when we considered that there was a possibility that our petrol supplies might be interrupted. A certain amount of expenditure was incurred in 1956. It totalled - as can be seen from the application for supplementary vote - a little over $13,000. This, was incurred in 1956 and, under our regulations, must be brought to account in the 1956 accounts. The balance of the expenditure was incurred in running the office until it was closed on 30th June, 1957. This amounted - speaking from memory, Sir - to, I think, $34,000-

Can the Hon. the Financial Secretary please quote the item, number and the relevant paper?

I beg your pardon, Sir. The paper is No. Cmd. 42 of 1957 and the item is 207 - Head 40 Supplies, New Subhead, Expenses of the Petrol Rationing Office. The office continued in existence until 30th June, 1957 and the expenditure incurred in 1957 is charged to the 1957 accounts.

Arising out of the estimate in paper No. Cmd. 42 of 1957, it says in the explanatory note: "The Petrol Rationing Office, which was established in November 1956, continued in being until June 1957, when it was decided that there was no longer any likelihood that petrol would have to be rationed." So, it did not appear to the Singapore Government that petrol would not have to be rationed until June 1957. Now, Mr Chairman, as I remember it, the British Government announced that it was abolishing petrol rationing in April 1957. Why did the Singapore Government take another two months to decide that it was no longer likely?

Subject to correction, Sir, I think petrol rationing was removed in May, not April, in the United Kingdom.

Well, why June then in Singapore?

It was not until the end of May that the Prime Minister in the United Kingdom stated that British tankers would use the Canal. The office had been in existence since the middle of November. We had progressively run down our staff throughout that period until, at the end, in June, there were only two or three people still employed. They were employed in tying up the loose strings of a petrol rationing scheme which could be pigeon-holed and introduced at short notice at any given time.

Perhaps, Sir, I can enlighten the hon. Member further on this. In January, we had a staff of a petrol rationing officer, a deputy petrol-rationing officer, a chief clerk, a financial clerk, 14 clerks and two office boys. In February, we discharged the chief clerk, the financial clerk, nine clerks and one office boy, so that we had cut down the staff by about two-thirds. In March, the petrol-rationing officer's services were terminated, so that the staff from March onwards was only very small.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $13,138 for Head 41 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 57 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $2,567 for Head 57 stands part of the Schedule."

Mr Chairman, we do not get much joy out of twisting the Government's tail - it has been twisted out of joint so often now that one is alarmed that it might be twisted out of place altogether! But it does seem strange to me that the sum of $2,567 was inadvertently posted and not corrected before the accounts were closed. And what seems even stranger is that now it is corrected we are supposed to pay out $2,567. I should have thought that, as this was just a posting error, one could so juggle the posting that we do not have to pay anything. Why is it that we have to pay $2,567 because of inadvertent posting?

First, Sir, as regards the inadvertence, the Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Communications and Works went on leave and it was agreed that his post should be filled temporarily by an officer in the Chief Secretary's Office, and it was agreed at the time that that officer's salary would continue to be paid from the Head "Chief Secretary". Inadvertently, this salary was debited to the vote in the Ministry of Communications and Works, with the result that it was over-expended. Now, this was not realised at the time. When the accounts have been closed, we find that expenditure has exceeded the voted provision. This has often happened in the past. Votes have often been exceeded, perhaps because bills from the Crown Agents have been posted late or for other reasons, and we have not had an opportunity to come to the Assembly before the accounts were closed to obtain funds to balance the account. All we are seeking to do now is to obtain a small vote to balance this particular account. There were of course savings on the Chief Secretary's vote owing to the inadvertent posting.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $2,567 for Head 57 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. The sum of $30,310 for the Heads of Expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule ordered to stand part of the motion. Motion and Schedule reported, without Amendment. Question, "That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $30,310 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 41 of 1957." put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $30,310 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 41 of 1957.

10.55 a.m.

Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's authority to move, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $2,115,572 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 42 of 1957. Sir, this message seeks supplementary provision amounting to "735,012 under Heads in the ordinary estimates and $2,022,200 under Heads in the development estimates. Offset savings amounting to $141,640 in the ordinary estimates and $500,000 in development estimates are available, and the net amount of new money required is therefore $2,115,572. Full explanations as to the need for the funds requested are given in the message and this little item adds to these explanations. Faced with this substantial message at this time of the year, hon. Members will no doubt be anxious to know something about the financial position generally. It will be recalled that in November of last year, it was stated that despite the estimated deficit of $18,000,000, revenue and actual expenditure would in all probability balance in 1957. That, Sir, I am happy to say, is likely to be the case, based on returns, which I have to date. Ignoring payments of compensation under the Malayanisation scheme (these are, I think, a fair charge against accumulated reserves since they will be covered in due course by savings on expatriation pay and passages), but taking account of the expenditure arising or are likely to arise in 1957 from the messages now before the Assembly, it now seems likely that revenue and expenditure will balance at about $234,000,000. With regard to the development estimates, it is clear that expenditure will fall considerably below the estimate. These matters will, of course, Sir, be dealt with in greater detail in connection with the Budget on 20th November. There is one point, Sir, which I would like to mention before I close, and that is that I propose to withdraw item 218 on page 9 of the message. That deals with the item "Subhead 14, item (2) - Kandang Kerbau Maternity Hospital" under Head D49 Medical and Health. I take it, Sir, that the proper time to do that will be when the Schedule is considered in Committee stage. Sir, I beg to move. The Assistant Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Mr Tan Theng Chiang): Sir, I second it. Motion accordingly committed to Committee of Supply. Motion and Schedule considered in Committee of Supply.

11.00 a.m.

The summary is at page 17. Head 1- The sum of $800 for Head 1 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 6- The sum of $10 for Head 6 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 12- The sum of $3,100 for Head 12 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 20- The sum of $47,400 for Head 20, ordered to stand part of the Schedule, Head 23 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $105,300 for Head 23, stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Chairman, the explanatory note says:' "Supplementary provision of $105,300 is required to meet anticipated expenditure during the remainder of the year." This is already 16th October and there are slightly under two and a half months left. The vote was originally for $100,000 for the whole of the year 1957. Can the government let us into this big secret as to what great jaunt is planned in these two and a half months that is gongs to cost $105,300?

The anticipated expenditure, as stated in The explanation, is in connection with the Port Commission which has just finished its deliberations. It is estimated that that will cost $70,000. The bills have not yet come in. And it is estimated that Singapore's share of the cost of the University Commission will come to close on $20,000, and for that also, bills have not yet come in. That represents close on $90,000 of the $100,000.

May I have an answer, Mr Chairman, to my question? I can add $70,000 plus $20,000 to make $90,000. There is a vote originally, of $100,000, so there is still a balance of $10,000. What is this $105,300 for? What is it being planned for in these two and a half months?

We also have to make provision for the estimated expenditure on a possible visit from the Transport Commissioner who may come to this country during the last two months of the year. We also have to make allowance for the payment of the allowances and expenses of the Colombo Plan expert who is here at the present time - the Colombo Plan expert who is training members of the Royal Singapore Flying Club in the Chipmunk aircraft, which has been made available by the Government of India. We also have made a small provision for unexpected contingencies.

Mr Chairman, I was always under the impression that Colombo Plan experts go all over South East Asia giving free help, assistance, guidance and so on. Are we to understand that in fact we are paying for this?

Sir, Colombo Plan assistance is not altogether free. The Colombo Plan authorities do pay a very large proportion of the expenditure but we are required to pay local subsistence allowances.

As a matter of interest, Mr Chairman, could we be informed where this Colombo Plan expert is coming from?

Sir, as I said, he has been here for some considerable time instructing people in Singapore to fly the Chipmunk aircraft which has been lent to us by the Government of India under the Colombo Plan, and this extra provision which I refer to is the extra sum required to complete the payment of his allowances this year.

Perhaps the Hon. the Minister for Communications and Works can tell us where this expert came from who is causing all this unnecessary expenditure to the Flying Club?

I am not conceding that the expenditure is unnecessary. He is an Indian officer, Capt. Bhargava, who is lent to us by the Indian Government.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $105,300 for Head 23 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 28 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $272,000 for Head 28 stand part of the Schedule."

Sir, this is something more light, more adventurous, this question of the speedboats. I have been reading from time to time, Mr Chairman, of how the Customs have been outrun in many a creek in Singapore. Now we are informed that for the sum of $42,000 we are going to have four speedboat hulls with outboard engines. And amongst the other things that these four speedboats are supposed to do, besides out-running smugglers or potential smugglers, is to give protection to the crews - "sufficiently strong to afford protection to the crews". Sir, can we be informed whether this means amour-plating speedboats?

There is no question of armour-plating, Sir. The provision covers the construction of four hulls which will cost approximately $3,000 each. The balance of the provision is required for the purchase of nine outboard motors, leaving an allowance of $3,000 as a balance against contingencies. The word "protection" is used because, generally speaking, these speedboat hulls are of comparatively flimsy construction and smugglers have in the past shown a tendency to turn quickly on their tracks and try and ram the Customs launches; and we feel that if we can construct a hull which is rather stronger perhaps than the ordinary outboard motor hull, we' will give the Customs officers in these boats a certain amount of protection. I think that everything we can do to assist the Customs officers in their difficult task of preventing smuggling we should do. It is not really a matter for flippancy. They do require every possible assistance which we can give consistent with efficiency and economy.

Sir, $3,000 per hull times four for four hulls is $12,000. I think I am right. That leaves a balance of $30,000. Can we be told how many engine sets or how many outboard motors that is supposed to purchase?

Sir, I have already said that we will be purchasing nine outboard motors at a cost of $3,000 a piece, making $27,000, and that we are keeping a reserve of $3,000 for contingencies.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $272,000 for Head 28 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 31 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $50,000 for Head 31 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Chairman, Sir, can the Hon. Minister for Commerce and Industry inform the House as to the size of the membership of this Singapore Agricultural Co-operative Union, and the number of animals that will be benefited by such a scheme?

Sir, the first part of the question is understandable but the second part is rather curious. The idea of any Government assistance is to benefit human beings and not animals unless it is the $5,000 given to the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. This Agricultural Co-operative Union has got six rural Chinese co-operative societies as its affiliates and if the hon. Member wants to know their names, they are the Potong Pasir Agricultural Production and Marketing Co-operative Society, the Changi Jalan Tiga Ratus Agricultural Production and Marketing Co-operative Society, Ltd., the Ama Keng Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society, Ltd., the Bedok Agricultural Marketing Co-operative (unlimited), the Gulega Road Co-operative Credit Society (unlimited), and the Hup Ho Agricultural Co-operative Society (unlimited).

Mr Chairman, I am afraid that the Minister has not answered my question. I would like to know the membership - how many members are there in these co-operatives, and what is the size of the farms. What we are interested in is how much they can produce or how much they can help to produce for the benefit of humans.

I am afraid, Sir, that offhand I cannot give the exact number of members of each of these component co-operative societies - the components of the Union, but I suppose there must be quite a large membership. The size of the holdings varies with each individual farmer. As the hon. Member knows full well, we are short of land in Singapore and therefore no farmer holds a big acreage of land.

I seek clarification, Sir. Towards the end of the paragraph it reads "after two years". Do I understand that after the period of two years the whole lump sum of $50,000 is to be paid back to the Government?

Yes, Sir. According to the plan that is envisaged for the working of the purchasing system, the Co-operative Union will be making sufficient profit for it to be able to repay the Government the loan after two years, but of course if unforeseen circumstances arise which prevent the loan being repaid after two years, perhaps Government will reconsider extension.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $50,000 for Head 31 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 33 - The sum of $2,000 for Head 33 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 38- The sum of $10 for Head 38 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 40- The sum of $34,624 for Head 40 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 46 - The sum of $17,000 for Head 46 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 49 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $45,050 for Head 49 stand part of the Schedule."

Sir, item 211 says: "Subhead 41, item (4) -Administration:-Drugs and Chemicals ... It is difficult to estimate in advance what actual requirements will be. $80,000 was allowed in the 1957 Estimates but expenditure is running at an average of about $9,000 per month...". Can we be informed what are these expensive drugs which are being used and whether there is any check on their use? The public is very often alarmed at the niggardliness with which drugs are dispensed to the free patients in the hospitals but are at the same time alarmed at the liberality with which they are being dispensed to "specialist" or paying patients. Now is there any check on the doctors in these hospitals, or are there any rules according to which they give or do not give expensive drugs?

I cannot give details now of the expensive drugs. There is an increase - a terrific increase, a fantastic increase - of out-patients, free patients, coming to our medical centres, which necessitates the constant supply of drugs. I do not concede any niggardliness at all in the supply of expensive drugs to free patients. We are at times short of some expensive drugs and endeavour to get them as fast as we possibly can. I assure the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar that there is no niggardliness at all on the part of the medical services.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $45,050 for Head 49 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. 11.15 a.m. Head 53 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $1,793 for Head 53 stand part of the Schedule."

Sir, did the City Council install a meter for the water they supplied to the old airport terminal?

I regret, Sir, I just cannot answer that question. I do not know.

Then we would like to know how they calculate the, figure $1,793.

I can only assume that they do have a meter and that the Director of Social Welfare was satisfied that this is a fair charge.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $1,793 for Head 53 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 57 - The sum of $155,925 for Head 57 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D42- The sum of $653,000 for Head D42 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D46 - The sum of $88,550 for Head D46 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D49 - Question proposed, "That the sum of $758,650 for Head D49 stand part of the Schedule."

The Hon. the Financial Secretary wishes to move an amendment?

Yes, Sir, I would like, if I may, to move an amendment to the Schedule, to excise item 218. That refers to the construction of 12 flats for medical officers at Kandang Kerbau. It appears on page 9 of the Command Paper.

Under Standing Order 69 (7) - "Any Member may move an amendment to the schedule to reduce by $ . . . the sum to be allotted for any head of expenditure in respect of any sub-head or item therein, but at least two clear days' notice of such amendment shall be given." So that before any amendment is moved, I must know whether hon. Members will agree to waive notice under the provisions of Standing Order 23, which reads: "Notice shall not be dispensed with in the case of a motion or in respect of any other proceeding for which notice is required except with the consent of the Speaker and the general assent of Members present." Have I the assent of hon. Members present? Hon. Members indicated assent.

You would, I think, like to know why I withdraw this particular item, Sir. Representations have been made to me by hon. Members on both sides of the House that the cost of these particular flats might conceivably be reduced. In these circumstances, I wish to investigate the matter to see whether that is indeed possible.

Perhaps the Hon. the Financial Secretary will move the amendment in the proper form, under Standing Order 69 (7)? It will be of assistance, of course, if hon. Members would seek to settle their amendments with the Clerk beforehand.

Sir, I must apologise for the trouble which I am causing you, but I must say in extenuation that this amendment was decided upon as the bell was ringing to open the proceedings. Sir, I beg to move, To reduce by $181,600 the sum to be allotted for Head D49 in respect of application number 218. Amendment agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $577,050 for Head D49, as amended, stand part of the Schedule," put, and agreed to. The sum of $577,050 for Head D49, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D53 - The sum of $25,000 for Head D53 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D57 - The sum of $427,000 for Head D57 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D61 - The sum of $70,000 for Head D61 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. The sum of $1,933,972 for the Heads of Expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule, as amended, ordered to stand part of the motion. Motion and Schedule reported, with an Amendment. Question, "That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $1,933,972 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 42 of 1957 as amended.". put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $1,933,972 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 42 of 1957 as amended.

11.28 a.m.

Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's authority to move, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $4,400 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in Schedule C contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 43 of 1957. Sir, this motion, by asking for token votes under 53 heads of the Estimates and small sums under three heads of the Estimates, seeks authority to implement the revision and rationalisation of salary scales in Division IV of the public service which has been agreed after protracted negotiations with the Unions representing the officers who will be benefited. As will be seen, Sir, from Schedule A of the Sessional paper, the task of revision and rationalisation has been a monumental one and it says much for the ability and good sense of all concerned that it has been completed so successfully. Some idea of what the task has involved and of the success which has come of it will be gained from the fact that 55 existing salary scales have been reduced to 12 key salary scales plus five variations. I think that the command paper and the schedules give a clear picture of what has been done. In Schedule A the 17 new scales are shown in the right-hand column by means of the Roman numeral IV plus one or more letters of the alphabet. Comparisons of columns one and two will give a clear picture of how existing posts and grades have been absorbed into new main classifications. Pensionable posts are shown in capital letters, non-pensionable posts are shown in italics. Schedule B gives a list of posts which have been upgraded. Schedule C is the usual financial summary. There is, however, one point which I should mention and which has inadvertently been omitted from the command paper. That refers to the pay of juveniles, that is, officers under 18 years of age, who have been appointed after 1st March, 1957. These officers will be paid salaries as follows: if they are below 16 years of age, they will be paid 70 per cent of the minimum basic salary of the grade to which they are appointed, rounded off to the nearest dollar; if they are over 16 but under 17 years of age, they will be paid 80 per cent of that salary; and if they are over 17 but below 18 years of age, they will be paid 90 per cent of that salary. They will, however, receive variable and other allowances at full adult rates. Sir, this revision of Division IV salaries was the last major revision of salaries in the Government service, and I am sure that hon. Members will be happy that this has been brought to a satisfactory and agreed solution. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second it. Motion accordingly committed to Committee of Supply. Motion and Schedule C considered in Committee of Supply.

The summary is at page 15. Unless any hon. Member wishes to speak on any particular item, I propose to take all the heads together: as involving one principle. Heads 1 to 60*- The sums for Heads 1 to 60, as stated in page 15 of Sesssional Paper No. Cmd.43 of 1957, ordered to stand part of Schedule C. *The following are the details of Heads 1 to 60 appearing in Schdeule C of Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 43 of 1957: SCHEDULE C Head Title Supplementary Provision required $ 1 The Governor 10 (Token) 2 Judicial 10 " 3 Council of Ministers 10 " 4 Legislature 10 " 5 Public Services Commission 10 " 6 Audit 10 " 7 Chief Minister 10 " 8 Chief Secretary 10 " 9 Broadcasting 10 " 10 Chemistry 10 " 11 Chinese Secretariat 10 " 12 Defence Services 10 " 13 Film Censorship 10 " 14 Gardens, Botanic 1,070 15 Information Services 10 (Token) 16 Police 10 " 17 Printing Office 10 " 18 Prisons 10 " 19 Registry of Marriages 140 20 Statistics 10 (Token) 21 Legal 10 " 22 Official Assignee and Public Trustee 10 " 23 Treasury 10 " 27 Accountant-General 10 " 28 Customs and Excise 10 " 29 Estate Duty and Stamp Offices 10 " 30 Income Tax 10 " 31 Ministry of Commerce and Industry 10 " 32 Agricultural 10 " 33 Co-operative Development 10 " 34 Exchange Control 10 " 35 Fisheries 10 " 36 Forest 10 " 37 Imports and Exports Control Registration 10 " 38 Marine 10 " 39 Marine Surveys 10 " 40 Supplies 10 " 41 Trade Marks Registry 10 " 42 Veterinary 10 " 43 Ministry of Local Government, Lands and Housing 10 " 44 Lands and District Offices 10 " 45 Survey 10 " 46 Education 10 " 47 Library, Raffles 10 " 48 Museum, Raffles 10 " 49 Medical and Health 10 " 50 Ministry of Labour and Welfare 10 " 51 Immigration and Passports 2,660 52 Labour 10 (Token) 53 Social Welfare 10 " 54 Ministry of Communication and Works 10 " 55 Civil Aviation 10 " 56 Meteorological Services 10 " 57 Postal Services 10 " 58 Public Works 10 " 60 Telecommunications 10 " -------- Total 4,400 -------- The sum of $4,400 for the Heads of Expenditure and for the services specified in Schedule C ordered to stand part of the motion. Motion and Schedule C reported, without Amendment. Question, "That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $4,400 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in Schedule C contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 43 of 1957.". put and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $4.400 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in Schedule C contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 43 of 1957.

11.34 a.m.

Sir, I beg to move, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Council of Malayan Smallholders Association, Federation of Malaya, be added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance. Sir, this application has been received from the Council of Malayan Small-holders Association under section 13 (1) (e) of the Income Tax Ordinance. Exemption is effected by the inclusion of the name of the public body in the First Schedule to the Ordinance. The Council of Malayan Smallholders Association was formed in 1956 under the auspices of the Government of the Federation of Malaya to promote, foster and protect the interests of the small-holders in the planting industry in Malaya. The original members of the Council were the Smallholders Associations of Johore, Malacca, Negri Sembilan, Perak, Pahang and Trengganu. There is provision in the constitution for the admission to membership of the council of smallholders' associations in other states and settlements, and such other smallholders' associations as the Council may decide to admit. All the income of the Council is derived from the Government of the Federation of Malaya which nominates an officer selected by the Minister for Commerce and Industry as a member of the Executive Committee of the Council. The Malayan Board of Income Tax considers that the Council may properly be included in the First Schedule to the Ordinance with effect from 1st January, 1957, and the Government accepts this advice. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second it.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Council of Malayan Smallholders Association, Federation of Malaya, be added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance.

11.36 a.m.

Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's authority to move, that WHEREAS by a resolution* of the Legislative Assembly on the 7th day of March, 1956 the City Council was empowered to borrow a sum not exceeding $30,000,000 by the creation of debenture stock upon the terms more particularly described in the said resolution: AND WHEREAS by a resolution+ of the Legislative Assembly on the 25th day of *"That this Assembly, in accordance with section 343 of the Municipal Ordinance (Chapter 133), sanctions the raising of a loan not exceeding $30 millions by the City Council for the purposes stated and under the conditions specified in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 12 of 1956." +"That this Assembly, in accordance with section 343 of the Municipal Ordinance (Chapter 133 of the 1936 Edition), sanctions the raising of a loan to be effected by increasing the issue of Singapore City Council 5 per cent Debenture Stock 1956 from an amount not exceeding $30,000,000 as sanctioned by a resolution of the Legislative Assembly on the 7th March, 1956 to an amount not exceeding $50,000,000 for the purposes stated and under the conditions specified in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 12 of 1957." April, 1957 the said sum of $30,000,000 was increased to the sum of $50,000,000: AND WHEREAS under the said resolutions the sum of $36,937,750 was duly subscribed leaving the sum of $13,062,250 still un-subscribed and the Stock in respect thereof unissued: This Assembly, in accordance with section .343 of the Municipal Ordinance (Chapter 133 of the 1936 Edition), sanctions the issue of Stock to raise the said sum of $13,062,250, still un-subscribed at the 30th September, 1957, subject to the provisions of the Ordinance and to the further condition that the said sum of $13,062,250 be raised by the issue of Debenture Stock at a discount of 10 per centum, i.e. at the price of $90 for each $100 of Stock bearing interest at the rate of 5 per cent per annum and repayable at par on the 1st day of May, 1976, or prior thereto at the City Council's option at par on any half-yearly interest date on or after the 1st day of May, 1966, upon six calendar months' notice being given. Sir, you will recall that in March 1956 the Assembly authorised the City Council to issue debenture stock not exceeding $30,000,000 for the further essential expansion of its electricity, gas and water undertakings. The rate of interest approved was 5 per cent and the stock was subject to redemption at the discretion of the City Council at any time between 1966 and 1976 on due notice being given. The issue was intended to be a conversion issue in so far as the City Council had decided to redeem the Singapore Municipal 5 per cent Debenture Stock 1926 and hoped that a substantial number of the holders of that stock would convert into the new stock. The new issue was favourably received by the investing public. The Central Provident Fund supported it generously and by April of this year the full amount of the issue had been taken up. The City Council, however, was still in urgent need of funds for its public utility undertakings, and, rather than float a new loan, it was decided to seek permission to raise the ceiling of the existing loan to $50,000,000. This was the subject of a motion to the Assembly in April of this year when it was resolved that the authorised amount of the 1956 loan would be increased to $50,000,000. Subscriptions continued to be made to the loan for some time after this resolution, was passed. By the middle of the year, however, the downward movement in the value of gilt-edged securities had become marked, yields had increased, and a 5 per cent loan at par had no longer many attractions for investors. The position at the beginning of September was that subscriptions had ceased to come in and a total of $13,000,000 remained unsubscribe. The need of the City Council for funds to meet impending bills, however, remained urgent. The matter was discussed with the City Council authorities and it was decided that in all the circumstances existing at the present time, it would be wiser to issue the balance of the existing loan at a discount rather than float a new loan at a higher rate of interest. The matter has also been discussed with the authorities of the Central Provident Fund, which, as you know, is the main source of investment capital available to Government and the City Council at the present time. The Board has agreed to support the issue of the balance of the existing 5 per cent loan if the issue price is reduced to allow a discount of 10 per cent. This discount gives a yield of 5? per cent to redemption and is in line with the present yield on similarly dated stock in the United Kingdom. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second the motion. Question proposed. 11.41 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in this Assembly on 29th July, in the debate in Committee on the Local Government Bill, the hon. Member for Tanglin moved an amendment which I opposed, and which amendment was to the, effect that loans raised by the City Council should be funded over the life of the physical assets to which they related and not the period from issue to redemption. Now, Sir, the House had been in committee on the Bill for several days and, I suspect, the Press were getting rather bored with the debate. Certainly the Press Gallery was pretty empty and the Public Gallery was quite empty, and I am sure that the star reporters of the various newspapers were absent at that time. But be that as it may, I was reported at that time as saying that there was a feeling that the Malayan dollar was slipping. Now, in point of fact, Sir, I made no reference whatsoever to depreciation, supposed or otherwise, of the Malayan dollar; at least not specifically. I am, Sir, a member of the Currency Board and I know something about these things. But in any case as a banker I am fully conversant with the Currency Ordinance and I know that the Malayan dollar, the Straits dollar, is fully backed by sterling and is at least as strong as sterling. Besides, I repeatedly told this House on a previous occasion that the only currencies to survive the Japanese holocaust were the Straits dollar and the Hongkong dollar, because they had 100 per cent backing. Now, Sir, what I was drawing attention to was at that time the universal depreciation of Currencies, to creeping inflation with its inevitable commitment of world-wide reluctance to invest in gilt-edged securities, that is government and municipal bonds, or indeed in any other type of fixed interest securities. The position of course is exactly as I stated it was and there has been no change in the interim. On the contrary, there has been a further slump in gilt-edged markets in the sterling area following the counter-inflationary measure by the Bank of England in raising the Bank Rate by two per cent to seven per cent per annum. Now, Sir, whether or no such action is an effective weapon in the battle against inflation is a matter of opinion. The relevance of all this, Sir, is this: that however unpalatable it may be to local investors who may have purchased this stock fairly recently and now find that it is offered at a greater discount, the fact is that the present decision is both necessary and inevitable. These are facts which intelligent people must fully realise. There may be those who feel that we should ignore economic changes in other parts of the sterling area, but as long as the existing fiscal and economic links continue with the United Kingdom, we cannot successfully maintain any attitude of economic isolation. It is doubtful if we could. Even if this island were completely and utterly independent, we should still be faced with the same position, as its existence depends on the free and unrestricted movement of money and that presupposes an approximate parity of interest and discount rates with those in the United Kingdom. The City Council wants this money. The City Council must therefore offer the public an adequate and contemporary return on their money. It is as simple as that. Sir, I support the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, that WHEREAS by a resolution of the Legislative Assembly on the 7th day of March, 1956 the City Council was empowered to borrow a sum not exceeding $30,000,000 by the creation of debenture stock upon the terms more particularly described in the said resolution: AND WHEREAS by a resolution of the Legislative Assembly on the 25th day of April, 1957 the said sum of $30,000,000 was increased to the sum of $50,000,000: AND WHEREAS under the said resolution the sum of $36,937,750 was duly subscribed leaving the sum of $13,062,250 still unsubscribe and the Stock in respect thereof un-issued: This Assembly, in accordance with section 343 of the Municipal Ordinance (Chapter 133 of the 1936 Edition), sanctions the issue of Stock to raise the said sum of $13,062,250, still unsubscribe at the 30th September, 1957, subject to the provisions of the Ordinance and to the further condition that the said sum of $13,062,250 be raised by the issue of Debenture Stock at a discount of 10 per centum, i.e. at the price of $90 for each $100 of Stock hearing interest at the rate of 5 per cent per annum and repayable at par on the 1st day of May, 1976, or prior thereto at the City Council's option at par on any half-yearly interest date on or after the 1st day May, 1966, upon six calendar months' notice being given.

11.47 a.m. The Assistant Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Mr Tan Theng Chiang): Sir, I beg to move the motion standing in my name. That this Assembly approves the improvement rate of two per centum on the annual value of all houses, buildings, lands and tenements within the City of Singapore, fixed by the Singapore Improvement Trust under subsection (1) of section 22 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance (Chapter 259) for the year 1958. Sir, this rate cannot, by law, exceed 5 per cent on property within the City area. Hitherto the rate has always been two per cent and the Trustees recommend no change in the rate for 1958. The approval of the Assembly is again required for this rate under the Singapore Improvement Ordinance. This rate, which is in lieu of the improvement rate referred to in section 59 of the Municipal Ordinance, is collected by the City Council and paid over half-yearly to the Trust. The monies from this rate, together with an equivalent Government contribution under section 23 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance, are estimated at $3,150,000 and form one of the major items of revenue of the Trust and are paid into the Improvement Fund. These monies are spent on improvement schemes, the re-housing of persons dis-housed under these schemes, the opening of backlanes, the provision of open spaces in congested areas, and generally on the maintenance of the general improvement plan. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly approves the improvement rate of two per centum on the annual value of all houses, buildings, lands and tenements within the City of Singapore, fixed by the Singapore Improvement Trust under subsection (1) of section 22 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance (Chapter 259) for the year 1958.

11.50 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move the motion standing in my name, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (2) of section 490 of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance (Chapter 207), resolves that the Singapore Port Rules, 1957, published as Notification No. S 204 in the Gazette Supplement No. 59 dated 2nd August, 1957, as contained in Sessional Paper No. S.L. 16 of 1957, be approved. Sir, the Singapore port rules were last reviewed in 1936 and since then many amendments have been made to meet changing conditions. The need for a complete revision of the existing rules has long been recognised and with the new rules, which hon. Members are now asked to approve, this need has been met. In the revision of the port rules, my Ministry has worked in close association with the Marine Police, Immigration, Customs, Port Health, Fisheries and Chemistry Departments, the Singapore Pilots Association and the Singapore Shipowners Association. The last-named association formed a sub-committee to comment on these rules when they were being drafted. It will thus be seen that the new rules represent the agreed views of all parties concerned. A large number of the existing rules have been modified and a few new rules have been introduced. The existing rules dealing with the licensing of cargo, passenger and fishing boats have been omitted from the new rules. It is intended to present them separately in two new sets of rules, namely, the Singapore Licensed Boats Rules and the Singapore Licensed Fishing Boats Rules. In the meantime, the existing port rules relating to cargo, passenger and fishing boats are being kept in force. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (2 of section 490 of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance (Chapter 207), resolves that the Singapore Port Rules, 1957, published as Notification No. S 204 in the Gazette Supplement No. 59 dated 2nd August, 1957, as contained in Sessional Paper No. S.L. 16 of 1957, be approved.

11.53 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move the motion standing in my name, That this Assembly, in accordance with subsection (2) of section 1 of the Control of Imports and Exports Ordinance (Chapter 214), resolves that the aforesaid Ordinance shall continue in force for a further period of one year commencing on the 8th day of December, 1957. Sir, hon. Members will recall that on six previous occasions this Ordinance has come up before the Legislature and its continuance has been extended each time by a period of one year. My motion now seeks to extend the continuance of the Ordinance for a further period of one year as from 8th December, 1957. This Ordinance gives the Minister powers to make orders prohibiting the import and export of goods. However, in keeping with our tree trade policy, these powers are used very sparingly as hon. Members know very well, and except for a comparatively narrow field, most imports are placed on the open general licence and exports are freely licensed. The powers of control, however, can be useful in regulating imports for balance of payments reasons, especially from the hard currency areas, but here again all essential, and many semi-essential, goods are licensed freely. These powers also provide a useful check for the purpose of disease control in connection with imports of plants, animals and meat. In the export field, the powers under this Ordinance are used to keep a check on exports of strategic materials and essential items in short supply in Singapore. At present controls on exports are very few in number. It is, however, necessary for the Minister to have such powers of control and the Trade Advisory Council has been consulted and it agrees with this view. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, in accordance with subsection (2) of section 1 of the Control of Imports and Exports Ordinance (Chapter 214), resolves that the aforesaid Ordinance shall continue in force for a further period of one year commencing on the 8th day of December, 1957.

11.55 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I must formally signify that I have His Excellency the Governor's consent to the moving of this motion, but perhaps before I move it I could refer to a typographical error in line 7 of the motion, page 135 of the Order Paper, where the word "North" Borneo should read "Northern" Borneo. North Borneo is a territory, Northern Borneo a geographical area. May I treat that as a typographical error, Sir?

Yes.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this Assembly takes note that the Government of Singapore, in conjunction with the Government of the Federation of Malaya, proposes to conclude an agreement, in terms as set out in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 44 of 1957, with Malayan Airways Limited, a company to be reconstituted as a public limited liability company registered in Singapore, for the maintenance and continued efficient operation of air services within and between the territories of Malaya, Singapore and Northern Borneo; and approves the purchase by the Government of Singapore, from the surplus funds of the Colony, of a proportion to the value of $500,000, of the share capital of the Company. It is with a feeling of happy relief, Mr Speaker, that I have arrived at this motion in the Assembly. It fulfils my promise given last July that the Assembly should have an opportunity of debating matters connected with this agreement. It also concludes a most exacting and exhaustive period of work. The first file on this was opened at the beginning of 1954 and since the middle of 1955 we have been in frequent and continuous study of the problems involved in this agreement and in the very lengthy discussions which have been necessary in order to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion. The agreement as tabled is substantially final and correctly represents the joint intentions of the Governments of the Federation of Malaya and of Singapore. It is still subject to drafting amendments. I would have wished to give the opportunity to the House for a longer period to study before this debate, but last Saturday was the earliest possible date for tabling and today is the latest practicable day for taking the debate if we are to complete all the necessary matters connected with the agreement before the end of the last extension of the agreement. And I must ask hon. Members to note that we cannot accept any amendments to the terms of the agreement. The Government has a constitutional responsibility for negotiating and signing agreements of this sort. We cannot shirk that responsibility or shove it off on to the House as a whole. I do not, however, expect any amendment to be moved. The agreement is a sound one. It reconciles the divergent interests of all concerned and it undoubtedly serves all concerned in the best way possible in the practical circumstances. I must also ask Members of the House, Sir, to note that this agreement covers only a part of the future operations of Malayan Airways. There is with us a complementary agreement which will be signed between the three Borneo territories of the one part and Malayan Airways of the other part. These two agreements are fully interlocking, complementary, interdependent, and they will together provide the firm basis on which Malayan Airways will be able to operate aviation services throughout the whole Malaya-Borneo area. This agreement is particularly satisfactory, Mr Speaker, because it is an example of international co-operation on the best social principles. We have all been saddened no doubt in recent years by the unhappy spectacle of nations selfishly and greedily seeking what they consider to be their national interests at the expense of other nations. That selfish and greedy conduct of nations has in the past plunged the world into the tragic futility of war and may do so again with horrible results for us all. Here we have a reversal of that unhappy situation. We have five territories coming together and making an agreement which fully embodies the principle that the good of each is best served to the mutual good of all. It is a most happy augury that the Government of the Federation should, at the outset of its period of independence, have so fully accepted and carried out this principle; and that Singapore, with self-government in hand, should have gone along as well. It is a model which the greater Powers of the world might very well follow. From our Singapore point of view, this agreement matches our historic function and duty of being a centre of communications and services for this part of the world, and indeed for the whole world. The five territories concerned will all benefit from having a strong, economically sound airline linking them efficiently. They will derive far greater benefits from that than they could have derived from any policy of isolationism. I will deal briefly with the economic aspects of the agreement when I come to the end of my motion, Sir. But I would point out here that for sound investment the scale of operations of an airline must match the capital invested. If you have airplanes idle on the ground when they could be fruitfully carrying passengers and freight in the air, you are suffering a dead loss; and there is every hope that under this agreement the scale of operations of Malayan Airways will be such as to match the fixed capital employed, because we have these five territories working in real partnership together with Malayan Airways as their common servants. And I should like to pay a high tribute to the Hon. Mr Ong Yoke Lin, who at the time of the major negotiations of this agreement was the Minister for Transport in the Federation. His negotiating skill, his grasp of principle, his statesmanlike leadership played a vital part in securing the general adherence of all concerned to this agreement. We owe him a great debt. I do not think, Mr Speaker, I need go through this agreement clause by clause. If there is any clause I do not refer to which hon. Members would like me to explain, I shall be glad to do so in reply; but I think I ought to draw attention to a few clauses, particularly number 8. Number 8 bears the appearance of a subsidy clause but, as far as Singapore is concerned, it is an appearance rather than a reality. By international custom, international flights get their aviation spirit free of tax and, consequently, Malayan Airways will, under this clause, receive nothing more than all other operators through Singapore also receive. Similarly, as regards the freedom from duties on spare parts and engines and that kind of thing, Singapore is of course a free port so that, as far as Singapore goes, this is a dead-letter clause. The next clause - of very great importance - is clause number 15. It deserves the closest attention of the House. In clause 15 (1) we provide that Malayan Airways shall have exclusive rights on the services in the First Schedule and on additions thereto during seven years, that is the first seven years of the 10-year franchise. And in 15 (2) we provide that Malayan Airways shall, for the remainder of the term of the agreement, a further three years, be entitled to operate all the services which it was operating at the end of the first seven years. Simultaneously, the Federation and Borneo safeguard their special interests by making provision for the possible sharing of additional services between Malayan Airways and Borneo Airways for Borneo, and between Malayan Airways and an airline for Malaya during the last three years of the agreement. This clause, in short, provides transitional possibilities if some transition is necessary during the latter years of the franchise. It is a difficult clause to summarise and indeed a difficult clause to understand. It involves both the technical complexities of the law and the technical complexities of civil aviation practice, and the combination of all these complexities produces a sort of verbal algebra which personally takes me a great deal of time to make sense of. If hon. Members want me to make it clear no doubt they will say so and I will try to clear up their minds in my reply to the debate. This clause does illustrate the difficulty of putting into readily comprehensible and not too unwieldy language an agreement which concerns different territories with to some extent different special needs. We had envisaged the writing of an agreement which would have covered all the five territories of Malaya and Borneo on the one part and the Malayan Airways on the other part, but when we came to writing it down it became completely unwieldy and it was decided that there should be a separate Borneo agreement which would be complementary, as I have already stated. So much for clause 15. Clause 16 is just worth a mention, Mr Speaker. It links up with clause 5 and it provides the basis for a potential expansion of Malayan Airways on to new overseas routes. Now we can pass to clause 18, I think, Mr Speaker, and this is one to which the House will assuredly give very close attention. We are all agreed, I am sure, on the essential need that our local citizens should be able both to qualify themselves and to exercise their qualifications in positions of responsibility and authority and leadership; in short that Malayan Airways should be truly Malayan as well as fully efficient; and this clause provides the means to attain that objective. Careful thought and planning will be necessary in this connection since at present the local staff, excluding the air hostesses, form a little under 25 per cent of the air crews and a little under 50 per cent of the qualified engineers. There will inevitably be a period of years during which expatriate staff must be retained in employment. I do not propose to prejudice the work of the new Malayan Airways Board, nor of our Government directors on the Board, by a discussion of details or by acrimonious references to past history. I have full confidence that the new Malayan Airways will be wise and just and practical in dealing with both local and expatriate staff. If at present any member of Malayan Airways' staff has feelings of doubt as to his future, I am sure that those doubts will vanish as the new Malayan Airways Board develops its policies. In this connection the close links which will henceforth exist between our airline and two great international airlines offer marked advantages in staffing matters. Clause 19 will also no doubt receive the close attention of hon. Members. Nothing is of greater importance to Singapore than that the development of our economy should not be obstructed by trade disputes. This clause provides for conciliation and discussion by which, properly used, trade disputes can be avoided, and I have full confidence again that in this matter the Board will act with practical wisdom for the good of all concerned. Hon. Members will no doubt particularly welcome 19 (c) which envisages that the staff organisations will not concern themselves solely with their terms of employment and conditions of employment, but will also play their part in matters of the efficiency of the services which they help to provide for the general good of the five territories. In regard to both these clauses, hon. Members will, I am sure, bear in mind that there will be two Government directors on the Board and that they will be well able to represent the best interests of Singapore and of the Federation, and of their citizens, in all matters. Clause 23 remains for a brief mention, Mr Speaker. It is important because it enshrines the very valuable principle of continuing co-operation between the two Malayan Governments. Co-operation is a practical matter of great importance. I do not think I need deal further now with the agreement but it does remain for me to deal with the question of the Government's purchase of part of the share capital of Malayan Airways.

I suggest this is an appropriate time to suspend?

If you wish to, Sir.

I shall take the Chair again at half-past two. Sitting accordingly suspended at 12.13 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.

Consideration of motion resumed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have done my best to deal with the major points in the agreement. I must now deal with the last part of my motion which concerns the investment of $500,000 from the surplus funds of Singapore in the reconstructed public Malayan Airways. I think I had better start by giving a simple account of what is actually going to happen over the capital of Malayan Airways. The existing issued share capital amounts to $2� million made up of 250,000 shares of $10 each. 550,000 new shares are to be issued, thus making a total capital of $8 million: that is, 800,000 shares of $10 each. This new share issue will be distributed amongst the existing shareholders in appropriate proportions according to their holdings. Thereafter, the Government of Singapore will buy 50,000 shares. The Government of the Federation of Malaya will do the same and so acting jointly will the three Borneo Governments. There will thus be a total holding of $l� million held by the three Governments. Just over $4� million worth of shares will be bought by QANTAS/BOAC and just under $2� million will be offered to the public of Malaya and Borneo. Simultaneously, Malayan Airways will be transformed into a public limited liability company. The effect of these transactions deserves the attention of the House. It is best illustrated by considering the profits reaped by a single $10 share. These will amount altogether to $22 made up of $11.40 from past profits, formerly allocated to Reserve, and $10.60 from appreciation of fixed assets. In short, a $10 share-based on an accountant's valuation - now has a market value of $32. From the point of view of the shareholders, that is no doubt a very happy situation but I think I had better make a few comments on it in order that Members of the House may see the situation in a more precise perspective. I should not like Members of the House to form the impression that by putting in $500,000 into the new Malayan Airways, we can expect to reap profits on that scale and to take them out of Malayan Airways and use them in some way to supplement the general revenue of the Colony. Let us first examine the $11.40 which comes from profits formerly allocated to Reserve. The management of Malayan Airways has consistently followed the very wise and very desirable policy of ploughing back a large proportion of profits into the industry. The result has been a relatively low rate of annual dividend. On capital actually invested, as distinct from the original capital, dividends have averaged only 5 per cent before tax. Shareholders who have forgone larger dividends in the past are now drawing in a lump sum what they have forgone in the past and if we add together the dividends actually distributed plus the lump sum which is now being drawn in respect of dividends forgone in the past, we find that we get an average annual return on the capital invested of about, I think, 14.2 per cent. If hon. Members are tempted to deduce from this that we ought to invest all our money in this sort of enterprise because we are getting a very high rate of profit, they ought to think again. This rate of profit of 14 per cent is not a very high rate for a risk-bearing enterprise and an airline is emphatically a risk-bearing enterprise. One single crashed aeroplane can wipe out its profits. There is no salvage from a crashed aeroplane; there is a dead loss of capital. Moreover, if you have an accident or accidents, you also suffer a loss of public confidence and a loss of goodwill amongst the travelling public and that will be reflected in a lasting loss of revenue. Now, thanks to the skill and reliability of its staff, Malayan Airways has a high - I can say an extraordinarily high-record for safety and for punctuality. I do not think that any other airline in the world has a better record. Malayan Airways has a 100 per cent safety record and about 98 to 99 per cent record for regularity of services. Over ten years of operation, during which it has carried some 1,040,000 passengers and it has operated some 159,000 revenue hours, Malayan Airways has never killed a passenger or lost an aeroplane. That remarkable record of safe flying is reflected in the fact that reserves have been built up and that they have not been wiped out through disastrous accidents. Now to provide for future re-equipment, it will continue to be necessary for Malayan Airways to put aside large sums to Reserve. Consequently, it will be necessary for them to seek to operate at a satisfactory rate of profit. Every effort must be made to ensure that the future operations of Malayan Airways are as satisfactory in regard to punctuality, safety, efficiency and financial return as their past operations have been. So much for the reserve aspect of the gain on the shares. The other aspect is the appreciation of fixed assets, and, of course, I need hardly point out that all fixed assets inevitably increase in their money value on the grounds of what the hon. Mr Sutherland was saying just now : -that there is a world-wide creeping inflation: as the money gets smaller, so the value of any assets in terms of the smaller money gets bigger. But the Malayan dollar has probably suffered less inflation than many other currencies and I would not like to guess what the element of inflation is in this appreciation of fixed assets; I do not think we need attach too much importance to it. A much more significant factor is the eleven Dakotas which belong to Malayan Airways. Although the Dakota is old and in a sense obsolescent, it has up till now had a high market value. The Dakota is a very suitable aeroplane for the sort of operations that Malayan Airways has conducted and as those operations are fairly widespread, naturally it has fairly high value in the world market. But we must remember this, that insofar as appreciation of fixed assets accounts for profits in this case, those profits are a windfall which cannot be expected to recur. It is possible, of course, that they may recur; there may be a favourable world market at some future date for the aircraft which may be owned by Malayan Airways, but it is not a thing on which anybody can count, or which you can take into your expectations or your planning. It is purely in the nature of a windfall. So much for the past profitability of Malayan Airways. We cannot in this matter attempt to predict the future profitability on the basis of the past. I am not going to attempt to guess what the future profitability may be. There are a great many factors which, in some cases, are necessarily unknown factors, in the sense that we cannot predict or control them. They operate by causes lying outside our own country. Direct profitability is not, however, the criterion by which we should judge our proposed investment in Malaya Airways. We are concerned not with making profits but with providing services. Our aim is set out in the second "Whereas" in the Agreement: "... it is the desire of the Governments to continue to provide for safe, economic and efficient air transport services;". Such services are of the greatest importance not only for Singapore but also for the Federation and for the three Borneo territories - in fact, for all the Government partners who are now undertaking this new aviation development. Now, if we are going to maintain those efficient air services which are so important, there will necessarily have to be a large capital investment because the aviation world is an intensely competitive one. We must have aeroplanes that fully match the needs and expectations of the travelling public and aeroplanes of that sort necessarily cost money. Now, it is very proper that we should aim and the new Malayan Airways should aim to provide all or as much as possible of the capital required out of profits. That can only happen if the rate of profit is reasonably high and if there is thoroughly safe flying to make sure that there are no accidents to wipe out profits which have been accumulated. If Malayan Airways or any other airline cannot find its capital from its own profits, then it will necessarily have to find the capital elsewhere: that is to say, either in the private market, the ordinary money market or from Government support of one kind or another. Now, the chances of getting large scale capital investment in an airline are not, on the world picture, very good. I have got here some world figures of airline profit or loss expressed as a percentage of turnover. In 1951, over the whole world picture, the loss was 1.9 per cent; in 1952, it was 3.6 per cent; in 1953, it was 1.3 per cent; in 1954, it was .4 per cent. Over all those four years, there was a loss - in some cases, a substantial loss. In 1955, the tide turned and there was a profit of 2.4 per cent gross on turnover. 2.4 per cent, I can point out, is hardly a commercial rate of profit. These figures are before payment of fixed interest.

On a point of information, Sir. Am I right in assuming that these figures being provided to us are figures of international airlines and not of internal monopoly airlines?

They were given to me as world figures taking in all types of airlines together. It will be a mistake to assume that the international airlines are necessarily more in the red than the, what is called, monopoly airlines.

Giving a monopoly. There is no competition.

It is surely an extraordinary illusion that Malayan Airways has no competition. There is, of course, vigorous competition from road and rail. [Interruption.] The hon. Member is not aware of it. He will only find out by experience that there is in fact real competition between road, rail and air in Singapore and in Malaya and if he doubts it, he can refer to Malayan Railways and get their views about it. On the question of monopoly operators or local operators - not international ones - making better profits, as he seems to be implying, perhaps I should give him an example. The United States of America is an extremely rich and wealthy country with a very high standard of efficiency and low operational cost - particularly staff cost - and there in that great and free economy, the Congress has found it necessary to pass a Bill (it went to the President last August) authorising Government guarantees up to 90 per cent on loans required by local U.S. operators. If Singapore had had to find from public funds - from the surplus funds of the Government - the capital now needed for Malayan Airways, the burden would have been very considerable indeed. It could only be met by sacrificing other development - schools, hospitals, a unified transport system or flood control or some other equally important work. Our investment in Malayan Airways is partly an act of partnership. It is an act of partnership between the five Governments concerned and it is also an act of partnership between the commercial operators and the Government cooperating. It is also a guarantee of our firm purpose to do all in our power to maintain our aviation services at the very high level which our status as a world communications centre requires. We must therefore note with satisfaction that the very efficient past management of the operations of Malayan Airways has made it possible to provide for the continued operation of this airline with strong new backing, with every reasonable prospect of economic soundness and of operational efficiency, and without a heavy requirement for investment from public funds. There has been no loss of capital for Singapore in this matter. All the capital accumulated from the past will continue to be employed and to give employment. We are also retaining an excellent working organisation with a very high level of skill, of experience and of public goodwill. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

I second the motion. Question proposed.

On a point of elucidation, Sir. The Minister for Communications and Works rattled off at some speed the distribution of the $10 million worth of shares. I would be obliged if he could at a slower speed tell us how this $10 million will be distributed.

I am afraid I must have indeed spoken too fast, which complaint has often been made to me by those who have to record my spoken words. The situation is that it is not $10 million but $8 million on revaluation - the capital altogether in the new Malayan Airways. Of this $8 million, after all transactions are completed, QANTAS/BOAC will hold just over $4 million. The five Governments (the Federation of Malaya, Singapore and the three Borneo territories) will each hold $500,000 making a total of $1� million; and the remainder which is just under $2� million will be offered to the public of Malaya and Borneo.

On a further point of elucidation, Sir. What about the present capital of $2� million of Malayan Airways?

I think, Mr Speaker, Sir, I had better read very slowly what I have already read very carefully once. I think the hon. Member must have not quite heard what I was saying. There is an existing issued share capital of $2� million made up of 250,000 shares of $10 each. New shares are being issued - 550,000 new shares - which make up a total of 800.000 shares still at $10 each, thus making a total capital of $8 million. This new share issue will, in the first instance, be distributed amongst the existing shareholders who will then in their capacity as owners sell them out to those who wish to buy them.

Could we be informed of the financial operations by which the $2� million worth of shares in the existing Malayan Airways will be converted into $4 million or $5 million worth of shares in the new Malayan Airways? How does that come about?

I think the hon. Member is taking me to a level of commercial practice where my approach is timid like that of a rabbit on meeting a boa-constrictor. I am not sure that I could explain in detail precisely how this operates under the company law and commercial practice. As I understand it, you create 550,000 new bits of paper, each entitled "$10 share", and these are distributed amongst various shareholders in proportion to their existing holdings. If I hold one quarter, then I have o get one quarter of the new issue; and then I shall have a claim on the actual property of the airline in relation to the shares I hold; so that its break-up or distribution value would be on that basis. But I am afraid that I have not expected to be taken into this type of company practice.

Since we do not propose to be rabbits in the face of boa-constrictors, could we ask the Minister for Communications and Works to table a memorandum or a White Paper giving all these essential facts before we debate this matter?

Surely, the hon. Member will appreciate that this has nothing whatever to do with this Assembly. It is purely a transaction between commercial shareholders who are making a normal share transaction in the ordinary way. This Assembly has nothing to do with it except insofar as, by not altering the company laws, this Assembly gives sanction to whatever they do. It is not a matter in which this Assembly should interfere in any way. All that we have to say is that we approve the Government proposals to acquire a holding in the newly reorganised and reconstituted public limited liability company.

We are not quite such rabbits as to believe that $500,000 worth of Government funds is not our business. It is our business and we want to know just what we are buying and why we are giving this monopoly away on these terms.

Sir, it is still elucidation. I take it?

It is still elucidation.

Sir, what we are buying is 1/16th of the new Malayan Airways. 2:54 p.m.

The Minister for Communications and Works had hoped to take the sting out of our criticism because very little time had been given to the Opposition to study what is a very important agreement offered by the two Governments to a private limited company. The first thing he has not explained is: why did the Government give BOAC and QANTAS - two public corporations of the British and Australian Governments - 51 per cent of our national airline's controlling share? The way he presented his argument this morning indicated that it was a case of the Government not having sufficient funds to acquire 51 per cent of the shares. Therefore it decided to give BOAC/QANTAS 51 per cent, sell by public auction or even by public subscriptions $24, million worth of shares and the three Governments together raise $14 million worth of shares. Now I would like to ask him and have a categorical answer, yes or no: was it or was it not a demand of QANTAS and BOAC or Malayan Airways that they should have a controlling interest in the company? That is the first point. If they did not want the controlling interest, why were they given a controlling interest and if they wanted the controlling interest, what was the reason for it? Mr Speaker, Sir, we are now presented with a fait accompli. Last year when we raised this question of the renewal of the franchise we were informed that there would be a full opportunity for debate of all the terms and conditions. Now we are told, "Here is the agreement. We are not obliged to tell it to the Assembly but we are doing it as a matter of courtesy." We are first of all informed that all this is the good work of the Minister of Transport of the Federation and a large bouquet was handed to him. Well, Sir, the bouquet may well have been deserved but I have a feeling that this is another instance where the Singapore Government has decided to hide behind the Federation sarong. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister took us through several clauses in the proposed agreement rather rapidly this morning. The first question I would like to ask him is: why is there no provision in the proposed agreement as to what is to happen if the agreement is not renewed at the end of the franchise? Clause 21 reads: "(1) Not later than the 30th day of October, 1964, the parties shall consult together to consider what further arrangements, if any, should be made at the end of the period of this Agreement. (2) Each party shall, as soon as possible after such consultation and, in any case, not later than the 30th day of October, 1966, inform the other party whether or not it desires-

Well, Sir, that is a nice easy passage for this happy agreement. We have had a very lengthy speech from the Member for Tanjong Pagar. Most of it was prepared and was unnecessary in the light of explanations already given: but since he has asked for them, I will try and give those explanations again. And the rest of it, there was not much in it. I will take his points as I got them down in my notes. "Why not enough time?" Well, I have dealt with that one. We had just got to the point during this week that I received the Borneo agreement; and that agreement necessarily had to be assured-

On a point of elucidation, Sir.

If the Minister will give way. Mr Francis Thomas resumed his seat.

I hesitated to put forward this information in case the Minister explained that he knew nothing about it but will the Minister confirm that, in fact, in the case of the Borneo Airways, the three Governments will hold 51 per cent of the shares?

This is really a matter concerning the Borneo Government.

That is not the point. It is a matter of principle.

I do not think I can safely deal with what the Borneo Governments are doing in their subsidiary airline which is again an airline linked with the BOAC and which they regard as a very vital airline for their own internal purposes. I could find out from the Borneo Governments whether they object to the hon. Member having the information he asked for but I do not think that I should try to give him the precise nature of the rather complicated proceedings between the Borneo Governments and the other interests. He asked, "Why a monopoly?" Air services must be a monopoly if they are going to pay. It is possible to increase the number of taxis on the street indefinitely, but an aeroplane must fly at a proper loading. If the load is insufficient, then it flies at a loss. You cannot expect to have capital invested in airlines unless you give the investors at least a reasonable chance of recovering their costs. I have indicated that although the profits of Malayan Airways have been satisfactory in the past, there is no certainty of their continuing at that level in the future. On the world picture, they have done extremely well but you cannot gamble on the fortunate past. He made a point about not enough public funds. Well, the simple fact is there: We are just hard up for money. We could invest our money in Malayan Airways if we wanted to, but of course if Singapore had wished to have a controlling interest, then obviously the other countries would have said, "Well,, we are not going to have our airlines at the mercy of the Singapore Government. It has to be a partnership." It would have been necessary to carry out a joint purchase, presumably in equal proportions, by all the Governments holding an equal proportion of the capital. It is a most difficult manoeuvre and would certainly be doomed to failure if it were to be tried at all. He wanted a categorical answer to the question why BOAC/QANTAS wanted a controlling interest. Well, the obvious answer is that they wanted to control the thing. The obvious danger to all people likely to invest in this country is that ill-judged and inexperienced people may get into power and that they may then carry out ill-judged and inexperienced policies. I do not think you will get anybody to put capital into Singapore in partnership with the Government unless they have a reasonable guarantee that their voice will be heard and that they will not be pushed around in an ill-judged way as a result of political pressures. I forget if I have dealt fully with the question of not enough time. I think I was interrupted at that stage. The simple fact is, of course, that we had to spend a good deal of time in getting this agreement up to tabling stage. There had to be a completion; we had to wait for the Borneo Governments to complete their parallel complementary agreement and the consequence has been that we are rather pushed for time. Now, a rather curious question, of what happens at the end of the franchise? The hon. Member read clause 21 and I do not think I need read it again. It says perfectly plainly "what further arrangements, if any, should be made at the end of the period of this agreement." The only thing that emerged from his question was an apparent assumption on his part that this Government would still be in power in 1967. At least he asks what our policy would be and what we intended to do in 1967. The fact of the matter, of course, is that we have provided a very adequate agreement with, as I pointed out in my original remarks, a transitional clause for a transitional period of three years - the last three out of the ten years of the franchise - and there is no point in trying to go further and to presume that we are going to do this or that at the end of ten years. We have not got that amount of foresight to see the future; nor has anybody else. "Why was not Air India invited to participate?" The hon. Member objected to what he called "whites", I think. I can only say that we do not-at least I certainly do not - when conducting negotiations, work from any racialist or racist approach. Air India is an efficiently run and a highly competitive international airline and if they had approached us, we would have considered it. In fact, they did not, and we are perfectly satisfied with QANTAS/BOAC as an effective partnership on a larger scale, with more advantages to offer to us. There is no reason whatever to suppose that Air India would have been able to give us any better or more helpful terms than what we have got from QANTAS/BOAC.

All your Ministers prefer to travel by Air India.

As to that, I cannot say. There are sabotage problems. He asked, "What is locally domiciled staff?" I am afraid that is a very thin one again in respect of clause 18. Obviously, a person locally domiciled in Singapore is not locally domiciled in Kuala Lumpur nor is he locally domiciled in Kuching, Brunei or Jesselton and you have got to find some phrase which adequately represents the fact that we are dealing with five different territories, and not with one. We have provided in clause 12 what is much more significant: "The restriction in favour of British subjects . . . shall be extended to include Singapore citizens when Singapore citizenship has been established by legislation." And the company is bound to employ them. Eighty per centum under that category should provide adequately for the point which the hon. Member has in mind. "Malayan Airways' fares are the highest in South-East Asia." I have a great deal of information here, Mr Speaker, but it will take me a little time to find the exact references I want. Now, here are the average fares in Malayan cents per passenger mile for some of the airlines operating in this part of the world: Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam 39.5 cents per passenger mile. Indonesia 39.6 cents per passenger mile. Malayan Airways 28.1 cents per passenger mile for what they call their standard service, I think and 21.1 cents per passenger mile for their tourist services. The tourist services are the more accurately comparable with the standard of service provided in the other airlines: Thailand 20.9 cents per passenger mile. Burma 20.6 cents per passenger mile. India 15.4 cents per passenger mile. Now, on that table, there are two airlines with a very much higher rate indeed, not very far off double, that is, Indonesia and Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam: then there are more which are substantially the same - Thailand and Burma running just level with Malayan Airways; then there is India down below five or six cents cheaper per passenger mile. Of course, there is a difference in the standard of living in these territories and in the standard of wage rates. I think it is fair to say that probably the passengers in Malayan Airways can (a) well afford these fares and (b) get a better standard of service or a very good standard of service; and that the possibility of keeping the prices down does, of course, depend on the wage rates prevailing in that particular territory. But anyhow there is no ground at all for saying that Malayan Airways' fares are the highest in South-East Asia. That sort of remark should be withdrawn when it is made. These wild allegations should not be made against what is in fact very largely a Malayan-operated concern. From a suggestion that our fares are unreasonably high, it would naturally follow that either the Malayans on the staff are unreasonably inefficient or that their wages are too high.

Or their expatriates are getting too much.

Another rather empty point: he noted that disputes go to an umpire; first you put up two arbitrators and if they cannot agree, it goes to an umpire. Then he asked, "How if they cannot agree on an umpire?" Well, of course, if he had read the clause with any attention, he would have seen that the arbitrators agree on their umpire in writing before they enter on the business of the reference. If they could not agree on an umpire, we should with draw our arbitrators and find two arbitrators who could agree on an umpire. "Why is Government taking only a token share in Malayan Airways?" Really, Mr Speaker, I thought half my remarks were directed to that point. Perhaps that is why I said that it was probably a prepared speech which had not been readjusted in the light of what I actually had to say but I do not think that it is necessary to say it all over again. The only way in which we could have found the money would have been by sacrificing development in other directions. Of course, the bottom of the barrel is not empty. There is some money but we have also got a great many calls on our money and we cannot-

Find $4 million.

- find $4 million without taking $4 million away from something else. It is a simple concept to understand. The hon. Member seems to think that the Government has a bottomless purse from which it can draw out money without ever coming to the end of it. I think the last point of any significance he made was: why was this motion moved by myself when it is in fact the Chief Secretary who has to sign it? I should point out that international air agreements have a dual aspect. They are partly commercial but they are also diplomatic or foreign affairs types of agreements and in this case the foreign affairs aspect predominates to the extent that it is appropriate that the Minister who has to concern himself with foreign affairs has to sign the agreement. That is why although I am the unhappy Minister who has had to do all the work, the pleasure of signing will fall to my friend and colleague the Chief Secretary.

Your Federation counterpart is signing.

My Federation counterpart is in an independent territory. We are not yet independent.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly takes note that the Government of Singapore, in conjunction with the Government of the Federation of Malaya, proposes to conclude an agreement, in terms as set out in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 44 of 1957, with Malayan Airways Limited, a company to be reconstituted as a public limited liability company registered in Singapore, for the maintenance and continued efficient operation of air services within and between the territories of Malaya, Singapore and Northern Borneo; and approves the purchase by the Government of Singapore, from the surplus funds of the Colony, of a proportion, to the value of 5500,000, of the share capital of the Company.

3.25 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move the motion standing in my name, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (3) of section 28 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Ordinance (Chapter 148), resolves that the Food and Drugs Regulations, 1957, published as Notification No. S. 252 in the Gazette Supplement No. 73 of 4th October, 1957, as contained in Sessional Paper No. S.L. 18 of 1957, be approved. Sir, these regulations have been prepared in consultation with the City Council, the Rural Board, the University of Malaya and the Department of Chemistry and they have also been considered by the Medical Advisory Council which the Members of this House are aware is a body of professional experts appointed to advise me on technical and professional matters. The principle of these regulations is to revise the provisions for protecting the public against the sale of food containing injurious ingredients and against mis-description of food and drugs and to provide fuller powers to secure that food is not contaminated in the course of preparation, distribution or sale. Considerable amendments to existing regulations for the protection of the public against mis-description of food and drugs have been brought into force both in the United Kingdom and also in the Federation of Malaya and the regulations in Singapore have also been amended to bring them into line as far as possible with the existing regulations of these countries. The opportunity has also been taken to introduce in Part VI of the regulations, Sir, rules for the preparation of food. Sir, I beg to move.

I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (3) of section 28 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Ordinance (Chapter 148), resolves that the Food and Drugs Regulations, 1957, published as Notification No. S. 252 in the Gazette Supplement No. 73 of 4th October, 1957, as contained in Sessional Paper No. S.L. 18 of 1957, be approved.

3.27 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move, That this Assembly resolves- that the Report of the Standing Orders Committee, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 13 of 1957, be adopted; and that, pursuant to section 54 of the Singapore Colony Orders in Council, 1955 and 1956, the amendments to the Standing Orders as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 13 of 1957 be made to the Standing Orders of this Assembly with effect from 1st November,1957. I should like, Sir, at this stage, to thank you for your valuable assistance in the deliberations of the Standing Orders Committee as a result of which the Committee has recommended that certain amendments should be made to our present Standing Orders. The amendments proposed are set out in detail in the Report contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 13 of 1957 and I do not propose to go through them one by one. The Report has been in the hands of hon. Members for some time and I have no doubt that they have already studied its recommendations thoroughly. Sir, I beg to move.

I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly resolves- that the Report of the Standing Orders Committee, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 13 of 1957, be adopted; and that, pursuant to section 54 of the Singapore Colony Orders in Council, 1955 and 1956, the amendments to the Standing Orders as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 13 of 1957 be made to the Standing Orders of this Assembly with effect from 1st November, 1957.

3.29 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move, That the Report of the Select Committee on the Singapore Citizenship Bill, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 18 of 1957, be adopted. Sir, the Singapore Citizenship Bill was committed to a Select Committee at the sitting of the Assembly held on 11th September. Sessional Paper No. L.A. 18 of 1957 shows that the Committee held five meetings. The minutes of these meetings can be found in Appendix III and Appendix IV contains the minutes of the meetings at which the Committee heard oral evidence from various individuals and from representatives of certain organisations. Hon. Members will note that careful consideration has been given to the representations made both orally and in writing and as a result certain changes have been made to the Bill. Certain of these amendments are technical ones designed to improve the drafting of the Bill and I do not propose to go into these in detail as they are fully explained in the official report on the proceedings of the Select Committee. Possibly, the most notable change has been the reduction of the residential qualification from ten years to eight years. As a result of further consideration and discussion, it has been agreed that it would be easier from an administrative point of view to reduce the qualification to eight years. This will greatly simplify registration as identity cards were issued late in 1948. Another important amendment, Sir, is the proviso added to clause 12 of the Bill which provides that before the Minister refuses an application, he shall refer the case to an Advisory Committee consisting of three persons appointed by the Governor in Council. In making his decision, the Minister shall have regard to any report made to him by this Advisory Committee. Hon. Members will also notice that a new Part VI has been added to the Bill. Sir, as is well known, the main purpose of the Bill is to enable persons who are qualified to become citizens under this law to take part in the general elections next year and it is therefore necessary for the initial registration of citizens to take place as quickly as possible in order that the electoral rolls can be prepared. It is an All-Party decision that a three-month period for initial registration is sufficient for people to have their names put on the electoral rolls and so take part in the forthcoming elections. At it is now going to be made so easy for people to be registered, it is necessary for the Minister to have powers to cancel that registration. Following such cancellation, the person concerned can reapply for registration in the normal way. These are the most important amendments and, as I said before, the others are designed to improve the drafting of the Bill. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I second the motion. Question proposed. 3.37 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, At the end, to add "subject to the recommittal of the Bill in respect of clauses 3 and 8 and one new clause immediately after clause 5 to a Committee of the whole Assembly".

Can I have that in writing, please? Amendment handed in.

The amendment is in order. Please proceed.

Sir, this Assembly is going to enact a law by which it proposes to give, under certain conditions, citizenship status to the people who reside or are domiciled in Singapore. Sir, when I went through the Select Committee Report, I found that a certain section of people made certain representations. They claim that those who are already registered as Citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies should be recognised automatically. Sir, I think that that is a very reasonable suggestion which, I beg to submit, the Select Committee completely ignored. These people have unmistakably shown their loyalty to Singapore by swearing allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen and to Singapore. It is not right to insist, every time there is a change of government, that citizenship registration should be renewed. According to this Bill, I think about 60,000 people who are Citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies will be asked to register again. Sir, we are not asking anything new by this registration. The same forms are to be filled in by the same section of people, swearing allegiance to the same person, that is, Her Majesty the Queen, and to the same country, that is Singapore. I think the Government finds pleasure in making more people come forward and register but the Government is not encouraging people to come forward and register because it is now creating a feeling amongst those who have expected themselves to be citizens of Singapore that they are completely ignored because they are asked to register again. The Government is really discouraging people from coming forward to register. When Singapore was directly under the colonial rule a new method of registration of citizenship was imposed on the people. I think, Sir, in 1946, the people were asked to register. Many people did go to register and there was an election. The result was that Mr C. C. Tan became the head of the then Government. When he became the head of the Government, he discovered a new method of registration of citizenship. By this new method, he deprived those people who elected him of their voting rights. After Mr C. C. Tan, our former Chief Minister Mr David Marshall proposed a new method of registration of citizenship. Now the Hon. the Chief Minister Dr Lim Yew Hock has invented a new method of registration of citizenship. As there is going to be an election in 1958, there will be another Chief Minister. Surely there will again be another method of citizenship registration. Sir, by these tactics, this Government must realise that the citizens of Singapore are losing faith in it. Whenever there is a change of government, a new method of citizenship registration will be devised. Another irony is this. This Assembly is not a constituent Assembly. This is a legislative Assembly. We were elected under the Rendel Constitution and we represent the interests of a certain section of the people. Not only are you not doing that, but you are depriving those people who elected you of their right to vote. The people who are Citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies whom you are asking to register are the very people who elected you to this Assembly.

I was never elected.

I am sorry, Sir. By "you", I mean the Government, and that is a most unfortunate thing. This Government is finding ways and means of depriving the voters who elected them of their voting rights. Therefore, I propose this amendment and if it goes to the Committee stage. I will explain it in detail. My proposed amendment reads: "Every person who immediately on the coming into operation of this Ordinance having been registered as a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies shall be a citizen of Singapore."

I second the motion, reserving my right to speak, Sir.

Sir, the hon. Members are anxious to complete the business set down for today. May I therefore seek the general assent of this Assembly to enable me to move a motion under Standing Order 7 (11) for the exemption of Standing Orders?

Has the Hon. the Chief Minister the assent of hon. Members? Hon. Members indicated assent.

Thank you, Sir. Sir, I beg to move, That the proceedings on the remaining items of business set down for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 7.

I second it.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the proceedings on the remaining items of business set down for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 7.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That at its rising today, this Assembly do stand adjourned to Monday, 18th November, 1957.

I second it.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That at its rising today, this Assembly do stand adjourned to Monday, 18th November, 1957.

Debate resumed.

The original Question was, "That, the Report of the Select Committee on the Singapore Citizenship Bill, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 18 of 1957, be adopted." Since which, there has been an amendment moved, At the end, to add "subject to the recommittal of the Bill in respect of clauses 3 and 8 and one new clause immediately after clause 5 to a Committee of the whole Assembly". The Question is, "That the words proposed to be added, be there added." 3.45 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I find it difficult to understand the reason for the amendment proposed by the Member for Farrer Park. This Citizenship Bill was drawn up as a result of the agreement reached in London during the constitutional talks. The agreement was debated in this Assembly in April; the hon. Member was present. The agreement was adopted and as a result of that, the Bill was drawn up in order to give effect to the wishes of the Assembly to see that persons who are qualified to become citizens can be registered in order that they can take part in the elections under the new constitution. The Member for Farrer Park would have us believe that the Government was employing all sorts of tactics. I cannot understand that insinuation, Sir. These citizenship proposals were as a result of an All-Party conference and the recommendations of the All-Party conference were approved by this Assembly before the All-Party delegation left for London for the constitutional talks. It is therefore clear. Sir, that the Government is against the amendment.

Sir, on a point of information. Whatever the proposed amendment the Member for Farrer Park may move, I would like to have information on this: if a citizen of the United Kingdom applies to be a citizen of Singapore, will he have to renounce his allegiance to the United Kingdom Government or to Her Majesty the Queen? If he holds a United Kingdom passport, will a Singapore passport be issued to him if he applies for Singapore citizenship? And if a Singapore passport is issued, will that Singapore passport be recognised internationally?

I now understand, Sir, why the Member for Queenstown seconded the motion, it would appear that he does not understand what this Bill is for. He has difficulty in understanding the agreement reached in London and what the citizenship proposals were. In the case of the citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies, what is required of them before they can become citizens of Singapore is that they should take an oath to the Queen and to the constitution. That is all.

On a point of clarification, Sir. Will that mean then that a person can hold dual citizenship

Order. I think the hon. Member is out of order. He should have made his speech when he seconded the amendment.

I am just asking for information, Sir. 3.47 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, although I am not in favour of the amendment, yet I would like to seek guidance from you: when a Member asks for a clause to be considered in Committee, we always allow that. We have done that previously and I think that is the usual practice.

Order. I was under the impression that the hon. Member was rising on a point of order.

No, Sir, I am asking for guidance.

I had better guide the hon. Member then. The relevant Standing Order 55 (3) reads: 'Upon a motion to adopt the report of a Select Committee on a Bill, any Member may propose an amendment to add, at the end of the motion or the original motion may include at the end thereof, the words "subject to the recommittal of the Bill [either wholly or in respect only of some particular part or parts of the Bill or of some proposed new clause or new schedule] to a Committee of the whole Assembly", and if that motion is agreed to, the Bill shall stand so recommitted...' I did, on a previous occasion, suggest that a procedure should be evolved whereby, when a Member asked for certain clauses to be reconsidered in Committee, it was as a matter of course that the motion should be accepted; but as the Standing Orders now stand, we must still go through the procedure of debate, and only if the motion is agreed to, then there can be a recommittal to a Committee of the whole Assembly. But today perhaps hon. Members will have noticed that there has been an amendment made to the relevant Standing Order which would in effect provide for the procedure I have indicated: that is, when a Member wishes certain clauses of a Bill to be recommitted to a Committee of the whole Assembly, that will be done as a matter of course, but that amendment to the Standing Order does not come into operation until the 1st of November. Amendment negatived.

The original Question is before the House.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill was the result of co-operative effort by all the Parties. We have considered every detail and every aspect of it in the interest of the people of Singapore and I believe that this Bill does not exclude anybody who wants to be loyal to Singapore and who wants to serve Singapore. We make it such that anybody who wants to be a Singapore citizen, if he is of good character and is an asset to this country, will be granted that right. Previous to this, Sir, we had been under the control of England and they made all these laws for us, so that anybody who owes allegiance to the Queen may come into this place and make it their land. However, since then, we have had many new nationals coming in and they may not be just citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies but may also be of the Commonwealth, so that we have to take into consideration all such people; but whatever it is, Sir, we believe that this Bill provides for all who would want to make this place their permanent home. We of the Liberal-Socialists have taken part in it and we support this motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the Report of the Select Committee on the Singapore Citizenship Bill, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 18 of 1957, be adopted. Bill read the Third time and passed.

3.55 p.m.

Sir, I beg to move, That the Report of the Select Committee on the Little Sisters of the Poor Bill, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 17 of 1957, be adopted. Sir, this Paper was laid on the 18th of September and the facts supporting this private Bill are clearly stated in the affidavit. The Little Sisters of the Poor have established homes for the maintenance, treatment and nursing of the poor, the aged, the sick and the infirm and for the purpose of the propagation of Christianity. I must say that although one of the purposes is for the propagation of Christianity, it is admitted by everyone in Singapore that they have not discriminated against any other religion in the treatment of the sick and the infirm and because of the good work that this body of people have done, it has received much contribution as a result of which it has been able to build two homes: one at Thomson Road, Singapore and the other one in Batu Lanchang Lane, Penang. As the work will increase and more homes will be established, it is felt that the vesting of all the properties and titles in the titular Roman Catholic Bishop of Malacca is inconvenient in that it puts an extra burden on the Bishop of Malacca for objects of which he has no real concern. It is therefore asked that the Little Sisters of the Poor be now incorporated by law under which it will be able to hold all the properties in its own name. Sir, I beg to move.

I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the Report of the Select Committee on the Little Sisters of the Poor Bill, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 17 of 1957, be adopted. Bill read the Third time and passed.

Resolved, "That the Assembly do now adjourn." - [Mr Chew Swee Kee] Adjourned accordingly at fifty-eight minutes past Three o'clock p.m. to 18th November, 1957.

Wednesday, 16th October, 1957

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare to state the numbers of men, women, boys and girls registered at the Government Employment Exchange as unemployed as at 30th September, 1957.

Persons registered at the Employment Exchange on 30th September, 1957, are as follows:- Men 5,926 Women 976 Boys (14 years-18years) 681 Girls(14 years-18years) 147 ----- 7,730 ----- As there is no statutory obligation to register for employment, nor any requirement that those registered should be only unemployed persons, the list does not give the whole picture. For instance, many of those registered may already be gainfully employed, but wish to transfer to other jobs. Again, others may be in part-time occupations or in training.